back to article Abolish the Telly Tax? Fat chance, say MPs at non-binding debate

Britons simply don't understand that "public sector broadcasting" is a "good for all society", a Labour MP lamented during a Westminster Hall debate on TV licensing. In spite of the dozen or so MPs who spoke during the 2.5-hour session, the debate managed to almost completely bypass the question of repealing the Telly Tax, as …

Page:

            1. John Brown (no body) Silver badge

              Re: @ lorisarvendu

              "I think those lines sum up the problem pretty well. All you have heard are negative stories, all the BBC reports is negative and then you mention the governments job of spin yet the BBC and the gov are pretty much singing the same song."

              And yet the print press segment who came out strongly for leave are also not reporting much in the way of positive outcomes fro Brexit either. As mentioned, lots of opinion pieces, but little actual factual reporting.

        1. lorisarvendu

          Google "bbc bias against labour".

          The New Statesman, the Indy, and the Guardian seem to agree the that BBC (and other media) have given Corbyn and the labour party a bad time.

          Now Google "bbc left-wing bias"

          The Daily Mail and the Express run with this one. Oh and the Independent...hang on...

          Basically if you think the BBC has a bias against your personal political leanings, you will find "evidence" (mainly in the tabloids and social media) to support your assertion...no matter what your political leanings actually are. In the same way as you will find evidence to support your view that the Moon Landings never happened, that JFK was killed by the Mob/CIA/FBI/Oswald, that the World is flat, and that the British Royal Family are all lizards.

        2. strum

          >Lets take some stories on the BBC right now,

          I think you need to pay a little better attention.

          1. "The prediction that average UK earnings in 2022 could still be less than in 2008" - that story wasn't a Brexit story. It was a post-crash story.

          2. "Deep fat fryers may help form cooling clouds" - that story wasn't climate change story (it went out of its way to make that clear).

          3. "who gives a shit"/"Who cares?" - two things you don't care about amount to far left-leaning bias? You need an education, old chap.

    1. MJI Silver badge

      Bollocks

      My wife watches SCD, my boss and his wife watch SCD.

      Anyone notice that it is glossy well produced feel good TV much better than the shouty crap on ITV.

      News, funny really, I think they are quite neutral UK wise, as mentioned elsewhere giving screen time to some potty people, but are neutral within the sensible main stream.

      However internationally they are more biased, it is obvious they do not like the Orange Fuckwit.

      Then see things like Question Time, plenty of chances to let fools show themselves up.

      This Week can be quite funny and seeing ex politicians from various parties being able to discuss stuff sensibly.

      1. Anonymous Coward
        Anonymous Coward

        Re: Bollocks

        SCD is excellent. I don't watch it myself, except for the results ( it's not worth going to the pub for an hour ), and I've watched the Saturday night programme when I've been ill, and it is really well made good quality entertainment.

        Not my cup of tea, but objectively it is very good.

        However not something we should be funding from a mandatory TV tax.

      2. Lars Silver badge
        Coat

        Re: Bollocks

        "they are more biased.....they do not like the Orange Fuckwit.". Am I biased if I don't like dog shit on my shoes.

    2. rmason

      Always a fair litmus paper for the BBC.

      those who are right wing think it shows left wing bias, those on the left think it shows right wing bias.

      1. Anonymous Coward
        Anonymous Coward

        That's been said to death.

        However you should read the Guardian's comments section ( not too much, the stupid might rub off ).

        There, you will learn that the Guardian is a right wing newspaper. All of your misconceptions about it being a left wing newspaper will be revealed to be false.

        I'm not arguing the BBC is left wing as such - I'm arguing it's metropolitan liberal and as such anti-conservative more than pro-labour.

    3. Anonymous Coward
      Coffee/keyboard

      I didn't expect to see people dancing

      heh, thanks for that.

  1. John Robson Silver badge

    I really don't see the issue..

    With having Sky/Vermin etc collect TV licence fee on behalf of subscribers and pass on those addresses and fees to the BBC.

    Makes it relatively easy to understand what's happening...

    I pay you for a TV service, and I get it.

    I don't pay you, I have to pay the BBC directly for that subset of service

    1. Just Enough

      Re: I really don't see the issue..

      You don't see the issue because, amazingly, you're not aware that many people don't subscribe to Sky, Virgin or BT.

      I get the BBC through this amazing device called an aerial. Consequently I pay nothing but a licence fee and no-one has any idea what programmes I watch, and which I don't. If the money is paid through subscribers instead, does that mean I get my BBC for free?

      1. MJI Silver badge

        Re: I really don't see the issue..

        Freeview & Freesat here.

        I did try Ondigital but the pay channels were rubbish apart from the airplane one, and dealing with one card two devices was a complete PITA.

        The boxes were also pretty poor compared to my IDTV, went digital for anamorphic widescreen.

        1. strum

          Re: I really don't see the issue..

          >Freeview & Freesat here.

          >I did try Ondigital

          You do realise that Freeview is pretty much a rebadged OnDigital?

          1. MJI Silver badge

            Re: I really don't see the issue..

            Of course I do and I still mainly watch 1 2 4 and News 24

            I was offered Ondigital because I had a digital TV.

            I had a digital TV due to ghosting and wanting anamorphic widescreen

      2. Anonymous Coward
        Anonymous Coward

        Re: I really don't see the issue..

        If the money is paid through subscribers instead, does that mean I get my BBC for free?

        Yeh, then you'll get the same 125k yobs with £200/mo Sly subscriptions signing a petition to put it back. Not wanting to waste their dole to, er, subsidise others.

      3. John Robson Silver badge

        Re: I really don't see the issue..

        "You don't see the issue because, amazingly, you're not aware that many people don't subscribe to Sky, Virgin or BT."

        Actually - I don't subscribe either - which is why I added the following line:

        "I don't pay you, I have to pay the BBC directly for that subset of service"

        I don't even bother with an aerial or dish at all.

        The very little TV that is worth watching is streamed from iPlayer (Blue Planet, Dr Who, some kids stuff) or 4OD/itvHub when appropriate.

        But it's not worth the effort to put an aerial up, or hook up either of the satellite dishes I have on the side of my house, and it's certainly not worth paying Vermin media again.

        I'm pretty sure I don't get good value from my license, but that's the way it is. I went for several years not having one, then they changed the rules, and for the sake of very little content I now get charged the full whack. I'd be happy with a PPV option frankly.

  2. AppealToReason

    Choice for the wealthy

    Pay-TV is just another way of dividing rich and poor - entertainment (?) for those that can afford it.

    1. Anonymous Coward
      Anonymous Coward

      Re: Choice for the wealthy

      I bet if you looked at who actually has Sky, it won't be the rich, its the poorer...

  3. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward

    BBC doesn't have a political party bias, it has a metropolitan liberal bias. That needs to be fixed. Not hiring most of its staff from the Graun would be a good start. Banning things like the BBC news's infamous "tory cuts" billboard.

    However the BBC license fee should be cut down from ~£150 to £50/year. One TV channel with a vastly reduced budget for entertainment, more news, more educational, more "things that the private sector won't do".

    Strictly, as much as it is loved, is not necessary to be paid for by a television tax. Neither is (well, was) Bake Off or Eastenders.

    If you want programmes like that you should have to subscribe. I'd pay more than I do now for the extra entertainment stuff. It's quite good. The fee would have to be more than the £100 shortfall I'm proposing as not everybody would subscribe. Fine. But we shouldn't be forced to pay for it *.

    * Before somebody says it, don't pay isn't an option. I subscribe to Sky Sports, therefore I need to pay for Eastenders. Bizarre, but true.

    Do we really need that many "comedy" panel shows stuffed with left wing comedians.

    1. MJI Silver badge

      What would be the alternative to a liberal metropolitan bias?

      Farage?

      But people forget that the programmes BBC often make would not get done by other channels.

      Strictly would become a shouty mess. Bake Off would get filled full of product placement and adverts.

      Eastenders, I'll give you that.

      But then the BBC allows programmes to find their feet, such as Only Fools and Horses.

      And never forget BBC Bristol Natural History Unit with David Attenborough.

      1. Anonymous Coward
        Anonymous Coward

        There's a sizeable gap between BBC liberal and your far right caricature of Farage.

        You think that only BBC can do tasteful ( SCD )? The switch from BBC2 to BBC1 was the worst thing that ever happened to Bake Off. They tried to make it more Bake Off.

        Although you've already agreed with me on Eastenders, Corrie is less over the top. I can be in the same room as Corrie. I can't put up with the shouting and screaming in Eastenders - I literally have to leave the room. Another soap ( not sure which, Brookside? Emmerdale?, who knows? ) is apparently one of the big ones now too. Another non-BBC programme competing adequately with Eastenders.

        There are a hell of a lot more broadcasters now than there were when Only Fools first started. A new programme like that could flog itself around to BBC, ITV, C4, C5, Sky, UKTV Gold, Dave, Netflix, Amazon,

        and probably more. They're all commissioning programmes. On that basis I'd say the need for BBC to give the next Only Fools its chance is completely gone.

        I did say the BBC should do more education - Attenborough would be a big part of that.

        I think we should have a BBC funded from public taxation or a dedicated tax ( as now ). I just don't believe that it should be doing things that are perfectly well served by the private sector and demanding that we pay for it.

    2. Pen-y-gors

      Do we really need that many "comedy" panel shows stuffed with left wing comedians.

      Strangely, there aren't many right wing comedians around, and the ones that were weren't actually funny, merely offensive. Could be because good comedy is often based on looking at reality and questioning it, and tends to involve quite bright people. Hence no kippers.

      1. Anonymous Coward
        Anonymous Coward

        Strangely the BBC does nothing to encourage right-wing comedians.

        They have however worked to encourage female comedians and those from ethnic minorities, so you do have to wonder why there is this oversight.

        1. Dan 55 Silver badge

          Because it's a part of their penance for inflicting Boris Johnson on the nation week after week on HIGNFY.

        2. Teiwaz

          Strangely the BBC does nothing to encourage right-wing comedians.

          Of course there were right-wing comedians.

          Went out of fashion during the 1980's. Partially from a tiredness of Mother-in-law jokes and other world views that were increasingly seen as unacceptable.

          Also New Wave Comedy.

          Python : https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PtuAtXQjn_k

          1. Anonymous Coward
            Anonymous Coward

            Re: Strangely the BBC does nothing to encourage right-wing comedians.

            The problem isn't a lack of right wing comedians, it's a lack of comedians that don't make a constant stream of jabs at the right and make their leftness part of their act.

            None of the top stand-ups do it, A: because why piss off half your audience, B: they are funnier than cheap anti-conservative jokes.

            The second rate comedians the BBC has on spend their time making cheap, lazy and unfunny jokes. See Russel Howard as a "fine" example of that.

            Most watchers of BBC panel shows are presumably either apolitical or left wing, perpetuating the view that it's acceptable for BBC panel shows to be firmly left wing.

            1. MJI Silver badge

              Re: Strangely the BBC does nothing to encourage right-wing comedians.

              If you are going to do political jokes there is plenty of material.

              Not just Boris, you have Abbot as well, and that England flag woman.

              I am all for equal opportunities piss taking.

    3. HmmmYes

      Ah EastEnders - that great modern soap, showing the EastEnd as a load of races, all getting on, all employed (mostly), spekaing English, and going to the pub.

      Not a mosque or FGM'd girl in sight.

    4. strum

      >Not hiring most of its staff from the Graun would be a good start.

      Odd that most of the recent Tory press officers have come from the Beeb...

    5. John Brown (no body) Silver badge

      I subscribe to Sky Sports, therefore I need to pay for Eastenders."

      On the other hand, to be allowed to sunscribe to Sky Sports, you first need to subscribe to another TV package which, no matter how basic, includes channels you probably never watch and so you are subsidising channels that others watch :-)

      1. Anonymous Coward
        Anonymous Coward

        That's my choice. Also due to the competition laws, I can subscribe to Sky Sports through BT or Virgin without subscribing to Sky at all.

  4. MJI Silver badge

    Least worst

    Like democracy.

    No good method, but there is least worse.

    At least Cohen has been shifted on, I am sure he was a plant to ruin the BBC.

    As to programmes, they do them for everyone, except shouty crap for annoying people.

    Licence fee to me is worthwhile just for the output of the natural history unit, and they are also the only mainstream broadcaster left in the UK with unpolluted screens. As a logo hater this means I watch more BBC than all the others together.

    If BBC1 or 2 get on screen logos the direct debit will be cancelled immediately.

  5. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward

    About as expected then, the usual backslapping with a strong side order of cock sucking followed by more bullshit as to why the British Bullshit Corporation needs the money to pump out 90% mindless drivel and propaganda to the masses along with the rare diamond like Natural World..

  6. simmondp

    Please send all those who oppose the Licence Fee to spend a month in the USA - the TV is unwatchable due to the adverts.

    Even if you do not watch that much BBC output remember all other commercial broadcasters have to compete with the BBC for quality of output and not overloading it's viewers with adverts. In the US there is nothing on (linear) TV to compare against.

    And while we are at it, please remind me why to view Sky I have to pay an exorbitant fee AND put up with adverts?

    1. Anonymous Coward
      Anonymous Coward

      There is plenty of competition already without the BBC purposefully spending money demanded with menaces on programmes which directly compete with the private sector.

      It serves a useful purpose. Chasing ratings isn't it.

      1. strum

        >It serves a useful purpose. Chasing ratings isn't it.

        The BBC has always known that if their rating fell, there'd be complaints about pandering to the intellectual elite - just as too much popular programming would bring calls for commercialisation.

        It's a balance - always has been.

    2. King Jack
      Facepalm

      please remind me why to view Sky I have to pay an exorbitant fee AND put up with adverts?

      Because Sky knows that idiots will pay. If people used their brains and voted with their wallets Sky would not do it. I find it strange that subscribers can't work that out for themselves.

  7. danbishop
    Trollface

    Yay grammar...

    Licence <-- noun

    License <-- verb

    I bought a licence from the licensing company who are authorised to license me.

    See also:

    Practice/Practise

    Advice/Advise

    :)

  8. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward

    BBC programming exports your culture around the world

    The BBC does more than provide you with programming. Some of that programming is exported all over the world, and your culture along with it.

    1. Teiwaz

      Re: BBC programming exports your culture around the world

      But look what that did to Dr Who....

      They started to get more interest from the U.S, which led to more storylines set there, next thing you know it is almost identical to US tv. No excuse for that, ITC knew how to do it.

  9. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward

    Anecdotally, I know a loads of folks overseas who leech iPlayer with VNP.

    It would seem to me that the BBC's focus should be to secure and monetise iPlayer; then the extra income generated could more than cover the loss of licensing fees generated through dwindling live TV usage.

    1. John G Imrie

      There are two problems with that.

      1) Copyright holders are still doing regional licensing deals meaning that the BBC can't allow programs it doesn't make directly to be seen outside the UK.

      and

      2) Every time they try to get their own programs shown outside the UK. Sky TV keeps jumping up and down screaming about unfair competition.

  10. MisterHappy
    Happy

    Pay-Per-View?

    After reading a lot of the comments I am left wondering what people want, some are saying that Netflix is just as good, if not better (no mention of Amazon though). Some are talking about only paying for what you watch & using a subscription only model.

    All well and good but when I had Nexflix I paid a flat fee every month and could choose from their offerings, kind of like paying the TV license fee and choosing what broadcast TV I watch.

    As for Sky, again the amount of dross that you don't watch will outweigh what you do & there are probably 6 people watching 'Duck Dynasty' at 3am on Discovery+1 but everyone not watching is still paying if they have the basic package.

    I am not a huge fan of the BBC but I find that £11 for the few things I want to watch is still better value than the £40 (ish) I pay to Sky for a similar number.

    Pay as you go TV doesn't seem to be offerered by anyone BTW.

    And if you don't watch BBC, that's fine too, there is a process whereby you can inform the relevant people and not have to pay the license fee.

    1. King Jack
      Thumb Down

      Re: Pay-Per-View?

      Why should anyone be forced to tell somebody that they don't use their service? Do I tell Tesco or ASDA when I walk into Lidl? The BBC should face reality and make the Licence for their service alone. Just like other businesses out there. Put out a good product or service and customers will come. Extortion is illegal except where the licence in concerned. You should not have to pay not use something. For for the apologists out there. A TV service is not like the NHS, roads or schools. Life would continue without the BBC extortion racket.

      1. MisterHappy

        Re: Pay-Per-View?

        So if I stop using my car I don't have to tell anyone? It can sit on the drive with no insurance and I don't have to pay any vehicle excise duty? Why am I forced to tell the council when I move house?

        If you are going down that route, why do I pay for libraries I don't use, swimming pools I don't go to and many of the other council 'amenities' I have no interest in?

        It's £11 a month... and if it's 'The principle of the thing' then have a look at how much Channel 4 and, I think, ITV get from the licence fee because they also get a cut.

        1. This post has been deleted by its author

  11. Boris the Cockroach Silver badge

    For gawds sake

    put the BBC on a subscription only service

    At least that way those of us who want to watch its output can pay for it, and those of us who dont, wont.

    And if they were serious about grabbing my money, they'd put as much of their archive on-line to watch as possible, instead of having to trawl pirate sites or youtube for low quality copies.

    1. John Brown (no body) Silver badge

      Re: For gawds sake

      "And if they were serious about grabbing my money, they'd put as much of their archive on-line to watch as possible, instead of having to trawl pirate sites or youtube for low quality copies."

      This is why Murdoch and Sky are pro-licence fee. They don't want the BBC to be able to do that and while they are state sponsored Murdoch can use the argument that the BBC is not allowed to compete with his and other commercial offerings other than in certain mandated ways.

  12. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward

    no agreement...

    People who are pro or against the tele liscense are not going to convince each other to change their view.

    For that reason i got rid of my TV, I dont agree with the license so i don't have the device.

    The problem for me is this extension to internet. iPlayer is geoblocked already to try and keep it for UK only viewers, but if they want liscence paying viewers only then you should have to put your liscense number in to watch it.

    I know this would mean Crapita would have to make some kind of functional joined up IT system, but maybe they could outsource it to a small inexperienced Indian company so that our taxes are really well spent helping other countries employment and economy.

  13. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward

    I've had 'em

    When I was a young working man, and pretty much every hour was given to earning a crust so I could afford my flat, I had cut back on all my costs and outgoings, such as the TV licence.

    I sent them back their letter, explaining I don't watch TV.

    One day, I got a knock at the door and two of them were there asking to see my TV. No problems, as it was all legit. They came in, checked the back of the telly for an aerial or cable to the wall socket of which there was none, as I'd got rid of it to avoid that trap.

    Then they went through every single channel - none of which had ever been tuned into the frequencies for any of the channels.

    Whilst they were doing this, they were asking about the PC setup I had in the living room as I had lots of machines running as servers and bits and bobs lying all over the place. One of the guys told me his sons PC had a virus which kept shutting his PC down after about a minute. I gave him written instructions on what to do and he ticked a box on his sheet and said I'd never hear from them again.

    Nice people!

    To this day, I've never watched live broadcast TV or any BBC streaming service which means I've saved somewhere over £2,300. When you look at it that way, that's not a small sum.

Page:

POST COMMENT House rules

Not a member of The Register? Create a new account here.

  • Enter your comment

  • Add an icon

Anonymous cowards cannot choose their icon

Other stories you might like