How do you think that the TV Licence could be remodelled?
Personally, I do not believe that the BBC should accept any type of advertising or sponsorship (any more than they already do!). I believe in a subscription-service BBC. Maybe BBC viewers could top-up a BBC viewing card at the post office and this unscrambles the BBC TV signal? Or BBC viewers could dial a telephone number on-screen to unscamble the BBC signal for individual programmes.
What are others thoughts on this?
2007-08-19 07:16:34 · 21 answers · asked by Anonymous in Politics & Government ➔ Law & Ethics
Visit http://www.tvlicensing.biz/ for more anti-TV Licensing information!!
2007-08-19 07:24:47 · update #1
Your ideas are good.
I never watch terrestrial TV as I have cable and pay Virgin Media for this service whom I am sure pay some money to the BBC for showing their channels so therefore I pay twice.
2007-08-19 09:03:37 · answer #1 · answered by cleocat 5 · 1⤊ 1⤋
I ask myself how often I watch BBC 1 or 2 and the answer is maybe a couple times a month. So for me, it's not fair.
It was OK when there was nothing else on television...and might I add before the BBC had a commercial agency which gets money from all kinds of sources outside of the license fee (syndication/licensing of programming, etc).
I would, however, be very happy to pay a small amount every year to sustain the World Service and to pay for BBC Radio generally (and specifically for their regional traffic news!), and to help the BBC make more outstanding series like "The Blue Planet" and "Walking With Dinosaurs". However, I do kind of cringe when I think how my license fee pays to produce the cr*p that the Beebs shows 99% of the time.
2007-08-19 08:32:31 · answer #2 · answered by lesroys 6 · 2⤊ 0⤋
I'd have no problem with paying the TV licence if all providers, not just the BBC, benefitted from the proceeds. The BBC are raking it in in all areas as all the BBC owned channels apart from 1 and 2 broadcast adverts. I really don't see why 1 and 2 can't show adverts and we could be rid of this ridiculous "tax" for good. I don't watch the BBC, or at least channels 1 and 2. To me, they really cannot justify it.
2007-08-19 07:28:45 · answer #3 · answered by El 3 · 3⤊ 0⤋
I personally think they should have adverts, this is just another unfair tax in the UK. The only thing I watch on the BBC is Dr Who and yes I would pay to see that if it went to subscription.
The BBC is also the worst channel for repeats.
2007-08-19 07:28:19 · answer #4 · answered by Mrs M 4 · 2⤊ 0⤋
The BBC should represent ALL of the areas, accents, religious diversity that is today's Britain, fed-up with turning on the telly or radio and hearing just a middle English or American accent.
If the BBC isn't going to represent all the people who pay for it, then it should be sold off.
2007-08-19 07:28:10 · answer #5 · answered by Avon 7 · 1⤊ 0⤋
I've never thought is was justified considering the BBC are the main recipients and they spend money like there no tomorrow//other companies get by so whats the problem with BBC why cant they!
2007-08-19 07:37:15 · answer #6 · answered by srracvuee 7 · 2⤊ 0⤋
The whole point of the TV licence was to fund a national, impartial broadcaster. The idea is great but, somewhere along the way, we lost the impartial bit. Consequently, the BBC has forfeited its right to what amounts to a tax. If it wants to peddle its own political views it can do so using funds from those who choose to support it.
2007-08-19 07:26:31 · answer #7 · answered by skip 6 · 4⤊ 0⤋
You still need a TV licence if you watch the TV only on the Internet.
There was recently a crack down on companies whos employees watch TV on the Internet. Those companies need a TV licence.
Lets get rid of the licence, those who have the most time to watch it ie. the unemployed can't afford to pay for a licence.
Perhaps TV stamps should be issued along with jobseekers allowance ?
2007-08-19 07:47:15 · answer #8 · answered by Steve 1 · 1⤊ 0⤋
Considering it is only for BBC and a lot of what they show are repeats, then no. I watch a lot of tv and probably only about 10% per week is BBC.
2007-08-19 07:30:12 · answer #9 · answered by Maggs 5 · 2⤊ 0⤋
The Licence fee is revenue for a national broadcasting channel that was originally supposed to keep the 'British' up to date on events it's government wished it to be aware of, i.e. a government 'organ' of trust, rather than a potentially aggressive foreign one.
Why we would even want to pay to hear our own governments views in times of constant media presentations I have no idea. But once the public were suckered into accepting it (same story with 'road tax) we were stuck with it.
2007-08-19 07:35:01 · answer #10 · answered by Ring of Uranus 5 · 2⤊ 0⤋