Does the BBC get too much of our Money?

[Trevor]

Well, I have no idea whether I am more staid, conservative or reactionary that you ( and neither do you to be fair)

My own view is that the BBC is a very precious thing - the envy of many and I think we would be a much poorer society without it

 

[seagullsovergrimsby]

It's an all-in-one communications license for TV, radio and internet; you have one or more of these you pay. I cannot remember exactly but around €20 a month, €240 a year.

With the progression of more and more watching TV and listening to radio on devices other than a TV or radio I can see the old fashioned TV license being replaced with an all-in-one license plus if the Tories win the next election they will look at privatising the BBC allowing them to go down the subscription/adverts route.

 

[Mowgli37]

I f*cking love the BBC. It would be a truly black day if it were ever to be taken away from us.

 

[Cosmic Joker]

I'm far more annoyed by the money given to Richard Branson to run trains, which not only do I not use but the people who do still pay through the nose for a ticket.

With apologies for the off topic; really? From the latest accounts on the rail regulator site:
http://orr.gov.uk/__data/assets/pdf_file/0004/11947/gb-rail-industry-financials-2012-13.pdf
Table 4.2: Government Premium / Funding in 2012-13 by train operator
Virgin Trains (source government)
Franchise receipts from government £0
Franchise payments to government £97M
From Table 4.1 also pay Corporation tax £6M
There will have been a deficit in the early years of the franchise, however as that's how these things are structured. The biggest operator deficit for 2012-13 however was Southwest Trains at £315M

As for "people who use them pay through the nose", it's like other train operators, get a walk-up ticket for the morning peak and yes you pay heavily, get an advance ticket for a particular train before they are sold and its bargain basement. Last ticket I got travelling with Virgin cost me £14 from Huddersfield to Euston via Manchester, for which Virgin would only get the revenue for the second leg.

Back on topic, i'm with those who say that the services that the BBC provide for £145/year is fantastic value, even though I watch relatively little TV these days. How many people with an internet connection really never use their news, sport or weather websites or apps? BBC worldwide also do a good job of maximising income from other countries for current and archive programmes, and this is possible because of the high quality of many (not all) BBC programmes over the years compared to your average commercial broadcaster. Charge separately at point of use for all BBC services and I think that even most light users would be surprised at how quickly the cost would mount up beyond £145 if they used the same as they do now.

 

[Spider]

I think it's utterly ridiculous that in this day and age there is a state television channel (to which you HAVE to subscribe) that is funded by an annual tax on the possession of a TV set. It has to change. I know the more staid, conservative and reactionary members of NSC will disagree.

The politics aside, we are very lucky to have a broadcasting system that is able to make programmes without the sole aim of making money. I have many problems win the BBC, but you cannot deny that without the state funding we would never get programming of the quality of BBC4, BBC Nature, some of the drama and documentaries. If you don't watch any of those then of course you're free to wallow in the lowest common denominator dross that ITV put out, but we'll all suffer accordingly if the public can't bring themselves to watch something decent in between X Factor and adverts to kitchen roll.

 

[Guinness Boy]

Absolutely stunning value. MOTD, Football League Show, 6 Music, comprehensive website, totally neutral news service. And that was TODAY. Anyone for another re-run of Marvellous?

 

[turienzo's lovechild]

their nature documentaries are almost worth it alone

 

[Hampster Gull]

The majority on this chain think good VFM, which is where i am. But does the BBC need to cover all that it does? For me on reflection its one of the things that makes it great

 

[Mowgli37]

The majority on this chain think good VFM, which is where i am. But does the BBC need to cover all that it does? For me on reflection its one of the things that makes it great

Are you doing market research for the Beeb or something?

I do think though the BBC seems to cover all bases really well. Live Football would be wonderful but the rights are just far too costly and without the extra income of adverts that would eat into the BBC's budget horrendously.

 

[brakespear]

Without the BBC (and regulation of broadcasting) most of our news would look like Fox News. It has the FL show on my laptop for me when I get up on Sunday morning. And the very existence of the BBC pisses off Rupert Murdoch, Paul Dacre and various other noxious, right-wing, swivel-eyed, crypto-racist, ****wits.

All this for less than £3 a week.

put like that I'd pay a couple of quid more if it came to it

 

[Hampster Gull]

Are you doing market research for the Beeb or something?

I do think though the BBC seems to cover all bases really well. Live Football would be wonderful but the rights are just far too costly and without the extra income of adverts that would eat into the BBC's budget horrendously.

Ha. Nope, no connections with the Beeb.

 

[cunning fergus]

i can see your point here, and im not sure that it should be a criminal offence. i wonder though if you think rail fares should be treated the same, changing from criminal to civil? it struck me as odd the other day that we criminalise rail dodging.

Interesting question. I think on the whole it is fair to criminalise rail dodging, to the extent that it is a form of theft from the rail provider.

The BBC licence fee is mandatory and in today's world with so many choices available to the individual with regard to how they consume media it is outdated. Get rid and let those who want the BBC pay for it...........it never ceases to amaze me just how many people who probably think they are liberal minded support the imposition (by the state) of the BBC on people who don't want it. Go figure.

 

[El Presidente]

Interesting question. I think on the whole it is fair to criminalise rail dodging, to the extent that it is a form of theft from the rail provider.

The BBC licence fee is mandatory and in today's world with so many choices available to the individual with regard to how they consume media it is outdated. Get rid and let those who want the BBC pay for it...........it never ceases to amaze me just how many people who probably think they are liberal minded support the imposition (by the state) of the BBC on people who don't want it. Go figure.

No one forces you to have a TV, so no one forces you to pay the licence fee.

 

[El Presidente]

Sorry, £145. It's gone up.

I realise that there is more than just TV that is on offer, but not everyone wants £145 worth of BBC media, and would rather just pay for what they use, which seems to work for most other commodities in the economy.

It doesn't work on Sky or Virgin or BT though, which are in theory the alternatives.

 

[jimhigham]

I'm perfectly happy to pay it. The depth of quality across all media is hugely impressive. I lived abroad (India and Nigeria) for a total of seven years and the esteem in which the BBC is held is enormous. I suspect that many countries wished they had a BBC of their own.

 

[cunning fergus]

No one forces you to have a TV, so no one forces you to pay the licence fee.

These days TVs are not just TVs are they...........without a "TV" how can I access the web and other media?

In today's modern world why should the state force me to pay for something I don't want?

It seems to me that denying people this choice is the very opposite of freedom...........at least I know what side of the debate I am on.

 

[Worthingite]

I feel we should get a rebate when they churn out stuff like Mrs Browns Boys, citizen Khan or bloody Miranda. Or at least an apology. I joke of course.... It is, overall good value for money

I also think their weekend broadcasting could be better- putting the telly on and seeing Bargain Hunt or some poxy home buy programme, or that dickhead that does that cookery show that's on all day on BBC 2, well that's just lazy planning. My idea would be to have the most watched things that have been on iplayer that week being played on BBC three or fours dead air channels from say 10am till 7pm. That way there's guaranteed half reasonable telly on, and no dead airspace

 

[yxee]

It doesn't work on Sky or Virgin or BT though, which are in theory the alternatives.

It's a step in the right direction for them, with modular subscriptions.

 

[Scampi]

I think a you can tell a lot about a person and indeed a corporation by its enemies. On this thread and indeed others we've had on the subject the opposition comes mainly from the extremes on the right and the left.

 

[Wilko]

I consider the licence fee to be the most 'value for money'cost of the year. I listen to Radio 2 all day at work, Radio 5 in the evenings, when I watch telly its usually BBC1 or BBC2, and really get most of my news coverage from them, so well worth the fee for me

Indeed. Anyone who moans about BBC just needs to switch on the TV for a bit whilst abroad to see the comparison. The BBC is a magnificent organisation which consistently produces fantastic media. Just wish I could get iplayer in Africa