The "Freeola Customer Forum" forum, which includes Retro Game Reviews, has been archived and is now read-only. You cannot post here or create a new thread or review on this forum.
You may be wondering what I'm on about (though I doubt it), if you don't I am talking about the license which every household which owns a TV must pay which goes straight to the British Broadcasting Corporation (BBC).
The BBC TV service was established in the 1930s and was the only TV station at that time. One channel, that everybody that had a TV could tune into. When the TV license was introduced with it no one complained. Why would they? They were getting regular broadcasts from London, and later Manchester and Birmingham for ten shillings a year (I think). People (admittingly rich ones, as the ten-inch receivers cost about 100 guineas!) could see flickering, but moving pictures on the small screen with this new and exciting technology for a low price.
Of course the TV license wasn't the first tax of it's kind; it was just a continuation of the Radio Tax (ten shillings originally) and so even people who didn't have TV were happy to pay for it.
Fast-forwarding the timeline to 2002 it seems that the State TV license tax has gotten out of control. The license has grown to a huge fee of £112 a year. So what? You might say, it's just the same as before we're just paying for more...
The thing is for most of us we are paying for two channels which to be quite honest are starting to fall behind to commercial competition. It is compulsory, which means if you have Sky, NTL etc you still have to pay the TV license on top of the cable/satellite fees, even if you only have a TV for gaming! Okay so there's also the Website services etc but to be quite honest I don't use it that much.
There is the argument that the BBC creates the chance for alot of new programs to filter through for all viewers to see. Two problems for this argument are that firstly most of these programs could be produced by a commercial station and secondly they now show nearly all new programs on BBC choice (BBC 3) and BBC 4 both of which are digital channels which you have to pay extra for (digi-box, installation etc).
People now roam the country looking for people who are 'dodging' the license ready to burst in through the door and force the residents to pay or PAY, if you get where I'm going here. They have set up a completely different company to collect it and then deliver it to them.
There are so many solutions to that could be implemented to get rid of or improve this paternalistic and frankly patronising tax. One way would be for the BBC to just become a commercial station, therefore putting the license into disuse. I honestly would not mind have advertising breaks in the middle of programs as they are useful to get some snacks in or take a quick trip to the toilet:). Another way would be to turn this tax into a universal station license, meaning that other networks would cost less, maybe even be free. The last way I can think of solving it would be to make it obligatory so you could decide whether or not you wanted the stations, surely they could encrypt their channels easily enough.
For some people the radio stations are a good source of entertainment for them. Once again there are loads of commercial radio stations that cost nothing. Radio 1 (if you like that kind of thing)- Capital FM or Virgin Radio, Radio 4 and Radio Five Live- Talksport, Radio 3- Classic FM and Radio 2- no one listens anyway :D.
It's not just the concept of the 'license' that annoys me, it's the way it's used. The director can spend the money however he sees fit whether it be on a new project, purchasing the rights to sporting events or buying his wife a brand new car. Another waste of the license fee is the new scheme the beeb have to let their staff pursue a 'dream'. They are given money to leave the company for six months and do what they dream of doing, whether it be teaching third world children about the wonders of television or living wherever the hell they like for half a year.
Also there is a channel in the US of A called BBC America, now correct me if I'm wrong but doesn't it have ADVERTISING or 'commercials' whatever you call them they are using this as a maybe small but an illegal income (since that is why we pay for the license).
That's about it for my rant, so just ask yourself this question: What would you prefer, a couple half-decent channels or £112?
The BBC TV service was established in the 1930s and was the only TV station at that time. One channel, that everybody that had a TV could tune into. When the TV license was introduced with it no one complained. Why would they? They were getting regular broadcasts from London, and later Manchester and Birmingham for ten shillings a year (I think). People (admittingly rich ones, as the ten-inch receivers cost about 100 guineas!) could see flickering, but moving pictures on the small screen with this new and exciting technology for a low price.
Of course the TV license wasn't the first tax of it's kind; it was just a continuation of the Radio Tax (ten shillings originally) and so even people who didn't have TV were happy to pay for it.
Fast-forwarding the timeline to 2002 it seems that the State TV license tax has gotten out of control. The license has grown to a huge fee of £112 a year. So what? You might say, it's just the same as before we're just paying for more...
The thing is for most of us we are paying for two channels which to be quite honest are starting to fall behind to commercial competition. It is compulsory, which means if you have Sky, NTL etc you still have to pay the TV license on top of the cable/satellite fees, even if you only have a TV for gaming! Okay so there's also the Website services etc but to be quite honest I don't use it that much.
There is the argument that the BBC creates the chance for alot of new programs to filter through for all viewers to see. Two problems for this argument are that firstly most of these programs could be produced by a commercial station and secondly they now show nearly all new programs on BBC choice (BBC 3) and BBC 4 both of which are digital channels which you have to pay extra for (digi-box, installation etc).
People now roam the country looking for people who are 'dodging' the license ready to burst in through the door and force the residents to pay or PAY, if you get where I'm going here. They have set up a completely different company to collect it and then deliver it to them.
There are so many solutions to that could be implemented to get rid of or improve this paternalistic and frankly patronising tax. One way would be for the BBC to just become a commercial station, therefore putting the license into disuse. I honestly would not mind have advertising breaks in the middle of programs as they are useful to get some snacks in or take a quick trip to the toilet:). Another way would be to turn this tax into a universal station license, meaning that other networks would cost less, maybe even be free. The last way I can think of solving it would be to make it obligatory so you could decide whether or not you wanted the stations, surely they could encrypt their channels easily enough.
For some people the radio stations are a good source of entertainment for them. Once again there are loads of commercial radio stations that cost nothing. Radio 1 (if you like that kind of thing)- Capital FM or Virgin Radio, Radio 4 and Radio Five Live- Talksport, Radio 3- Classic FM and Radio 2- no one listens anyway :D.
It's not just the concept of the 'license' that annoys me, it's the way it's used. The director can spend the money however he sees fit whether it be on a new project, purchasing the rights to sporting events or buying his wife a brand new car. Another waste of the license fee is the new scheme the beeb have to let their staff pursue a 'dream'. They are given money to leave the company for six months and do what they dream of doing, whether it be teaching third world children about the wonders of television or living wherever the hell they like for half a year.
Also there is a channel in the US of A called BBC America, now correct me if I'm wrong but doesn't it have ADVERTISING or 'commercials' whatever you call them they are using this as a maybe small but an illegal income (since that is why we pay for the license).
That's about it for my rant, so just ask yourself this question: What would you prefer, a couple half-decent channels or £112?
Page:
they could bring it down to £0 if they used adverts LEGALLY, they already run commercial adverts on their digital channels and ones abroad.
And they thought i wouldn't notice...
And they thought i wouldn't notice...
£112!?!?!? I asked my mum and she said it's true! Oh my god. The BBC could bring it down to £65 or something if the used adverts!
cookie monster wrote:
> You missed out Frasier! Sacrilege.
Oh yeah. I love Frasier and missed it out?!?!?!? What was I thinking!
> You missed out Frasier! Sacrilege.
Oh yeah. I love Frasier and missed it out?!?!?!? What was I thinking!
You missed out Frasier! Sacrilege.
Channel 4 on friday Evenings is better - Father Ted, Does Doug Know, Jackass, Make My Day, Late Night Poker - the list goes on!
Also - the quality of BBC programs are slowly gowing downhill, but only slightly.
And what is is with getting rid of the Hot Air Ballon thingy? They put other stuff on because we are becoming a multicultural society! Other contries wouldn't do that!?!?!?!
And what is is with getting rid of the Hot Air Ballon thingy? They put other stuff on because we are becoming a multicultural society! Other contries wouldn't do that!?!?!?!
Ah well, i guess so.
i guess me and cookie monster are the only people that care about paying a stupid and pointless tithe to the BBC?
I would take my money and run, i think it is ridiculous that in these times we still have to pay for the priveledge of OWNING a TV, not watching it, OWNING it. And furthermore the government are bickering over whether they should allow old age pensioners to get thier license for free, what a bunch of theiving hoods, the poor old people have barely enough to get by because of the governments unresponsiveness to increase their pensions by the basic rate of inflation. These people who worked from the age of 13, whether it be down the coal pit, or at a bakery, sacraficed their education to keep Britain moving. Well its no bloody wonder people no longer have faith in politicians, they say one thing but mean another. Its a disgrace to say the least.
Why should we pay for the right to have our television, why not make Tv's that cannot pick up BBC, thus voiding their need to pay for a license. They never would, because it would be so popular that they would be as poor as the old age pensioners they are trying to rob their license money from.
Lets take for example yesterdays viewing (12/05/02) for BBC 1 i count 8 repeated shows, what is the need for this? If it were to fill an emergency time slot, then fair enough it is short notice, but for scheduled TV, this just is not on. Then we have BBC 2 14 repeated shows, this is nothing short of a farce! Padding out the gaps in the schedule with so many repeats is a waste of the license payers money. I don't enjoy watching vintage episodes of "The good life" it has had its time, and in modern times is just not funny any more.
If we compare this with ITV 1 which has 10 repeated shows we can see the problem, why does a license fee paid channel (BBC2) have more repeats than a commercially funded station? It beggers belief! Channel 4 has 18 repeats, which is a little more dissapointing. And channel 5 has 16 repeats. But i cannot stress to BBC2 enough, stop milking the simpsons repeats! For gods sake, ive seen every episode so many times they are etched into my corneas!
And as you rightly point out, we are paying the fee and the BBC's free to air channels are screening the newest and best programmes before we even get a sniff of them. Sometimes the BBC shows one redeeming show, Walking with dinosaurs and Space were both great scientific shows, but they are one in a million. And as for family entertainment, dont make me laugh, because the programmes certainly don't! My family is among the laziest shows ever, i don't even know why they made a second series, who is watching this crap?! And as for the new "All about me" well that is already on the scrapheap as the last episode aired last night. All of the comedy is drained from the fangs of the BBC, where are the Friends, Fraisers and Jackasses (at the BBC)? In their wake we are left with Simpson and Fresh prince of Bel-air repeats, which are good but starting to smell of moth balls.
This is a very bad show from the BBC and i fear as the years get on, it could get a whole lot worse.
Why should we pay for the right to have our television, why not make Tv's that cannot pick up BBC, thus voiding their need to pay for a license. They never would, because it would be so popular that they would be as poor as the old age pensioners they are trying to rob their license money from.
Lets take for example yesterdays viewing (12/05/02) for BBC 1 i count 8 repeated shows, what is the need for this? If it were to fill an emergency time slot, then fair enough it is short notice, but for scheduled TV, this just is not on. Then we have BBC 2 14 repeated shows, this is nothing short of a farce! Padding out the gaps in the schedule with so many repeats is a waste of the license payers money. I don't enjoy watching vintage episodes of "The good life" it has had its time, and in modern times is just not funny any more.
If we compare this with ITV 1 which has 10 repeated shows we can see the problem, why does a license fee paid channel (BBC2) have more repeats than a commercially funded station? It beggers belief! Channel 4 has 18 repeats, which is a little more dissapointing. And channel 5 has 16 repeats. But i cannot stress to BBC2 enough, stop milking the simpsons repeats! For gods sake, ive seen every episode so many times they are etched into my corneas!
And as you rightly point out, we are paying the fee and the BBC's free to air channels are screening the newest and best programmes before we even get a sniff of them. Sometimes the BBC shows one redeeming show, Walking with dinosaurs and Space were both great scientific shows, but they are one in a million. And as for family entertainment, dont make me laugh, because the programmes certainly don't! My family is among the laziest shows ever, i don't even know why they made a second series, who is watching this crap?! And as for the new "All about me" well that is already on the scrapheap as the last episode aired last night. All of the comedy is drained from the fangs of the BBC, where are the Friends, Fraisers and Jackasses (at the BBC)? In their wake we are left with Simpson and Fresh prince of Bel-air repeats, which are good but starting to smell of moth balls.
This is a very bad show from the BBC and i fear as the years get on, it could get a whole lot worse.
Oops i forgot all the slow readers were on tonight.
Maybe I should spell the words fon-et-e-cly...
Maybe I should spell the words fon-et-e-cly...
Page: