Ross leaves the BBC

[cunning fergus]

So are you saying that you never watch any of the BBC channels or listening to any of the radio stations? Just a question like. Personally not fussed by the license fee because I listen to Radio 1 over its commercial rivals because of the lack of adverts and the BBC also produce some good programs which for a small amount in reality a month isn't bad value when you compare it to Sky or whatever.

No I am not saying that, however the rare gem does not mean I am happy to be taxed at £140 a year for an organisation that essentially represents the past and luxury for a select few.

I loved this years Comic Relief where the earnestly ecological BBC sent some 15 C listers round the world (with accompanying film crews) so we could all share their experiences.............what fun. Wouldn't it have been better to contibute the costs of that circus to Comic relief instead, with a contribution from those taking part?..............But no, what a bunch of wankers.

I have SKY and am happy to pay for it, however there should be an option (especially now we are going digital) to block off BBC output to those who don't want it; I can pay for BBC programmes through iPlayer if necessary.

The BBC spent £4m (or nearly 30,000 licence fees) on are last year; is that good value?

 

[pasty]

No I am not saying that, however the rare gem does not mean I am happy to be taxed at £140 a year for an organisation that essentially represents the past and luxury for a select few.

I loved this years Comic Relief where the earnestly ecological BBC sent some 15 C listers round the world (with accompanying film crews) so we could all share their experiences.............what fun. Wouldn't it have been better to contibute the costs of that circus to Comic relief instead, with a contribution from those taking part?..............But no, what a bunch of wankers.

I have SKY and am happy to pay for it, however there should be an option (especially now we are going digital) to block off BBC output to those who don't want it; I can pay for BBC programmes through iPlayer if necessary.

The BBC spent £4m (or nearly 30,000 licence fees) on are last year; is that good value?

100% agree. In this day and age of freedom of choice of what we watch, I find it absolutely ridiculous that we are charged £140 a year for something that we may or may not watch. I don't drive a car, so I don't pay car tax, but I have no choice about buying a tv licence whether I watch BBC or not.

I'm not saying I wouldn't pay for it if I had the choice, I just think it is outrageous that you have to pay for it no matter what.

 

[drew]

No your right, there's the variation of Doctors, Casualty and Holby, comedies like My Family, Big Top and Little Miss Jocelyn, Dont forget the quality of So you think you can dance'.

No doubt you are happy to ignore freedom of choice, you know like that oft used word democracy. You love the BBC you can pay for it, I would rather not. If there's a channel/programme worth watching I would be happy to pay for that. That's progression and dinosaurs like you need to embrace the future.

If you check the published data on employees, 106 of the most senior managers earn over 21m between them (or 150,000 licence fees), and their expenses alone were £180,000 in 2009/10. I note the pension pot is already in excess of £8bn, nests well feathered eh.

I bet you hate the bankers too!

I am not saying the BBC is spotless and I'm not going to get into a stupid slanging match over programming. However, I do believe the system we now have does more to push standards up. If there were no BBC and they were all competing on a commercial basis standards would plummet. Look at ITV and their Children's output. Now virtually zilch. How many classic drama productions do Sky show for example. How many shows do Sky actually produce themselves?

Also, are you suggesting the subsciptions for Sky should change so that you only pay for the programme you watch rather than a package. For example, you don't pay for sky sports, you pay for each programme so if you only like golf, you only pay for that, or if you only like football you only pay for the specific matches you want. Now that would play right into the hands of the big four as they would be the only matches the TV would show because that's where they would make most of their money. How long then before the premiership disappears and there is a Euro League only.

The likely fact is that if the whole system was commercial, Television would be brought down to the lowest common denominator very quickly.

You sound like the bleeding heart liberals who bang on about the human rights for terrorist whilst the rest of us are getting bombed and shot!

Still, you won't change your mind and I won't change mine. I'm happy to pay £3 a week for the Beeb.

As for dinosaurs and progression, what a stupid comment as your progress is towards lowers standards. Still, that's unimportant as long as you have freedom of choice. Well, not exactly freedom of choice as you do need the money to pay for it!!!!! What freedom of choice would pensioners have who can't afford subscription TV.

And what has my views on bankers got to do with it. Are you one?

 

[drew]

100% agree. In this day and age of freedom of choice of what we watch, I find it absolutely ridiculous that we are charged £140 a year for something that we may or may not watch. I don't drive a car, so I don't pay car tax, but I have no choice about buying a tv licence whether I watch BBC or not.

I'm not saying I wouldn't pay for it if I had the choice, I just think it is outrageous that you have to pay for it no matter what.

Presuming you have Sky, you pay a fixed subscription each month for a package of programmes that you may or may not watch. What's the difference?

The only way you would have complete freedom of choice is if every programme on every channel was charged separately. Is that what you are advocating?