BBC fiasco

[fibo_trader]

BBC

YouGov survey: British sarcasm 'lost on Americans'

Some passive aggressive phrases - like "with the greatest respect" - could get lost in translation.

www.bbc.com

 

[0007]

BBC Captain's not going down with the ship then?

Read In Full: Tony Hall's Resignation Letter

Lord Hall has written to all BBC staff to explain his abrupt decision to step down from his role as BBC Director-General this summer. He wants the same

order-order.com

 

[Pat494]

The licence fee can’t be justified in the age of Netflix - 1828 - Championing Freedom

Social media now seems perpetually awash with allegations of bias and conspiracy at the BBC, especially at times of heightened political engagement such as election periods. Most of these allegations, of course, are nonsense that can only come into being thanks to the closed nature of the...

www.1828.org.uk

 

[timsk]

Undoubtedly the best case that I've come across - not to mention the funniest - for keeping the BBC and the licence fee . . .

 

[MasterOfCoin]

The License Fee is a Tax, nothing more, nothing less.

As such, it should be administered and collected by the Treasury/ Inland Revenue, NOT the BBC.

It is beyond ridiculous that a massive 20% of the Fee is wasted simply in the process of collecting it.

Needs scrapping immediately, if not sooner.

It should not now and never have been the case that to access the vast array of commercial services provided to the public, be it by subscription or 'free to air' models, the consumer should be required to pay for the BBC as a pre-requisit.

This isn't about the merits or otherwise of the BBC as a service or Institution.

It's about how it's funded.

If it's a 'Public Service' then it should rightly be funded by the Public Purse - Taxation.

If not, then it's simply another broadcaster and should be funded commercially, as are all the others.

About time this question was settled once and for all.

 

[Signalcalc]

How low can the BBC go? | The Spectator

Last weekend’s papers claimed that the government desires a ‘massively pruned back’ BBC. Former Conservative cabinet minister Damian Green and someone called Huw Merriman spoke out against this, which allowed the BBC to put the headline ‘BBC licence fee: Tory MPs warn No. 10 against fight’ atop...

www.spectator.co.uk

 

[Signalcalc]

The License Fee is a Tax, nothing more, nothing less.

As such, it should be administered and collected by the Treasury/ Inland Revenue, NOT the BBC.

It is beyond ridiculous that a massive 20% of the Fee is wasted simply in the process of collecting it.

Needs scrapping immediately, if not sooner.

It should not now and never have been the case that to access the vast array of commercial services provided to the public, be it by subscription or 'free to air' models, the consumer should be required to pay for the BBC as a pre-requisit.

This isn't about the merits or otherwise of the BBC as a service or Institution.

It's about how it's funded.

If it's a 'Public Service' then it should rightly be funded by the Public Purse - Taxation.

If not, then it's simply another broadcaster and should be funded commercially, as are all the others.

About time this question was settled once and for all.

For a broadcaster to be publically funded, then it must be accountable to the public. Unfortunately the direction of the BBC under left wing activism and control has taken a left wing, minority turn that is not in tune with the majority British public view.

Promoting minority views by a broadcaster is fine as long as it is not funded by the public, it is no longer providing a public service but taking an ideological stance, hence the mass cancellation of TV licenses as a protest or even just a lack of interest in the programming.

On this basis, I disagree that the Licence fee is a tax (although I agree that it is considered to be a tax because of legislation and enforcement) and therefore funding the BBC should not switch to general taxation, that route means we are all still paying for something that the majority do not want anymore and therefore it should move to a subscription based service.

Something akin to Sky, a basic service plus extras for the programming you really want to watch. £2.50/month for basic plus £1 for each addon (wildlife, sport, cooking, climate shite etc).

 

[Pat494]

The whole point of the BBC was to have an impartial news and documentary service to educate the masses. If it is driven by capitalist greed and fear then no one will believe a word they say, knowing that it is really promoting what sells well and probably in the hands of a billionaire.- YUK !!

 

[Signalcalc]

The whole point of the BBC was to have an impartial news and documentary service to educate the masses. If it is driven by capitalist greed and fear then no one will believe a word they say, knowing that it is really promoting what sells well and probably in the hands of a billionaire.- YUK !!

Isn’t that what all other broadcasters (and newspapers) are, they are all biased in some form, however in the UK there is a heavy state presence which is why you see the latest left leaning ideology being pushed by the BBC and C4?

• ITV funded by sponsors and advertising, who are the sponsors?
• Channel 4 publicly owned by a corporate arm of the Department for Digital, Culture, Media and Sport (work that one out, its state propaganda AKA BBC, dressed up)!
• Channel 5 owned by ViacomCBS a US conglomerate.
• etc