BBC puts forward levy on broadband bills idea

[[GSV]Trig]

Here's a thought, maybe if you got value for money, people wouldnt have such an issue with it..
The BBC is an old archaic institution that hasnt kept up, it needs to die in its current form.

[DK2019]

Here's a thought, maybe if you got value for money, people wouldnt have such an issue with it..
The BBC is an old archaic institution that hasn't kept up, it needs to die in its current form.

Well everything but the news and political stuff is good value. Its the most important part that makes the whole thing worthless imho.

[watercooled]

My issue with it (well, one of many) is if the Government are prepared to admit it's a public service, why not take it out of general taxes and have their expenditure subject to the same sort of scrutiny as other Government spending? If it's not, then give people the choice whether they want it or not. Can't really logically have it both ways - either it's a public service or it's not IMO.

And I agree with what others have said, the funding model looks pretty ridiculous when compared to other broadcasting agencies. A 'public service' where a lot of people are making orders of magnitude more than the PM? Definitely raises some questions, doesn't it?

Oh and yes, people are conflating the TV License and the BBC but given the overwhelming majority of the TV License payments go to the BBC, it doesn't really make much difference IMO. The transmissions costs etc. make up a very small fraction of the total.

Edit: For what it's worth, my opinion on the matter used to be less strong and I do value the quality of the UK's TV in general over what you see in some other places with their horrendous advertising models. But it's not like we don't have many good ad-funded channels too.

However, the attitude and disdain they seem to show towards any suggestion of decriminalisation has worked wonders in polarising me against their argument. Not to mention the people who I know have been continually harassed for non-payment despite genuinely not even watching TV. And the nonsense fear-mongering tactics they've used over the years to instil paranoia in people who don't pay.

[Dribble]

If the BBC were impartial, I'd happily pay the license fee.
It used to be that they read the news and interviewed politicians and allowed the viewer to form their own opinions. The bias displayed now is incredible.

This, as a pretty normal middle class white heterosexual male I object to having to pay to be portrayed as the scum of the earth in need of re-education.

[jimbouk]

I assume with BBC's entertainment arm seeking content worldwide that that side wouldn't be a massive money pit. I may be in the minority (or the quiet majority, you never know!) but I like the news coverage of most things. Too London/England focused on the main front pages/programmes would be my main concern.

The value for money part is difficult. Yes it's too expensive when you just consider the UK centric output compared to other services, but not vastly so (online newspaper subscription plus a couple of streaming services for example). What it does provide in other ways such as education (I used the bite sized learning many moons ago) and services around the world is difficult to quantify in terms of value to individuals who do not benefit from those services. English spoken news abroad may seem as pointless for someone who's never been stuck in a foreign country may seem as pointless as an x-ray machine for someone who's never broken a bone.

Perhaps like BT it needs to be broken up into smaller parts; entertainment (voluntary subscription), news & education (TV licence by whatever means) and foreign services (standard tax)?

[flearider]

the easiest solution is to encode it and have a decoder that you pay for in your house ..
then see who wants one ..
i still pay but never watch bbc well any tv for that matter i do stream what programs i do watch to my pc .. which are sci-fi and mostly made in the usa .. uk tv is cheap garbage coronation st eastender's

[DK2019]

This, as a pretty normal middle class white heterosexual male I object to having to pay to be portrayed as the scum of the earth in need of re-education.

April fools comment?

[DWhitley]

They are in favour of any system which takes away the ability of viewers to opt out.

They claim to provide high quality programming but they are not prepared to put this to the test, at the same time claiming that their overpaid "talent" such as Gary Lineker would go elsewhere if their salaries were reduced to something more respectable. £25k per annum sounds about right.

A shadow of what it used to be.

[philehidiot]

The BBC have realised they're irrelevant and want to move their income so it's tied to something that is. What in the name of Our Sweet Lady of Guadeloupe does the BBC have to do with broadband? Now, if they switched their service to broadband only and used ISP level blocking to grant or deny access depending on whether you paid for it with your broadband, I'd get that.

I use the BBC F1 website and iPlayer because the missus forces me to watch Casualty as she likes watching me rant / pause it and point out all the hideous mistakes on screen. I particularly like it when they shock asystole and it's also clear that to get the flat line, someone has just unplugged the ECG simulator.

At the moment I've used the BBC website to keep up to date on coronavirus stuff as and when but that's still usually nothing I don't get from other news sources.

Perhaps the BBC should use this as a chance to rid itself of the overpaid talent and to get in new people, fresh faces and be the place ordinary humans can go to start a career, rather than the preserve of a few elites? Surely THAT would be representing the people?

[Pleiades]

April fools comment?

God, I hope so. But have a horrible feeling it was 'serious'

[Percy1983]

I am happy yo pay the TV license as it pays for itself in Cbeebies alone, the quality of programming id excellent and my son isn't bombarded with adverts every 15 minutes which means he doesn't want every toy to ever exist.

Likewise they do make some programmes which make no commercial sense for adverts or selling for niches and minorities which simply isn't possible in commercial setting where every penny spent is to make money and anything not doing so is cut.

On that they do need to cut some of the celeb/talent show bull.

I will say the payment/billing system no longer works and do think just adding it somewhere else makes more sense.

[3dcandy]

Everyone who has commented above seems to not grasp a major stumbling block in ALL of this argument. Remove people paying for the BBC and FM radio, DAB radio in fact any radio would disappear almost overnight. So you will not be able to listen to radio as over 90% of the content other than the music is by the bbc in some shape or form. Freeview - gone, again 90% of the content is BBC. You would then be left with a stark choice of losing 95% of all of the content EVER produced in the UK and being unable to watch it or a mahoosive hike in any form of tv/video to cover the BBC either by this proposed tax, or Sky/Virgin or whoever doubling their basic subscriptions. I know someone who works for Sky. They reckon if they'd have to pay for the subsidised BBC content they use on a basic subscription at a fair cost then a basic Sky package would be upwards of £65 a month

Everyone seems happy to say they won't pay for the BBC. You would also remove tv for approx 20% of the nation because you are unwilling to pay for it...

It's a tough one. It's like broadband that doesn't matter how you slice it BT get a bit of the pie in nearly every connection in the UK somehow. The same applies to the BBC

[kalniel]

I can see the argument.. however they're behind the times. If they want to be forward looking tie it to a mobile levy, or to be honest just go subscription so people can opt in or out. If the govt like it they can subsidise.

Disclaimer: I don't have a TV.

[watercooled]

Everyone who has commented above seems to not grasp a major stumbling block in ALL of this argument. Remove people paying for the BBC and FM radio, DAB radio in fact any radio would disappear almost overnight. So you will not be able to listen to radio as over 90% of the content other than the music is by the bbc in some shape or form. Freeview - gone, again 90% of the content is BBC. You would then be left with a stark choice of losing 95% of all of the content EVER produced in the UK and being unable to watch it or a mahoosive hike in any form of tv/video to cover the BBC either by this proposed tax, or Sky/Virgin or whoever doubling their basic subscriptions. I know someone who works for Sky. They reckon if they'd have to pay for the subsidised BBC content they use on a basic subscription at a fair cost then a basic Sky package would be upwards of £65 a month

I'm not quite sure if you're talking about programming or the technical distribution of such. If it's the latter, I already addressed this in a previous post - a tiny fraction of the TV License pays for this and it would be no big deal to fund this some other way, or perhaps even a drastically cheaper TV license. In fact the cost of processing payment for such a small amount would probably be prohibitive! To suggest radio, DAB, Freeview would disappear without public-funded BBC programming is just wrong. And nor is 90% of the content BBC, unless you perhaps count the three million redundant BBC radio stations which they're already considering cutting IIRC.

I think adding it to some other bill is a categorically stupid and unfair idea. You move from an already questionable system of bullying the majority of people into paying for it, into putting effectively another poll tax onto every individual in the country whether they watch it or not. That is not progress in the slightest, it's a huge step backwards and goes completely against the whole debate of wanting to decriminalise it. After all, you can't be accused of not paying if it's practically impossible to avoid paying! This is just the BBC tabling an idea which may decriminalise it in the literal sense, but in reality just saves them money on having to enforce it themselves, and they'd be going to the bank rubbing their hands together.

Again, if it's such a vital public service and the public truly think this - why is it not paid for out of public money (from taxes), and have the organisation subject to the same sort of value-for-money oversight as other public bodies are?

Everyone seems happy to say they won't pay for the BBC. You would also remove tv for approx 20% of the nation because you are unwilling to pay for it...

How? For what it's worth, we do have a TV License because we (well, not so much myself) do watch TV. There's no contradiction in paying for something but being against forcing others to do the same for something they do not want.

It's a tough one. It's like broadband that doesn't matter how you slice it BT get a bit of the pie in nearly every connection in the UK somehow. The same applies to the BBC

I'd disagree there's a valid comparison to make. Openreach provide a service to those other providers which comes at a cost, it's not a tax they receive for doing nothing. If you're not using an OR network (e.g. Virgin, CityFibre, Hyperoptic, etc) then they don't get paid.

[gagaga]

Utter arrogance. They have no right to exist. They need to stand on their own two feet.

They should be sold off (alongside Channel 4) once the current mess is over. The state will need all the money it can get then.

[gagaga]

Remove people paying for the BBC and FM radio, DAB radio in fact any radio would disappear almost overnight. So you will not be able to listen to radio as over 90% of the content other than the music is by the bbc in some shape or form.

What are you on about?

Freeview - gone, again 90% of the content is BBC. You would then be left with a stark choice of losing 95% of all of the content EVER produced in the UK

Riiight. I suspect ITV will have a thing or two to say about that. And Channel 4. And Channel 5, Dave (yes I know BBC co-own), Sky etc etc.

The BBC 'own' one of the DTV muxes. One. And even then they sell off some of the capacity to other broadcasters.