BBC puts forward levy on broadband bills idea

[3dcandy]

Watercooled - I won't quote it makes for a long winded thread. I dumbed it down a lot. Pure contentwise is basically what I'm saying. If you can't receive a fee for using BBC content then the service would disappear is what I mean in a nutshell. The licence fee is basically a tax that is why the legislation and the warnings letters etc. are how they are. Just because it is not worded as a tax it basically is including appropriate punishments like a prison sentence if you do not pay it. That's it in a simple term.

Re: broadband - Virgin despite using their own fibre network use a huge amount of OpenReach backhaul and infrastructure and then Openreach have their fingers in many pies. Again there is effectively a broadband tax without the severe penalties of the licence fee for avoidance or non payment.

If you investigate how much news (including Sky news and other agencies) that source their content via complex licensing agreements back to the bbc I believe you would be surprised. When I say FM and others would disappear many of these stations are propped up by collection of the licence fee which despite being separated from the tv side still contribute. That is not the issue though as I believe that because DAB and FM will lose large amounts of money as they will have to compete with paid for subscriptions (they have no mechanism to collect on going royalties or bill people in a nutshell) it is this reason that will sound the death knell for many stations. I'm not saying that radio stations with an advert every minute wouldn't pop up in their place but hey that's another debate...

In a nutshell I believe that what I'm trying to get at is that a radical rethink is in order. But we also don't really have the systems or the mindset in place right now to do this without causing massive disruption. My mother for example would never pay for broadband or pay for tv or radio. She has no papers and no other way of hearing or watching the news. Does she deserve to be taxed in a different way? Yes she pays via the licence fee but she has been doing that for many decades. Finding a solution to that issue is much harder than it seems. Perhaps a decoder box is the way to do it but she struggles as it is with recording programs due to the tech side of it.

PS I am enjoying the debate. No sides taken and like to see the arguments, which to the most part are a good read

[3dcandy]

What are you on about?


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.

Yup - see my comment above. I know plenty in radio and a few in the BBC. Without getting the money in and with people reluctant to hear an advert every minute they will struggle. Again take away the bbc channels or channels that use BBC content and the choice would drop dramatically. Not being able to get enough money to broadcast is why things like FM would disappear. Yes stations would come along afterwards but many would go. Like I said it's another debate. A friend in the BBC says that he looked into this and predicts that approx 75% of FM stations would shut pretty quickly as the money is simply not there and they are helped by the BBC. A good mate in radio has said that COVID-19 for example has hit the money that the station he works for by 90% already. A station that is already struggling. They are looking at ways to get revenue and FM and DAB are the methods that will almost surely go as they can't be monetised

[DemonHighwayman]

In France you just tell them when you pay your council tax that you don't have a tv and thats the end of it, no additional charge and importantly no constant harassment from license enforcers !

[watercooled]

I'll also avoid quoting for the same reason. I'm also not suggesting that the BBC would exist if there was literally no funding for it, that much is obvious.

I do understand about the non-access network sharing agreements between OR and Virgin (I was referring pretty much to the access network side of things as the debate becomes moot anyway beyond that, as there's a huge and complex set of agreements beyond that, involving peering, transit, leased fibre, etc), but my point remains exactly the same, in that OR are being paid for a service. If they are not being used, they do not get paid. As it happens, Virgin (and some others like Vodafone and an increasing number of newer providers) have extensive nationwide or regional fibre networks and the sharing works both ways - in some areas where laying independent networks doesn't make financial sense, BT lease fibre from other networks like Virgin. Openreach are not getting paid a tax by entities who are not using them.

Again regarding the license fee funding distribution, the VAST majority of it goes to BBC funding, and it would be no major feat to claim funding for the other parts e.g. from public funding.

You use the example of your mother and how she would not be prepared to pay for TV... but she does pay TV license? Isn't that effectively the same thing? If it went do a by-choice funding model, what's the difference?

[ik9000]

It doesn't need the BBC to make Corbyn look bad. Anyone can see him for what he is without needing to lob accusations of bias around. This current license fee review is actually the Tory backlash against the BBC for what they felt was bias against them! That and don't forget how cosy the Tories are with the Murdoch empire who obviously don't have anything to gain from a diminished BBC at all do they?

[CAT-THE-FIFTH]

The Tories on purpose created this problem as they thought the BBC was too too "left wing" and too "pro-Europe" so have been gutting it,poking around with it and attacking it for nearly a decade. Cummings also hates the BBC. In many countries there can be more than one state funded public broadcaster. Germany has two,which is funded by 8 billion Euro of fees. The BBC by comparison is probably half that in actual public fees and generates a far greater percentage of its income via commercial means,compared to many European publically funded broadcasters(about 1/3 of its funding). France has 3 different state TV/radio organisations with nearly 4 billion Euro of funding. RTE and TG4 in Italy have at least 2.5 billion Euro. NHK in Japan is also funded via a large license fee too. The BBC has significantly larger worldwide reach than almost all of the European and international public broadcasters.Also internationally the BBC is considered more or less the official voice of the UK.

People might want to ask who benefits most if there is no BBC...its people such as Rupert Murdoch and a number of US centric corporations who are good mates of certain politicians,so they have been drip feeding negative stuff via their mouthpieces for a longtime. The BBC is not only a competitor locally for these huge corporations,but more importantly internationally.

The BBC could be funded by general taxation for its core services,but OFC why would they want a public service broadcaster which needs to adhere to certain standards,when they can get Murdoch and co to do it themselves. They could use advertising but it will be spun as a negative too.

To put this in context,the cost of the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan alone cost £30 billion upto 2014. Always money for a good war(it afflicts all of our parties),but never enough for a public broadcaster,let alone listening to the 2016 pandemic exercise and buying more ventilators and PPE. Even the US is feeling "worried" for us know.


Edit!!

Also the BBC "had" to bid for its weather services instead of using the Met Office....they use MeteoGroup now. So they are now trying to also undermine the Met Office funding streams too,bit by bit - so wait until there will be noise in 10 years in the media that its rubbish,crap,etc. Everything to privatise and sell off assets eventually by slowly running them down.

[Ttaskmaster]

The Tories on purpose created this problem as they thought the BBC was too too "left wing"

Were they watching the latest series of Doctor Who, by any chance?

[CAT-THE-FIFTH]

Were they watching the latest series of Doctor Who, by any chance?

[DK2019]

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

Right wingers genuinely scare me.

[The Hand]

The BBC should just have advertising for standard broadcasting and a subscription(ad free) for smart devices/TVs for those who want it. BBC should move with the times and not force people to pay for something they might not want.

[ik9000]

Cat's on the money - this a political move.

[Dribble]

Right wingers genuinely scare me.

I'm perhaps slightly right of centre, pretty average really, you the sort of people who populate most of the country outside of the liberal left echo chambers and shock them every time they loose some public vote. Anyway I used to love the BBC, but then I noticed every story with a baddy in it had a picture of me. Anyway if the BBC was a fair representation of the political views of the country then I'd be all for it, but as pretty well everyone there is from one side of it that's just not possible.

[judge56988]

The Tories on purpose created this problem as they thought the BBC was too too "left wing" and too "pro-Europe"

It is and it was.

[CAT-THE-FIFTH]

I'm perhaps slightly right of centre, pretty average really, you the sort of people who populate most of the country outside of the liberal left echo chambers and shock them every time they loose some public vote. Anyway I used to love the BBC, but then I noticed every story with a baddy in it had a picture of me. Anyway if the BBC was a fair representation of the political views of the country then I'd be all for it, but as pretty well everyone there is from one side of it that's just not possible.

Impressive acting resume there - that is one heck of a character actor if you can become a man or women,tall or short,old or young!

You must hate US TV then. "You" are the foreign bad guy in half their films and programmes. Germans too.

They hate us so much,they even get yanks to pretend to be brits,who pretend to be bad guys. They CBA even to hire a proper Brit...bloody cheapskates!

I was watching one of the new Trek series,and they had two Romulan bad guys with British accents for double the effect...one was a proper Brit,so at least they went to the effort!

Westworld was a bit better,they had Anthony Hopkins as a morally grey character and Tessa Thompson as the evil killer baddie lady...you see things are looking up for "You". Even the baddies are getting inclusive!

It is and it was.

I know left wing people who call it a government mouthpiece.

TBF,I just skim the top news from it. Can't say either way.

Reuters is probably fairly neutral(I think).

[watercooled]

I had a half typed-up response mentioning the trend of the US film industry always portraying the English as baddies, I wasn't sure if I was being a bit flippant given the context though!

Surely even the US audience are growing tired of the predictability of nearly every terribly imitated English accent being the villain, though?

Edit: Not that I read general news a heck of a lot, but I agree in that I find Reuters fairly neutral. I've found their wording to be pretty objective and free of speculation or opinion on the articles I have read.

[judge56988]

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

Right wingers genuinely scare me.

The right wing obviously ranges from slightly right of centre to fascism. The extreme right scares me just as much as the extreme left scares me because both require authoritarian rule, which is something I hate with a passion. That viewpoint probably relects the leaning of the majority I would say, based on the election results and it's abundantly clear that this country does not and probably never has wanted a left wing government because whenever that has been the alternative to a Tory government, the Tories have always won.
What irks me is that a supposedly impartial, publicly funded broadcasting organisation is pushing their liberal (small l) agenda, not just through the news and current affairs programming but also through their drama output. Their remit is to report the news without bias whether that be overt or the more subtle kind favoured by the BBC. Print media mostly is and always has been biassed in one direction or another according to the beliefs of the proprieter however everyone is aware of that. The whole thing about the BBC is that it's not meant to be like that.