QOTW: Do you pay the TV licence fee?

[smurfm]

I do pay the license, despite the fact that I do not think the BBC is unbiased and I get a lot of content from other sources. However, overall the quality of the content is good and I feel UK benefits as a country, so we should maintain it.

[deadstoned]

Nope didn't watch it and the BBC has been slipping in terms of bias, so I no longer wanted to fund them anyway with the dozens of alternative options.

[AGTDenton]

I don't watch normal TV, I don't want my life to revolve around someone else's schedule or watch watered down versions of films. I'm more about watching films on Blu-ray and shows on Netflix at times that suit me. I'm not going to pay for something I don't use.

Slowly but surely it will disappear imo.

[spacein_vader]

I don't watch normal TV, I don't want my life to revolve around someone else's schedule or watch watered down versions of films. I'm more about watching films on Blu-ray and shows on Netflix at times that suit me. I'm not going to pay for something I don't use.

Slowly but surely it will disappear imo.

I agree on most things, but news, sport and some other major events are better experienced live.

[Rubarb]

I actually do pay for a TV license atm, but hopefully soon it will change , On average I watch maybe 10 hours per week at most on the TV, so it's pretty poor value in anyone's eyes, given the fact that 10 hours is mainly other channels rather than the BBC... it's very poor value.

I would pay double for a tv that cant tune BBC channels and watch for free... no fee's etc

Maybe this is something they should work on ?

[AGTDenton]

I agree on most things, but news, sport and some other major events are better experienced live.

I agree somethings are good live but the news is a depressant for me and sport isn't my thing unless it's Rally sport or Boxing but as its only on Sky or BT I can't be bothered to have both just to get a fight that I have to pay on PPV at 5am or very un live Rally racing repeats from a year ago

[HollyDOL]

In CZ we pay ~70GBP a year for similar service (25% of that is for 'radio' but if you have TV you are required to pay for radio as well). Alas, the program is full of ads, reality shows and biased political junk depending on where the wind blows atm. Automatically when you have a power line you are expected to pay. You get mails starting with "Explain why you are not paying fees" in pretty rude way. You are required to pay if you have any device capable of receiving DVB-T,C or S (except mobile phones I think). But the 'blackmailing' strategy you folks write about sounds almost same like one that happens here.

[Lord Midas]

Self-promotion isn't really advertisements but looking at the BBC way of doing it, 1 or 2 minutes between shows, is hardly a tough watch.

Unlike SKY, for example. 4 breaks per 1-hour episode, if you include the last one. When watching the likes of SKY Witness each break starts with a SKY advert and ends with 3 SKY adverts. Usually in the order of Sports, Movies then one or two regular programming episodes. We never watch live TV anymore, everything is on demand or the day after so we can fast-forward the adverts.

The BBC is way better in this regard. And to be fair their programming of the big shows is way better. They just have more... quality, than say ITV.

[Saracen999]

I agree on most things, but news, sport and some other major events are better experienced live.

I can see why you say that, but it's not really an issue for me.

There's very little sport I watch, or would be bothered about if I couldn't watch it at all. I'm certainly not bothered enough about TV news to worry about live and, 'major events' .... I can't think of any that bother me there, either.

[Fogoldgaming]

Completely! Non-advertising tv is priceless.

[Cr@ig]

No its Bias Crap we have to pay for on BBC, the only thing good to come out of the BBC is Sir David Attenborough, the rest is utter crap and over priced.

[spacein_vader]

I've heard a lot of people with wildly different political views complain about BBC bias over the years. Oddly not a single one thinks it's biased in favour of their viewpoint.

The natural history unit and the children's programming are both superb, as is a fair chunk of the radio output which oddly is also funded by the TV licence.

[neonplanet40]

We have to get it because my wife watches live tv. But NOT the BBC. That's why I think the whole thing is a con. Having to pay more than the cost of Netflix and Spotify for a service I don't use?

It should be subscription based. I.e. if you want to watch the BBC then you pay for it. If not, then you don't. However, they will never do that as they know the majority of the public wouldn't pay for it and it would cease to exist.

[Dribble]

I used to love the BBC back at the turn of the century, but a few years ago I released that as a British white male I was always the villain in every story. While still really love some BBC stuff, I can't stand that I'm paying the salary's of a bunch of people who's purpose seems to be undermine and vilify me at every opportunity.

[Gh0sty]

Haven't paid it for years. Our viewing habits have changed massively and we only tend to watch online streaming programs now. For a while we stopped watching telly altogether and its slowly crept back in but in a much more controlled way which suits our lifestyle much better.

[tunrip]

I remember someone once pointing out that most commercial channels don't exist to make you watch TV. They exist to make you watch the adverts. I know that Netflix upsets this trend, but I still find the BBC to be refreshingly different in that regards.

And I know there are complaints about BBC news, but I think they make an effort to try to be fair and balanced.

I think it's worth it