Mick F wrote:Agree, TC.
If we do away with the telly soon, we may replace it with an iMac. Large screen, and connect it to a sound system. We could then have digital radio (and Listen Again) via internet, watch DVDs, watch BBC iPlayer, and any other stuff out there. We have a laptop each, and all this could be done with them, but it's a palarva to connect it all up, so don't bother very often.
"There's nothing on the telly" for us. The telly yet again never got plugged in last evening, and I can't see it getting plugged in again unless we want to watch one of our few DVDs.
The BBC licence is dead in the water IMHO.
Listen again, BBC iPlayer... These exist to hear/watch content that is produced using cash from the license fee.
The cost of distribution is a relatively small part - most of the cost is in the production of content.
The cost of 'celebs' isn't the fault of the BBC, in this country the costs are tiny compared to the states - which doesn't have an equivalent. It is outrageous how much they get paid (and footballers) but that's another issue.
The problem with saying "I don't use it why should I pay" is that it can be applied to any public service.
I don't use parks - should I pay for them?
I have private health care - should I contribute to public health care costs?
Should car drivers pay for bike lanes?
Bike riders pay for roads?
As I said the BBC is a small cost and I think it's benefits are positive. If it just became another commercial channel I think we would become just a little less British...
However times change, whether the licence fee can survive the changes which are happening in our 'easy serve', 'on demand' media world - who knows. When people are willing to watch badly done tat, compressed beyond recognition on a computer screen - I don't think anyone can call it.