Apart from the obvious "we have too!" but realy why? Why does'nt the BBC accept advertising like every other channel? Let's all refuse to pay that will show them!!
2006-12-22 01:34:03 · 12 answers · asked by paul m 1 in Entertainment & Music ➔ Television
You pose a very good question.
Not many years ago you also had to have a licence for radio.
I think however, that the BBC should look to "product placement"
A way of advertising to gain revenue towards costs of programmes without the need for adverts interrupting our viewing.
This would lead to more money for the BBC, without adverts, and help to reduce the licence fee, or even bring it down to a very small amount each year, that I'm sure we would be willing to pay for such a good service.
2006-12-22 02:04:47 · answer #1 · answered by Dr David 6 · 0⤊ 0⤋
The BBC provides not only the terrestrial TV channels but also radio channels and the cable channels. The quality of programming is unlike anywhere else in the world. ITV is suffering because no one is watching the adverts anymore due to sky + etc. Have you noticed how every other programme has a phone in vote or phone in competition? This is to make the money to pay for the programmes. I would much rather have a company who invests in unknown newcomers (such as the Office) who would not have been given the time of day on another channel. The BBC website is extensive and vast and is a constant source of news, information, recipes for everyone. I am happy to fund such a wonderful organisation.
2006-12-22 01:39:55 · answer #2 · answered by Carrie S 7 · 6⤊ 0⤋
This was instituted by the government to pay for the BBC, at one time you had to buy a radio licence if you owned a radio. It is also supposed to keep BBC broadcasts from favouring someone who buys advertising space off them. Since the government is in effect their paymaster, it raises a question, do they favour their sponsor? Eg; in news and documentaries.
I personally wouldn't refuse to pay the licence fee, as there is a £200 fine if you don't, and they have detector vans they send round. Though I would be willing to sign a petition advocating the abolition of the TV licence.
2006-12-22 02:02:11 · answer #3 · answered by funnelweb 5 · 0⤊ 0⤋
I think it is absolutely disgusting that we pay a TV Licence. The BBC sells a lot of the programmes it makes for astronomical prices throughout the world and we get the absolute rubbish on our BBC channels, like soap operas. I watch the news. As for Sky it too is to expensive for everything is repeated over and over again, week after week. There should be more control of the prices and the quality of TV, as in the old days
2016-05-23 15:30:02 · answer #4 · answered by ? 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
I think the licence fee is still worthwhile as we do get several radio and tv stations plus one of the worlds best online sites for news, sport, weather etc. I do however resent paying for channels such as BBC3 and BBC4 as most of the programs are repeated on one and two anyway. Also, the number of radio stations is getting out of control with new BBC radio stations popping up each year. I think they should narrow down to two TV and four radio channels and reduce the licence fee accordingly. Not much hope of that though.
2006-12-22 01:56:26 · answer #5 · answered by John D 3 · 1⤊ 1⤋
The reason why we pay is because the BBC is the best TV channel in the world.If they advertised like all the other channels.Then the BBC would end up being as crap as all the other channels.
I mean "Can you imagine an advert right in the middle of Dr Who"!!!!
ps... I dont work for the BBC.
2006-12-22 01:43:58 · answer #6 · answered by Anonymous · 3⤊ 1⤋
Because if you don;t put something in, then you;ll get nothing back, try lookin and comparing the quality of other TV programming around the world, especially where there is no input. I live in Spain and the TV is terrible, full of adverts and crap programmes, no great documentaries or travel programmes, not good, well made dramas, nothing, mostly south american imports worse than Crossroads, beleive me, 100 times worse in acting and set building, thats why!
2006-12-22 01:42:56 · answer #7 · answered by SunnyDays 5 · 3⤊ 0⤋
i was going to answer something else, but i read your first reply by cassie and she actually makes a lot of sense (hence her thimbs up), i suppose the cist every year makes up for the investment it makes on people who wouldnt be given the chance by other companies, but others do this to, for instance peter kay, he was taken on by channel four, and they use advertising!
2006-12-22 01:57:37 · answer #8 · answered by button moon 5 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Why don't you all stop subscribing to Sky and Setanta, and I can get free footie on BBC again.
2006-12-22 01:42:13 · answer #9 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
Because the Beeb thinks it's "National Institution" and above the rest!
2006-12-22 01:40:20 · answer #10 · answered by Biblins 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋