LinkBack URL
About LinkBacksRead more.Pay-per-view system a possibility for watching old BBC content on iPlayer.
Read more.Pay-per-view system a possibility for watching old BBC content on iPlayer.
BAS**RDS!The BBC is brainstorming plans to charge viewers of its iPlayer service for accessing archived content. ... With the current licence fee costing £145.50 a year, the BBC reassured licence payers that they would still be able to access iPlayer content as they do now and confirmed that it has no plans to introduce a second licence.
As license fee payers we've already paid for the content once, so how the heck can they justify (other than greed) wanting to charge for it again. That said, if they wanted to introduce some kind of single payment subscription scheme that allowed a subscriber to access all archived content, then I'd be (very cautiously) in favour - in so much as it's far better than the "pay per view" system hinted at in the article.
Presumably this has been bought about by the current government's hatred of the Beeb and consequently the squeezing of their finances, (widely reported).
Career status: still enjoying my new career in DevOps, but it's keeping me busy...
*sigh* old media mentality still being applied to the internet.
To be fair, it's not like the iPlayer is free to run - I'm sure it runs up a lot of bandwidth, which has to be paid for. But Would allowing access to "archived" content really increase the bandwidth in use at any given time? Surely the older content won't be anywhere near as popular as the catch-up content.
I'm all for charging international visitors to watch the content, but I don't see why we should be charged when really all it'll take is a few extra hard disks to store the content (which it probably already is on).
The sooner the TV license fee is abolished once and for all, the better.
Outdated, unfair, and extortionate.
It depends what people are being charged for.Originally Posted by crossy
High definition video uses a fair bit of storage, bandwidth and decent machines to serve to people. If the BBC are looking to make content available over the current free period of 7 days, but cover their costs with a fee, I really don't have a problem with this.
I'm sure international visitors would be over the moon to be able to pay to watch content, the problem is the BBC *still* hasn't offered them.
Good point - if this charging idea is all about the money, then how about "internationalising" the service like you're suggesting. After all, isn't everyone telling us that the UK needs to export more?
Career status: still enjoying my new career in DevOps, but it's keeping me busy...
I agree, if it took off, I reckon all BBC operations could be conceivably financed by international content delivery. They should really be on the ball on this.Good point - if this charging idea is all about the money, then how about "internationalising" the service like you're suggesting. After all, isn't everyone telling us that the UK needs to export more?
Charging for archival content that already has been paid for is distasteful, pay-per-view downright greedy, but then again if they made such shows free it would effectively kill their DVD sales division, so it was always going to be a matter of when they were going to monetise this.
Certainly don't agree with it out of the principle that has already been paid for out of the licence fee. However, it's important to remember that these are shows you would not (legally) have access to unless you a) bought the DVD/Blu-ray/whatever or b) waited until they were repeated again. So in either case, money would have to be paid in order to watch it, or wait until it's repeated... which it'd then be free on the iPlayer.
Hmmmmm. Not quite sure where I sit on this issue, just yet. No doubt the Daily Mail will go haywire over this story.
The opposite, the BBC is recognising that making content available over the internet requires some thought and are re-examining how they charge and deliver it. They have found that an increasing number of people (a lot of students) are now not buying a TV licence as they are only watching the content in iPlayer. They are consuming the media buy not paying for it, so the BBC is investigating how to level the field on the Internet, to see how they need to change the mentality.
The international delivery of iPlayer is difficult due to the multitude of independent companies that the BBC uses to get content, plus they already sell loads of content internationally anyway.
As for paying for things more than once, that's how media works, you don't go to the cinema once to see a film and then expect to go back as many times as you want for free, or get the DVD in the post as you've paid to see it. If the 1st view cost of all media had to pay for the all production costs and profit no-one would be able to afford it.
System:Atari 2600 CPU:8-bit 6507 (1.19MHz) RAM:128 bytes Colours: 16 (4 on screen) Resolution: 192x160
If they were downloadable and DRM-free...
...they'd be on certain websites for free within minutes?
How about they make several tiers for the license fee?? Have TV only or internet only ones too which are cheaper than the current fee.
I agree, very unfair organisation with unreal bias lately. I don't want to pay to be treated as if I'm a... well I won't go into their seeming view of typical British person but you get the point.As for the above comment of the current government hatred of the beeb, do you watch it? Listen to the radio stations? Even old newsreaders admit how stupid it is, it's not right is it?
Back on topic, the BBc now make 1 or 2 new decent things a year and seemingly only can afford 3 episodes (Sherlock) because of no rise in fee this year. I'd say this is just being spiteful but still that's not a lot of content to archive is it?
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
