Is the BBC worth the TV licence?
2006-12-12 01:41:48 · 13 answers · asked by stenchofpretension 1 in News & Events ➔ Media & Journalism
No and No
2006-12-12 01:43:11 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 0⤋
The BBC is funded by stealing/threatening people for their money to pay for a licence to view crap programs. They deny you access to other channels that had to provide thier own sponsors to be on air, but can't be watched without paying the BBC (sounds like a monopoly), then there is the salaries for the fat layer of executives. They could support themselves off sales of documentaries and magazines etc. People who wish to voluntarily contribute could do so by member support or through BBC fundraisers/telethons but not by threats and intimidation.
2006-12-12 06:50:50 · answer #2 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
You have it wrong there mate, the BBC isn't funded by the state its funded entirely by the TV licence fee which all house holds have to pay.
2006-12-12 02:22:34 · answer #3 · answered by robert x 7 · 1⤊ 0⤋
Perhaps a solution could be for Auntie to receive both a licence fee as at present, and in addition, sell programmes to sponsors..but not advertising space. This additional revenue to be channelled to providing better programmes and compete for some good films and sport coverage.
Those who pay both a licence fee and for cable or satellite could save money.
2006-12-12 04:18:47 · answer #4 · answered by DAVID H 1 · 0⤊ 0⤋
If the BBC was funded by the state, the state would put our taxes up to pay for it.
One way or another, joe public ends up forking out.
2006-12-12 01:50:15 · answer #5 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
Yet again, someone who hasn't got a clue.
The BBC is entirely removed from the "state" ie Government. It is funded by the License fee and from it's own commercial activities (making & selling prgrammes abroad).
Also, don't forget that the BBC is free of adverts - revenue has to come from somewhere - the "commercial" stations charge a lot of money for advertising slots.
The BBC, despite showing it's fair share of crass, brainless progs including soap operas, it still has some of the finest (and bias-free) news coverage in the world, it produces world-class documentary programmes, gave birth to "The Young Ones" and "Red Dwarf", not to mention "Fawlty Towers" and "Blackadder". It has truly global radio services (as in the World Service).
So, to give you a straight forward answer, yes it's worth the license fee. Simply has to be better that watching badly-made, cheap and not very funny imported US sitcoms or yet another reality show.
2006-12-12 02:32:25 · answer #6 · answered by BushRaider69 3 · 1⤊ 1⤋
The BBC which should actually be called the E(english)Broadcasting Corporation, is a blatant waste now, of UK tax-payers (hard earned) money..
Now if Corrie was on the BBC, that would be a different matter..
2006-12-12 01:50:48 · answer #7 · answered by Steel-River Bhoy 4 · 1⤊ 1⤋
No not at all. It should do the same as ITV etc and get advertising to pay for it. I would rather watch adverts every half an hour then pay for a TV licence.
2006-12-12 01:43:56 · answer #8 · answered by Lisa R 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
tv licenceing is a crock of sh*t it goes up every year and for what more repeats ohh and if your lucky strictly come dancin oh joy
2006-12-12 06:32:52 · answer #9 · answered by Quinn 4 · 1⤊ 0⤋
Its not bad but it does have a left leaning bias which it has admitted to its run by left liberals . Its got to sort it self out or go commercial
2006-12-12 03:32:31 · answer #10 · answered by jack lewis 6 · 1⤊ 1⤋
No it should not be funded, they could make more money advertising anyway.
2006-12-12 04:30:58 · answer #11 · answered by Mark U 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋