Jump to content

BBC & licence fee (merged threads)


Recommended Posts

 

 

There are legal(?) ways of watching television WITHOUT the need of a Licence.

 

The majority of ways* you can legally watch TV these days do not require a TV license. 

 

Do read the requirements carefully. I am sure many people are paying "because they have a TV" and don't realise the circumstances where the license is required are actually quite narrow.

 

 

*not necessarily the way the majority watch as yet.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 65
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

I      The majority of ways* you can legally watch TV these days do not require a TV license.    Do read the requirements carefully. I am sure many people are paying "because they have a TV" and don't

The law is the same, the penalties are different. In Scotland it's generally (except for repeat and severe, whatever that means, offences) a set fine of half the fee. In England it can technically go

TV Licensing is owned by the BBC, although they don't make this obvious , possibly because it doesn't fit in with the cuddly image that they are trying to portray.  Capita are contracted to collect th

So the BBC are to spend £38 million on goons to shake down over 75 year olds for a weeks pension money for a TV licence to watch their WOKE propaganda and endless repeats .They should all refuse to pay what are they going to do send granny to jail ?https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2020/08/05/bbc-spends-38-million-call-centres-staff-chase-over-75s-licence/

The Scottish laws on TV license are far less strict so the grannies in jail will be south of the Anglo-Scottish boarder.

 

that being said the most likely demographic to be watching TV the old fashioned way are the over 75s and media companies have been improving their streaming services in the hopes of weaning the under 50s off online piracy/bootleg streaming sites.

 

thus the majority of eyeballs are looking away from live TV and unless you are looking for something extremely rare or lost media you can basically dredge up anything from the net if you look hard enough.

 

Still i think the best way to deal with the BBC is to simply replace your television with a monitor that has no tuner if possible and simply not use Live TV or BBC iplayer.

Lots of whingeing about how :

The Daily mail told me Gary Lineker doesn't deserve his cushy overpaid Job at the BBC and i agree with them because he made me give up my crisps from my packed lunch when i was a little lad!

 

 

If the Over 75s are watching it and or using iplayer then they should be treated like any other customer its mean spirited to rescind their exemption they are well within their rights to doso.

 

i encourage anyone planning to contact local representatives to simply say you don't support the license fee imposition and cite your reasons.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I have no problem with paying the license fee for all the BBC services I use. Although I watch very little TV I listen to a lot of radio and use the various BBC web services regularly.

 

However, how the flat fee license is collected is, I believe, unfair as it doesn't relate to peoples ability to pay or which of the BBC services they use. People of pensionable age are statistically wealthier than younger people, but there is also the biggest gap between the richest and poorest in this category, so why give a blanket fee waiver to all pensioners and not just those who can ill afford it?

 

---

 

I pay for most of the news services I use regularly. Call me old fashioned, but I believe in the principles of paying for good quality journalism which is relatively free from external commercial pressures.

 

But I suppose now-a-days many people want and expect all their content for free, and the only workable revenue model for journalism is advertising income which means news agencies have to jump to the tune of their advertisers, pursue populist agendas and use clickbait sensationalism to get the maximum eyeballs onto the adverts.

 

I have seen a severe decline in the quality, balanced journalism in the last decade, and longform investigative journalism is almost a thing of the past. Many 'news' outlets don't even pretend to do the basics of journalism anymore - they just feed people what they want to read to fit their existing biases.

Many people will believe what they want to believe, and if they can find 'news' sources to confirm their beliefs for free, why would they pay to have their beliefs challenged?

Link to post
Share on other sites
which means news agencies have to jump to the tune of their advertisers, pursue populist agendas and use clickbait sensationalism to get the maximum eyeballs onto the adverts.

 

I have seen a severe decline in the quality, balanced journalism in the last decade, and longform investigative journalism is almost a thing of the past. Many 'news' outlets don't even pretend to do the basics of journalism anymore - they just feed people what they want to read to fit their existing biases.

 

~

But I suppose now-a-days many people want and expect all their content for free, and the only workable revenue model for journalism is advertising income which means news agencies have to jump to the tune of their advertisers, pursue populist agendas and use clickbait sensationalism to get the maximum eyeballs onto the adverts.

 

 

Its pretty common tactic for political activists to contact Employers, Advertisers and sponsors directly when somebody says something they don't like.

and Review bombing is a common tactic though because a bunch of people go out and buy the thing being "boycotted" Just to spite whoever is angry at it.

 

There is a culture-war/Coldwar/Civil war between bi-factional Neoconservatism+Neoliberalisim vs Populist Paleolibertarianism+Classical liberalism in the west,

Though its a bit of a word salad describing these since terms are a bit obscure.

 

However, how the flat fee license is collected is, I believe, unfair as it doesn't relate to peoples ability to pay or which of the BBC services they use. People of pensionable age are statistically wealthier than younger people, but there is also the biggest gap between the richest and poorest in this category, so why give a blanket fee waiver to all pensioners and not just those who can ill afford it?

People of pensionable age are statistically wealthier but it is arguably worse to bee a poor when you are old than poor and young since you have more time to make up for it,

as one assumes able body in youth and feeble body in later years although exceptions to this rule do exist.

 

It would be better to be a healthy able bodied 69 year old with 3 years left to live than a handicapped terminally ill 16year old with 2 months left but these are not average/Representative examples of young/old

 

A middleclass old man in a nice house who has been enfeebled by age and relies on his loving family to get by will cultivate more empathy within us than a penniless able-bodied homeless person dieing on the streets alone.

 

Some things are innately more likely to tug on our heartstrings like those we view as vulnerable, and these are all heavily politicized.

If those we see as strong suffer more than those we view as weak we will only acknowledge it on an intellectual level and not an emotional level

 

For example most women are shorter and weaker than men on average therefore the well of empathy for women is much more moist than the well for their counterparts.

 

in a fight between a man and woman we assume the male is the aggressor because on average women are smaller,

 

In the same way our government is geared towards helping pensioners and very large firms and doesn't care about low earners or those just starting out or small /medium enterprises and is perfectly willing to make things harder for them if it benefits the pensioners or the type of business that can line their wallet.

 

Younger people are viewed as either responsible for their own poverty or that the onus is on them to do something about it  older people are seen as victims of time itself

 

average politicians income in unaffected by taxes they cater to those who slip nice things into their pockets and just let the machine coast

Link to post
Share on other sites

Folk should realise that "TV Licencing" is NOT the BBC but, a Private Company that has "won" the contract to collect Licence Fees (and take a cut).   Take it from there...

 

TV Licensing is owned by the BBC, although they don't make this obvious , possibly because it doesn't fit in with the cuddly image that they are trying to portray.  Capita are contracted to collect the licence fee on behalf of the BBC through its TV Licensing arm.

 

There is a wealth of information here, which I hope the old folks will become aware of: https://tvlicenceresistance.info/.

 

Join the forum if you wish.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I wonder just who owns and operates Capita Business Services Ltd. Some people tell us one thing and some tell us another. Some people don't seem to understand that their BBC is a statutory corporation, that in itself can own millions of private limited companies. It makes you wonder, doesn't it.

 

ps Royal Charter?

Edited by George.
Link to post
Share on other sites

An update to what I said earlier...

 

From Wikipedia:

 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/BBC#Commercial_activities

 

The BBC pursues its licence fee collection and enforcement under the trading name "TV Licensing". The revenue is collected privately by Capita, an outside agency, and is paid into the central government Consolidated Fund, a process defined in the Communications Act 2003. Funds are then allocated by the Department of Culture, Media and Sport (DCMS) and the Treasury and approved by Parliament via legislation. Additional revenues are paid by the Department for Work and Pensions to compensate for subsidised licences for eligible over-75-year-olds.

 

It later goes on to say that from August 2020 the rules around over 75s will change.

Link to post
Share on other sites

So, when were Crapita's goons last in Shetland extorting money out of the brainwashed. I've not been aware of any of their snoops and conmen lurking around for well over 10 years now. So unless someone knows different I don't think Shetland's grannies, or anyone else need worry too much about the TV tax aka. 'Television Licence'.

 

I guess when you're a very much 'for profit' outfit like Crapita, unless you can get enough folks to sign up to the TV tax to cover the Northlink fare(s), hotel bills and hire car(s) for your goon(s) that both gives the goon(s) enough commission (yup, they're paid commission for the sign ups they get, or so I'm told anyway) and still make Crapita a decent profit on top, they're not going to bother turning up.

 

Maybe one of the few times the extortionate travel costs to/from here play in our favour.

 

And if one shows up, just whip out your funky 'do everything' mobile and tell them to smile as you're recording the conversation you have with them. Never tried it myself, but seen many vids posted where somebody did just that, and after an initial bit of bluster, the goon soon decided they had nothing to say and remembered they needed to be somewhere else, anywhere else, than that person's doorstep.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...

×
×
  • Create New...