Ageing, out of date public funded (often unwillingly) behemoth.
The corporation has rolled from one crisis to another, the Saville whitewash being the latest from which it seems likely they will suffer long term, like the Catholic church before it for its complicity.
The licence fee is a complete anachronism, BBC 2 is the 'whitest' broadcaster in Europe and now they're trying to roll the iPlayer cat back into the fee payment box.
Time to move it on?
Should the BBC be privatised?
Re: Should the BBC be privatised?
Are you looking for another Murdoch to rescue it and put it on the straight and narrow?
-
SpannerGeek
- Posts: 722
- Joined: 12 Nov 2015, 2:16pm
Re: Should the BBC be privatised?
Anyone... Even Murdoch couldn't have ballsed it up this badly.
The licence fee won't last 2 years. I'll not be sorry to see the back of it. Most of my TV is Netflix and live streaming. And mostly everyone I know is of the same modern habits. The BBC is a dinosaur waiting for a meteorite to hit it.
The licence fee won't last 2 years. I'll not be sorry to see the back of it. Most of my TV is Netflix and live streaming. And mostly everyone I know is of the same modern habits. The BBC is a dinosaur waiting for a meteorite to hit it.
Re: Should the BBC be privatised?
I can understand somebody not wanting to pay a licence fee but I cant understand wanting to remove the BBC. I dont approve of Sky and I dont subscribe to it but it isnt really any of my business if it exists or not, that is for its customers to decide.
The vast parts of the BBC output which doesnt do anything for me, Radio1, Radio3, The Voice etc, I just ignore.
The vast parts of the BBC output which doesnt do anything for me, Radio1, Radio3, The Voice etc, I just ignore.
-
SpannerGeek
- Posts: 722
- Joined: 12 Nov 2015, 2:16pm
Re: Should the BBC be privatised?
Once the licence fee goes, then what? It's either privatisation now while it's still got value, or drag it out till we have to give it away like the Royal Mail.
-
Richard Fairhurst
- Posts: 2037
- Joined: 2 Mar 2008, 4:57pm
- Location: Charlbury, Oxfordshire
Re: Should the BBC be privatised?
One bit of good news reported by MoneySavingExpert:
So we can still watch the Tour without a TV licence!
The Department for Culture, Media and Sport has confirmed the new requirement to have a TV licence would would only apply to those watching BBC iPlayer on catch-up and wouldn't apply if watching other catch-up services such as ITV Hub and Channel 4's On Demand.
So we can still watch the Tour without a TV licence!
cycle.travel - maps, journey-planner, route guides and city guides
Re: Should the BBC be privatised?
and wouldn't apply if watching other catch-up services such as ITV Hub and Channel 4's On Demand.
Yet another perverse decision. You will need a licence to watch ITV (which isnt a BBC service) on TV but not on catch up.
Yet the justification for making BBC iPlayer subject to a licence, is that you have to pay for using the BBC's services.
Re: Should the BBC be privatised?
If the BBC is privatised, will I end up paying more for TV or less? I currently pay my licence (£145) and nothing more, and get all the Freeview channels. Seems to me to be cheap. I don't want Sky. I dislike being fed adverts every few minutes. I also think the BBC is what keeps the other TV providers on their toes. Without the BBC standards would fall across the board.
Doesn't the title of this thread sound like something Maggie would have dreamt up?
Doesn't the title of this thread sound like something Maggie would have dreamt up?
Last edited by pwa on 2 Mar 2016, 4:02pm, edited 1 time in total.
Re: Should the BBC be privatised?
I do hope not, otherwise we will be bombarded with even more advert riven mindless instantly forgettable dross.
Al
Al
Reuse, recycle, thus do your bit to save the planet.... Get stuff at auctions, Dump, Charity Shops, Facebook Marketplace, Ebay, Car Boots. Choose an Old House, and a Banger ..... And cycle as often as you can......
-
SpannerGeek
- Posts: 722
- Joined: 12 Nov 2015, 2:16pm
Re: Should the BBC be privatised?
The licence fee in its current form won't survive. Then what?
My Netflix subscription is £72 a year and demonstrably better drama, TV series and documentary than BBC. Their 'Making a Murder' series, filmed over 10 years is staggering in its execution and something the BBC could never have aspired to.
And I can share my subscription with 5 other people, on ANY platform, with NO adverts. The bbc is anachronism piled upon anachronism. Time to punt it, while it's still worth anything at all.
My Netflix subscription is £72 a year and demonstrably better drama, TV series and documentary than BBC. Their 'Making a Murder' series, filmed over 10 years is staggering in its execution and something the BBC could never have aspired to.
And I can share my subscription with 5 other people, on ANY platform, with NO adverts. The bbc is anachronism piled upon anachronism. Time to punt it, while it's still worth anything at all.
Re: Should the BBC be privatised?
A prime example of a world without a licence fee supported BBC is available at present.
Try watching the Six Nations Rugby on ITV and then decide which form of TV service finance is preferable!
Try watching the Six Nations Rugby on ITV and then decide which form of TV service finance is preferable!
-
SpannerGeek
- Posts: 722
- Joined: 12 Nov 2015, 2:16pm
Re: Should the BBC be privatised?
We use Netflix, as we have a smart tv and like to watch films in HD. 90% of what's on there is poorly produced rubbish and to find the good stuff we nearly always need to go online for other sources as the indexing is appalling.
Streaming requires you having good enough IT to cope. We're lucky - said smart tv will do it, and my tablet usually, but many people can't afford a smart tv, nor a powerful enough tablet/laptop. If you try it on substandard IT you just end up being driven mad by buffering.
The argument for privatising the BBC is there to be debated, but as a user of both I don't see either Netfix nor streaming as an alternative for many - particuarly older - people. We use them in addition to, not instead of our use of the BBC.
Jan
Streaming requires you having good enough IT to cope. We're lucky - said smart tv will do it, and my tablet usually, but many people can't afford a smart tv, nor a powerful enough tablet/laptop. If you try it on substandard IT you just end up being driven mad by buffering.
The argument for privatising the BBC is there to be debated, but as a user of both I don't see either Netfix nor streaming as an alternative for many - particuarly older - people. We use them in addition to, not instead of our use of the BBC.
Jan
Re: Should the BBC be privatised?
Did you actually read that, or just the bit you chose to highlight. TP is arguing against privatisation of Channel 4, and i doubt he would see privatisation of BBC2 as an answer to any defects. What he actually said about BBC2 was that black and ethnic minority viewers are not tuning in as much as white British viewers. He's not saying privatisation would improve that.
There are all sorts of possible explanations for black and ethnic minorities not tuning in to BBC2 as much as others. B&EA people are also over-represented in terms of educational and economic deprivation, which may have a bearing on which channels people watch.
Re: Should the BBC be privatised?
I think there are actually two issues rather than the "privatise or not".
First we need to establish if the compulsory subscription is to remain. For people who watch TV but don't watch the BBC is seems wrong that they should be paying more than the subscription cost for other channels to the BBC for something they don't want. I see no reason why the BBC should not continue under it's current "ownership" but with a voluntary subscription (i.e. everybody/household can chose to subscribe and watch or not subscribe and not watch).
As to sell-off. I see no reason why it should be sold off. After all, what are you actually selling, where is the value. Most BBC programs are made by production companies who will happily make the same programs for anybody who pays them. All there really is to sell is the back catalogue and a few "ownerships" (like Top Gear).
Although I don't watch the BBC I recognise that some do like it's output and are happy to pay a subscription so no reason why they should be denied - so I'd say maintain ownership but switch to a subscription for viewers. I do wonder if the BBC would have to make dramatic changes to itself where the license fee to become a subscription for those who viewed, but if not enough want to pay for it's output then so be it (no reason why others should subsidise those viewers).
Ian
First we need to establish if the compulsory subscription is to remain. For people who watch TV but don't watch the BBC is seems wrong that they should be paying more than the subscription cost for other channels to the BBC for something they don't want. I see no reason why the BBC should not continue under it's current "ownership" but with a voluntary subscription (i.e. everybody/household can chose to subscribe and watch or not subscribe and not watch).
As to sell-off. I see no reason why it should be sold off. After all, what are you actually selling, where is the value. Most BBC programs are made by production companies who will happily make the same programs for anybody who pays them. All there really is to sell is the back catalogue and a few "ownerships" (like Top Gear).
Although I don't watch the BBC I recognise that some do like it's output and are happy to pay a subscription so no reason why they should be denied - so I'd say maintain ownership but switch to a subscription for viewers. I do wonder if the BBC would have to make dramatic changes to itself where the license fee to become a subscription for those who viewed, but if not enough want to pay for it's output then so be it (no reason why others should subsidise those viewers).
Ian