Petition Against the bbc

[chebby]

Well he won't be watching 'Turks and Caicos' next week (at 9pm, BBC2, on Thursday 20th March) so i'll just have to plug it here.

The long anticipated sequel to David Hare's film 'Page Eight' (Bill Nighy, Ralph Fiennes, Michael Gambon et al.) and the second in what will be the 'Worricker Trilogy'.

I can highly recommend watching / recording the repeat of 'Page Eight' this Saturday at 10:30 PM on BBC2 to set the scene (if you haven't already seen it yet).

 

[Dave_]

Ooo. Cheers for the heads up. Have set get_iplayer to grab them.

 

[jacobmorrison]

For anyone who's interested, i've signed it.

Anyone who signs that is an idiot.

Agreed. The BBC is the envy of the world. The constant BBC bashing led by the daily mail is utterly depressing and self-defeating. Anyone who thinks that they shouldn't have to pay because they don't watch BBC content should think about the shows they grew up with and how their own lives were affected and enriched by the output from the beeb. Then they should take a moment to consider how today's children are also benefiting in the same way. It's sad how some people can only see as far as their own wallets, and seem determined to deprive others just to save a few quid.

 

[SonofSun]

Considering the amount of money the BBC has (aproximately £5 billion a year) I expect better content than is currently delivered. The problem with the BBC is they waste huge amounts of money (£1 billion+ on the new HQ) and they have far too many managers and are basically just too big. Then you have all the scandals, payoffs for failure and of course the bias news (see Balen report etc etc etc).

If the BBC was smaller and more efficient ,a better service could be provided, but as its OUR money they just throw it in the air like confetti. The BBC's funding model is now outdated and I can't see it continuing, I think it will more likely move to a subscription model in the near future.

The licence fee is really unenforcable and more and more people each year (especially the young) are not paying it ,as they have a huge amount of content they can watch without needing a licence.

I would prefer to keep the BBC, unfortunately they are likely to be the architects of their own destruction.

 

[The_Lhc]

The licence fee is really unenforcable and more and more people each year (especially the young) are not paying it ,as they have a huge amount of content they can watch without needing a licence.

I think you'd find most young people don't pay it because they still live at home with their parents.

 

[SonofSun]

The licence fee is really unenforcable and more and more people each year (especially the young) are not paying it ,as they have a huge amount of content they can watch without needing a licence.

I think you'd find most young people don't pay it because they still live at home with their parents.

According to the BBC, students are no longer buying a TV licence as they watch downloads/streaming services and use the iPlayer, of course this is a cultural thing, many see today content as free.

 

[laserman16]

Well he won't be watching 'Turks and Caicos' next week (at 9pm, BBC2, on Thursday 20th March) so i'll just have to plug it here.

The long anticipated sequel to David Hare's film 'Page Eight' (Bill Nighy, Ralph Fiennes, Michael Gambon et al.) and the second in what will be the 'Worricker Trilogy'.

I can highly recommend watching / recording the repeat of 'Page Eight' this Saturday at 10:30 PM on BBC2 to set the scene (if you haven't already seen it yet).

Thanks for the heads up Chebby, really enjoyed Page Eight so will look forward to the follow up.

 

[BenLaw]

Considering the amount of money the BBC has (aproximately £5 billion a year) I expect better content than is currently delivered. The problem with the BBC is they waste huge amounts of money (£1 billion+ on the new HQ) and they have far too many managers and are basically just too big. Then you have all the scandals, payoffs for failure and of course the bias news (see Balen report etc etc etc).

If the BBC was smaller and more efficient ,a better service could be provided, but as its OUR money they just throw it in the air like confetti. The BBC's funding model is now outdated and I can't see it continuing, I think it will more likely move to a subscription model in the near future.

The licence fee is really unenforcable and more and more people each year (especially the young) are not paying it ,as they have a huge amount of content they can watch without needing a licence.

I would prefer to keep the BBC, unfortunately they are likely to be the architects of their own destruction.

Hardly unenforceable, saw a recent news article saying there were several hundred thousand criminal prosecutions for non-payment last year.

 

[iamthegruffalo]

Good lord, I didnt realise there were other channels.

I suppose that must be what the other people watch.

 

[BenLaw]

Here's the news article I read:

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-26492684

 

[HDNumpty]

Hmm let me see - what does the BBC give us?

2 HD channels with excellent programming

2 other channels, often with superb music documentaries

News & parliamentary channel

several excellent ad-free nation al radio stations including the excellent and award-winning 6music, plus local and regional stations.

BBC iPlayer, BBC radio player with listen again...

Do I want to sign a petition to abolish the 40p per day TV licence fee? NO I DON'T!!!

 

[professorhat]

If the BBC were to go that way, that would be the death knell of live broadcast TV for me and I'd just move over completely to Blu-ray / streaming services.

 

[Feral]

I still think the licence fee offers value for money. True, there are very large inefficiencies in the organisation that size which is effectively a collection of many entities so you could argue you could get better value from you fees.

let's not forget the incredible HD Olympic coverage, the world service various radio stations, serious drama and no adverts. I once spent 3 weeks in Australia and teeth pulling experience of watch a film with adverts every 10 mins for 3-4 mins. If that is the shape to come I'll burn my TV!

 

[trj007]

I still think the licence fee offers value for money. True, there are very large inefficiencies in the organisation that size which is effectively a collection of many entities so you could argue you could get better value from you fees.

let's not forget the incredible HD Olympic coverage, the world service various radio stations, serious drama and no adverts. I once spent 3 weeks in Australia and teeth pulling experience of watch a film with adverts every 10 mins for 3-4 mins. If that is the shape to come I'll burn my TV!

The joiy that is commerial TV.

 

[Dave_]

I still think the licence fee offers value for money. True, there are very large inefficiencies in the organisation that size which is effectively a collection of many entities so you could argue you could get better value from you fees.

let's not forget the incredible HD Olympic coverage, the world service various radio stations, serious drama and no adverts. I once spent 3 weeks in Australia and teeth pulling experience of watch a film with adverts every 10 mins for 3-4 mins. If that is the shape to come I'll burn my TV!

The World Service was/is funded by Foreign Office grant not licence fees (until April)

 

[ayjaycee]

Here's another vote for the BBC in general and continuing with the license fee in particular. Others might not agree but my opinion is that 5 Live with it's news and sport coverage is worth the fee alone.

 

[cheeseboy]

Here's another vote for the BBC in general and continuing with the license fee in particular. Others might not agree but my opinion is that 5 Live with it's news and sport coverage is worth the fee alone.

couldn't agree more. For me it's Radio 6. I mean without the BBC we woldn't have had John Peel in such a predominant position to help promote new music of all genres.

 

[fr0g]

For me it's the fact that it tries its best to be unbiased and isn't forced to "always" pander to the (generally dumb) whims of the majority in its programming style.

Also, the website is best of breed.

 

[Series1boy]

And no Jimmy Saville or [EDITED BY MODS]

 

[fr0g]

And no Jimmy Saville or [EDITED BY MODS]

Because of course all these type of people were exclusive to the BBC.

 

[Series1boy]

And no Jimmy Saville or [EDITED BY MODS]

Because of course all these type of people were exclusive to the BBC.

Did I say they were exclusive, I don't think so..

what I will say though, the BBC covered up all of this and spent public money paying their CEO's off etc for covering up. It's a an utter disgrace!

 

[chebby]

And no Jimmy Saville or [EDITED BY MODS]

Because of course all these type of people were exclusive to the BBC.

Did I say they were exclusive, I don't think so..

what I will say though, the BBC covered up all of this and spent public money paying their CEO's off etc for covering up. It's a an utter disgrace!

How would this have been different with subscription funding?

Would those people who were indulging in criminal behaviour at the time have desisted because the funding model of their employer was different? Was their behaviour worse because of the license fee?

 

[John Duncan]

And no Jimmy Saville or [EDITED BY MODS]

Because of course all these type of people were exclusive to the BBC.

Did I say they were exclusive, I don't think so..

what I will say though, the BBC covered up all of this and spent public money paying their CEO's off etc for covering up. It's a an utter disgrace!

Whereas using [EDIT - him] as an example, when he was not guilty of any offence, is not disgraceful?

 

[BenLaw]

He has a retrial on two charges so I wouldn't go nuts either way just yet.

 

[John Duncan]

Acknowledged. I'll err on the side of libel liability reduction though.