Or you’re just winding me up as usual in which case carry on

Funkstain wrote:

I do think left wing creep needs to be qualified and explained and defined here. It means nothing in isolation. What do you mean?

Funkstain wrote:

But the scale man. The scale! Someone quickly pull us up an infographic of the output of the BBC. Dramas. Soaps. Comedy. Radio for everyone. Podcasts for everything. World service in multiple languages. Local services. Sports. News and current affairs. Arts and culture. Documentaries on everything. Music. Web content. IPlayer.

I think the local services is the big difference.

RTE does all the rest as well though.

Im not trying to argue about scale of output as obviously the BBC is bigger. All I was trying to say is you can probably have a national broadcaster funded by advertising and it not immediately compromise the output. Will probably be a absolute shitter for everyone used to watching BBC 1 and suddenly getting adverts every 15 minutes though.

That'll probably actually the bigger annoyance for most people than editorial independence.

I'm happy to pay my TV licence, I think it's incredible value for money and I don't even watch much BBC content.

most right-wingers complain of BBC bias because all inclusivity is tokenism in their eyes. suddenly there are black/brown/disabled/gay/trans people in their fave tv shows, and this, they argue, is ramming a political ideology down their delicate snowflake throats. 

conversely, left-wingers complain of BBC bias because their news coverage rarely challenges the prevailing economic orthodoxy, and they borrow their talking points from the right-wing propaganda rags.

Funkstain wrote:

But isn’t the problem (or at least the argument made by license defenders) that you cant’t really justify niche services, or providing a more universal service which covers more than any one particular person may want or need - which means we all end up paying for stuff we’d never use all of, which again sounds like I dunno the NHS or roads or other things taxes pay for?

I was greatly encouraged the other day hearing about Starmer’s plans to expand the NHS to cover prevention rather than “merely” cure, I’d happily pay more for that even though I think I’d probably not need it

Is it not comparable? Is “media content” mere entertainment, hardly comparable with society saving services?

Totally agree on Starmer's preventative approach. Music to my ears that. Sent it to my dad who is on the fence about voting Labour for the first time. He has been banging on about a preventative NHS for a decade now.

Back to the license. I think labelling is important and if we were to make an NHS comaprison I would argue a 'TV license' is a bit like calling healthvare taxes 'GP tax'. One fairly large aspect of the whole. Can be called a 'BBC tax' maybe. The point really is to make people think about all the services available not just one that they may not even use. Broadcast TV is dying so whatever happens BBC funding has to be detached from it and targeted at what people are using.

Lord_Griff wrote:

Funkstain wrote:

Or you’re just winding me up as usual in which case carry on

Heh, a little of both. Plus that website that show news source leanings.

BBC

Damn, a random website said it? It must be true.

LivDiv wrote:

If it needs a tax then it needs to be more transparent about what that covers.
For a start the label 'TV license' is massively outdated. It should be a 'media license' if anything.

Secondly it seems grossly unfair that if the funding covers such a broad spectrum that consumers of one particular aspect should pay for it all.

It has to move away from that model because regardless of who is in government the number of people signing up is dwindling.

I would suggest a tax on mobile and broadband contracts.

Edit: There used to be a radio license. Then a combined radio and TV license. The radio eventually just became free for all. I think basic TV should probably be the same as it becomes mainly the reserve of older people.
Just like the radio made way for the TV as the primary outlet online services are taking over TV.

There's an article on the Guardian about this that points out the issue with this is that it would significantly increase the cost of accessing the internet, which is potentially pretty unfair. I guess general taxation would be more equitable but a harder sell to the public.

poprock wrote:

Raise taxes, nationalise the BBC and fund it centrally. Enshrine the necessary level of funding in law, linked to inflation. Done.

Fuuuuuck no. Imagine if a government had literal control over the corp.

My taxes pay for plenty of things I don’t personally use. I’m okay with that.

LivDiv wrote:

Totally agree on Starmer's preventative approach.

Run around the park, ya fat bastard! sounds about the measure of it.

We can cut beds now — we've warned the fat bastards off Mars bars. Imagine ending up on Jamie Oliver Ward. Leering photos of NHS-branded smugness; a sugar lecture on the telly.

Done properly, it's obviously a great idea.

Latest Escape hot take: BBC has produced no engaging drama for 21 years.

Hmm.

Lurch666 wrote:

a tax to fund a TV station

Fuck’s sake

poprock wrote:

My taxes pay for plenty of things I don’t personally use. I’m okay with that.

Yeah this is my favourite reaction people are having that baffles me because they just gut react "I DONT USE THE BBC DON'T WANNA PAY FOR IT"

Bitch, I don't have kids, or use social housing, or have a chronic condition requiring treatment, should I not be okay with my tax money paying for that?

It's like all of the world services and the radio on top of everything else with the BBC as well. Plus the ability to make programmes that don't have to have to turn a profit means they can produce stuff that otherwise would not always get commissioned. BBC's news coverage of late has been obviously, pathetically partisan shite, but the number of people who are happy to throw it all in the bin because THE FUCKIN TORIES of all people say we should is staggering.

I'll rep the fucking arts and media 4eva and the Tories can fuck off and so can everyone else who thinks arts and media shouldn't be something the UK taxpayer should fund for our own cultural benefit. Fucking narrow minded dunces, etc.

Imho just raise income tax by the amount the licence fee brings in or something, and ditch the licence fee. People out here acting like they haven't been enjoying shit like all the bbc2 comedies from the 90s, or top gear, or bake off, or noel's fuckin house party, or listening to the radio EVER, or watching the shitting Olympics, or tennis, or rugby, or world cup.

Just because it's easier to access the niche stuff that interests you on the internet, or hyper budget US flagship series on a Netflix account you don't even pay for your just use the login your brother in law have you for his family account, etc., doesn't mean there's no value in the Welsh language local news and shit. Smdh this whole thing has really pissed me off. Fucking tryin to take the BBC away, find me in Blackfriars I'll help you inspect the underside of the bridge, etc.