Quantcast
Please log in or register. Registered visitors get fewer ads.
Forum index | Previous Thread | Next thread
This is a horrifying prospect 23:38 - Sep 27 with 1066 viewsreusersfreekicks

https://www.theguardian.com/media/2020/sep/27/are-paul-dacre-and-charles-moore-s
1

This is a horrifying prospect on 07:28 - Sep 28 with 944 viewsOldsmoker

The Poachers have become the Gamekeepers.

Poll: What mode is best?

0

This is a horrifying prospect on 07:48 - Sep 28 with 932 viewsKropotkin123

The "TV licence" should be scrapped. I shouldn't have to fund the BBC just because I own a TV. I rarely use their services and certainly wouldn't pay a subscription to them for the same value.

My partner, who isn't from the UK, was surprised at just how much pro-british content there was in there. So much ww1 and ww2 content on what is meant to be news.

The only decent service in my opinion is BBC world and you can't access that from the UK and it is largely funded by independent means such as advert revenue.

Regardless of my thoughts of these people, I'd rather someone came in and took an axe to the revenue stream.
[Post edited 28 Sep 2020 7:48]

Lambo delenda est
Poll: Is Water an Object?
Blog: Round Four: Eagle

-7
This is a horrifying prospect on 08:04 - Sep 28 with 902 viewsdeliasplums

This is a horrifying prospect on 07:48 - Sep 28 by Kropotkin123

The "TV licence" should be scrapped. I shouldn't have to fund the BBC just because I own a TV. I rarely use their services and certainly wouldn't pay a subscription to them for the same value.

My partner, who isn't from the UK, was surprised at just how much pro-british content there was in there. So much ww1 and ww2 content on what is meant to be news.

The only decent service in my opinion is BBC world and you can't access that from the UK and it is largely funded by independent means such as advert revenue.

Regardless of my thoughts of these people, I'd rather someone came in and took an axe to the revenue stream.
[Post edited 28 Sep 2020 7:48]


BBC local radio that provides many older and housebound people with a real connection to their local community? How are you going to replace that?

It's 106 miles to Portman Road, we've got a full tank of gas, half a round of Port Salut, it's dark... and we're wearing blue tinted sunglasses.
Poll: Which recent triallist should we have signed?

2
This is a horrifying prospect on 08:12 - Sep 28 with 894 viewsWeWereZombies

This is a horrifying prospect on 07:48 - Sep 28 by Kropotkin123

The "TV licence" should be scrapped. I shouldn't have to fund the BBC just because I own a TV. I rarely use their services and certainly wouldn't pay a subscription to them for the same value.

My partner, who isn't from the UK, was surprised at just how much pro-british content there was in there. So much ww1 and ww2 content on what is meant to be news.

The only decent service in my opinion is BBC world and you can't access that from the UK and it is largely funded by independent means such as advert revenue.

Regardless of my thoughts of these people, I'd rather someone came in and took an axe to the revenue stream.
[Post edited 28 Sep 2020 7:48]


I think all I need to do to refute your argument is recall what watching television in Spain, the United States or Italy is like.

Poll: Most unrealistic candidates to buy out Marcus Evans

1
This is a horrifying prospect on 08:23 - Sep 28 with 875 viewsMonkeyAlan

This is a horrifying prospect on 07:48 - Sep 28 by Kropotkin123

The "TV licence" should be scrapped. I shouldn't have to fund the BBC just because I own a TV. I rarely use their services and certainly wouldn't pay a subscription to them for the same value.

My partner, who isn't from the UK, was surprised at just how much pro-british content there was in there. So much ww1 and ww2 content on what is meant to be news.

The only decent service in my opinion is BBC world and you can't access that from the UK and it is largely funded by independent means such as advert revenue.

Regardless of my thoughts of these people, I'd rather someone came in and took an axe to the revenue stream.
[Post edited 28 Sep 2020 7:48]


Compared to other countries tv. The BBC is far superior. Having said that, they should never have brought the fee back in for OAPs,over 75,that was naughty.
0
This is a horrifying prospect on 08:35 - Sep 28 with 850 viewsKropotkin123

This is a horrifying prospect on 08:04 - Sep 28 by deliasplums

BBC local radio that provides many older and housebound people with a real connection to their local community? How are you going to replace that?


I'm not going to replace it.

If the BBC isn't financially viable as a subscription basis/advert basis with the remit it has, then non-profitable services should be pulled to make it so.

If some of those services, that are unprofitable, are deemed to be a socially significant outreach programs for older and housebound people, then create a tax to plug their gap for the shortfall.

I shouldn't be be forced to pay for a service that I don't use. Particularly when a percentage of that money goes towards million pound contracts for shows like MOTD, when the hosts could easily be replaced.

I don't see why I should be financially support religious services when I believe in the separation of the church and the state.

Edit for other comments: I don't use the service, so I don't care if it is comparatively good. I shouldn't have to pay for the BBC to watch Netflix, Disney+, YouTube, Google play, etc
[Post edited 28 Sep 2020 8:40]

Lambo delenda est
Poll: Is Water an Object?
Blog: Round Four: Eagle

-1

This is a horrifying prospect on 08:45 - Sep 28 with 822 viewsOldsmoker

One simple change that the BBC could implement is to allow google adverts on their website. The amount of visits the BBC website gets per day is 100's of millions. I'm sure that would pull in enough revenue to cover some of their costs.
The BBC website is the soft power that the UK needs. It is one of the top 10 most trusted sites in the world.

Poll: What mode is best?

0
This is a horrifying prospect on 08:51 - Sep 28 with 803 viewsdeliasplums

This is a horrifying prospect on 08:35 - Sep 28 by Kropotkin123

I'm not going to replace it.

If the BBC isn't financially viable as a subscription basis/advert basis with the remit it has, then non-profitable services should be pulled to make it so.

If some of those services, that are unprofitable, are deemed to be a socially significant outreach programs for older and housebound people, then create a tax to plug their gap for the shortfall.

I shouldn't be be forced to pay for a service that I don't use. Particularly when a percentage of that money goes towards million pound contracts for shows like MOTD, when the hosts could easily be replaced.

I don't see why I should be financially support religious services when I believe in the separation of the church and the state.

Edit for other comments: I don't use the service, so I don't care if it is comparatively good. I shouldn't have to pay for the BBC to watch Netflix, Disney+, YouTube, Google play, etc
[Post edited 28 Sep 2020 8:40]


You have just explained why our society is completely screwed. You’re alright jack and everything is measured in £s.
I just hope you continue to make enough £s to keep your head above water - forever.

It's 106 miles to Portman Road, we've got a full tank of gas, half a round of Port Salut, it's dark... and we're wearing blue tinted sunglasses.
Poll: Which recent triallist should we have signed?

4
Login to get fewer ads

This is a horrifying prospect on 08:59 - Sep 28 with 781 viewsKropotkin123

This is a horrifying prospect on 08:51 - Sep 28 by deliasplums

You have just explained why our society is completely screwed. You’re alright jack and everything is measured in £s.
I just hope you continue to make enough £s to keep your head above water - forever.


No, I've explained how you can use the taxation system as a fairer way to support services deemed as outreach. And you have taken this as just me me me.

What is wrong with looking out for me anyway. I can't afford to get a home and start a family. Yet I'm meant to contribute to services that I don't use or agree with, just so I can get some measure of relaxation in my limited downtime.

I've also said how BBC world services is better quality, and supported by ad revenue. Like OS says, it is a quick fix to change to income streams, with little overall impact to the service.
[Post edited 28 Sep 2020 8:59]

Lambo delenda est
Poll: Is Water an Object?
Blog: Round Four: Eagle

1
This is a horrifying prospect on 09:00 - Sep 28 with 772 viewsWeWereZombies

This is a horrifying prospect on 08:45 - Sep 28 by Oldsmoker

One simple change that the BBC could implement is to allow google adverts on their website. The amount of visits the BBC website gets per day is 100's of millions. I'm sure that would pull in enough revenue to cover some of their costs.
The BBC website is the soft power that the UK needs. It is one of the top 10 most trusted sites in the world.


Does everything have to be profit driven and littered with adverts? My enjoyment of TWTD has certainly improved since I went ad free.

Poll: Most unrealistic candidates to buy out Marcus Evans

4
This is a horrifying prospect on 09:09 - Sep 28 with 753 viewshomer_123

This is a horrifying prospect on 08:45 - Sep 28 by Oldsmoker

One simple change that the BBC could implement is to allow google adverts on their website. The amount of visits the BBC website gets per day is 100's of millions. I'm sure that would pull in enough revenue to cover some of their costs.
The BBC website is the soft power that the UK needs. It is one of the top 10 most trusted sites in the world.


They could but they absolutely shouldn't.

Ade Akinbiyi couldn't hit a cows arse with a banjo...
Poll: Evans...

1
This is a horrifying prospect on 09:09 - Sep 28 with 752 viewsKropotkin123

This is a horrifying prospect on 09:00 - Sep 28 by WeWereZombies

Does everything have to be profit driven and littered with adverts? My enjoyment of TWTD has certainly improved since I went ad free.


In reality what you are saying is you'd rather I paid for there to be no adverts rather than you pay for there to be no adverts via subscription or you'd rather I pay for the service, rather than the companies pay for the service.

Eitherway, to flip the last comment of me being selfish, I'd argue this is a very self-centred way of looking at it.

It would also be very simple to create an ad-free subscription service at exactly the same value as the TV licence to give both viewpoints their desired option

Lambo delenda est
Poll: Is Water an Object?
Blog: Round Four: Eagle

1
This is a horrifying prospect on 09:49 - Sep 28 with 713 viewsWeWereZombies

This is a horrifying prospect on 09:09 - Sep 28 by Kropotkin123

In reality what you are saying is you'd rather I paid for there to be no adverts rather than you pay for there to be no adverts via subscription or you'd rather I pay for the service, rather than the companies pay for the service.

Eitherway, to flip the last comment of me being selfish, I'd argue this is a very self-centred way of looking at it.

It would also be very simple to create an ad-free subscription service at exactly the same value as the TV licence to give both viewpoints their desired option


I deny being self centred except in the sense that I want everyone to benefit from news and programmes that are relatively unbiased (and I accept the point that sometimes the BBC just seem to be cheerleading for the royals or pandering to the middle classes - whatever they are these days). The insidious effect of advertising should not be underestimated, and the power it has to nudge us into areas we would not normally consider, or to be subverted by malign social forces, should not be underestimated.

Having a state licensed media product does at least introduce some competition into what would otherwise be an oligarchy, a form of thought control administered by a tightly knit cabal of kleptocrats, that is what I see in the three nations I mentioned earlier.

Poll: Most unrealistic candidates to buy out Marcus Evans

2
This is a horrifying prospect on 11:21 - Sep 28 with 654 viewsHerbivore

This is a horrifying prospect on 08:35 - Sep 28 by Kropotkin123

I'm not going to replace it.

If the BBC isn't financially viable as a subscription basis/advert basis with the remit it has, then non-profitable services should be pulled to make it so.

If some of those services, that are unprofitable, are deemed to be a socially significant outreach programs for older and housebound people, then create a tax to plug their gap for the shortfall.

I shouldn't be be forced to pay for a service that I don't use. Particularly when a percentage of that money goes towards million pound contracts for shows like MOTD, when the hosts could easily be replaced.

I don't see why I should be financially support religious services when I believe in the separation of the church and the state.

Edit for other comments: I don't use the service, so I don't care if it is comparatively good. I shouldn't have to pay for the BBC to watch Netflix, Disney+, YouTube, Google play, etc
[Post edited 28 Sep 2020 8:40]


If you're only using those services and not watching any live TV then you don't need a TV licence.

Poll: Should someone on benefits earn more than David Cameron?
Blog: Where Did It All Go Wrong for Paul Hurst?

3
This is a horrifying prospect on 18:13 - Sep 28 with 517 viewsKropotkin123

This is a horrifying prospect on 11:21 - Sep 28 by Herbivore

If you're only using those services and not watching any live TV then you don't need a TV licence.


even if I am watching them on a "smart TV"?
[Post edited 28 Sep 2020 18:14]

Lambo delenda est
Poll: Is Water an Object?
Blog: Round Four: Eagle

0
This is a horrifying prospect on 18:23 - Sep 28 with 495 viewsDanTheMan

This is a horrifying prospect on 18:13 - Sep 28 by Kropotkin123

even if I am watching them on a "smart TV"?
[Post edited 28 Sep 2020 18:14]


Correct. As long as you're not watching iPlayer etc.

Poll: FM Parallel Game Week 1 (Fulham) - Available Team

0
This is a horrifying prospect on 19:21 - Sep 28 with 441 viewsKropotkin123

This is a horrifying prospect on 18:23 - Sep 28 by DanTheMan

Correct. As long as you're not watching iPlayer etc.


Well thank you and thanks Herbivore. I'll cancel in the morning. Thankfully I've only had a TV for one year :/

Lambo delenda est
Poll: Is Water an Object?
Blog: Round Four: Eagle

0
This is a horrifying prospect on 19:48 - Sep 28 with 403 viewsNthsuffolkblue

This is a horrifying prospect on 07:48 - Sep 28 by Kropotkin123

The "TV licence" should be scrapped. I shouldn't have to fund the BBC just because I own a TV. I rarely use their services and certainly wouldn't pay a subscription to them for the same value.

My partner, who isn't from the UK, was surprised at just how much pro-british content there was in there. So much ww1 and ww2 content on what is meant to be news.

The only decent service in my opinion is BBC world and you can't access that from the UK and it is largely funded by independent means such as advert revenue.

Regardless of my thoughts of these people, I'd rather someone came in and took an axe to the revenue stream.
[Post edited 28 Sep 2020 7:48]


The BBC for all its faults does some excellent work with radio, especially local radio and with education and the resources it produces and publishes at no expense to the consumer. Considering it is effectively a state-sponsored TV channel it does remarkably well to stay impartial. The fact the right criticise it for its left bias while the left criticise it for its right bias is testament to this.

However, I do think it should be run a little more detached from Government. The level of the licence fee and choices such as who is director general should be made independent of Government.

Poll: Would a draw against Peterborough have been a fair result?
Blog: [Blog] Ghostbusters

2
This is a horrifying prospect on 20:17 - Sep 28 with 369 viewsSwansea_Blue

This is a horrifying prospect on 19:48 - Sep 28 by Nthsuffolkblue

The BBC for all its faults does some excellent work with radio, especially local radio and with education and the resources it produces and publishes at no expense to the consumer. Considering it is effectively a state-sponsored TV channel it does remarkably well to stay impartial. The fact the right criticise it for its left bias while the left criticise it for its right bias is testament to this.

However, I do think it should be run a little more detached from Government. The level of the licence fee and choices such as who is director general should be made independent of Government.


Brings us nicely full circle back to the OP.

I agree, but sadly more independence is a pipe dream at the moment. It'll end up closer to North Korean state TV if Boris gets his way with these appointments.

Poll: So then cake aficionados, which is your favourite part of Battenberg?

1
This is a horrifying prospect on 20:23 - Sep 28 with 360 viewsWeWereZombies

This is a horrifying prospect on 20:17 - Sep 28 by Swansea_Blue

Brings us nicely full circle back to the OP.

I agree, but sadly more independence is a pipe dream at the moment. It'll end up closer to North Korean state TV if Boris gets his way with these appointments.


And I thought his hair couldn't get any worse...

Poll: Most unrealistic candidates to buy out Marcus Evans

1
This is a horrifying prospect on 20:27 - Sep 28 with 350 viewsSwansea_Blue

This is a horrifying prospect on 20:23 - Sep 28 by WeWereZombies

And I thought his hair couldn't get any worse...


Kim Jong-un's hair is pretty good for someone who's died at least 3 times.

Poll: So then cake aficionados, which is your favourite part of Battenberg?

0

Please log in or register. Registered visitors get fewer ads.
About Us Contact Us Terms & Conditions Privacy Cookies Advertising
© TWTD 1995-2021