First they throw them under the bus by scrapping the free licences, and letting the BBC take the blame, and now I've been hearing on the news that they're going to scrap the licence fee totally and replace it with some unspecified alternative form of funding. We all know what means, don't we, Ads or a subscription, so you can kiss goodbye to any content that doesn't bring in tons of money.
Am I supposed to be upset? They should've switched to a different funding model years ago. The TV license is antiquated and should've be superseded by their commercial arm. The bbc sell their productions all around the world and they should be made to live off that. Last time their profits were made public, they were making £2 billion.
To be fair, the BBC has been doing a good job of slowly but steadily destroying itself for the last 20 years.
Pretty much this. They constantly and maliciously hamstrung their most popular production overseas, Top Gear, for years. Another IP, Doctor Who, has been run into the ground. They act like they're impartial when they really aren't. I could go on listing their flaws, but I'd be at it all day.
BTW, I just found out that Dr Who is now essentially under the control of Sony.
The TV license tax should have been abolished years ago. If the BBC is as good and popular as many on here say it will have no problem in surviving and thriving in the commercial world.
Agreed. And as I've said just above, they already have a commercial arm. It was called bbc worldwide, but they merged it into bbc studios a while back.
Good, as far as I’m concerned.
Agreed, should've happened before the pandemic though.
Me too, really don't like the BBC's attitude.
They do appear to have contempt for at least half of the country.
If the BBC get rid of Nicholas Witchell, then I'd be happy to pay the license fee.
Nagging b-imean naga munchetty is my trigger. She's nails on a chalkboard, both in her tone of voice and attitude, and on top of that, she's broken bbc rules many times, yet is still there. Nick Knowles appears in a Shreddies ad and he's suddenly out the door.
It's not unexpected, but it's sad.
It's only sad for what the bbc stood for, not for what it currently stands for.
Heaven forfend we have yet another commercial broadcaster with all the attendant adverts. Having an advert free, publicly funded broadcaster is very important IMO.
Maybe the bbc should've thought about this and acted accordingly, instead of continuing down their self destructive path. They could keep their current model if they switch to a subscription service.
It is a big step in the sense that it'd mean a massive reduction in funding. The BBC is not set up to compete as a subscription service. A subscription model would bring about a direct comparison with the likes of Netflix, and their pricing structures, for what is not the same product. But whatever the price, many current licence fee payers, even those who mostly watch the BBC, would save money and watch ITV/Channel 4 etc if they are free. The BBC's output is heavily tailored to the UK audience and the format of broadcast television, so opportunities to expand the subscriber base are limited without the billions of venture capital funding the big streaming providers have benefited from.
Once again, should've thought about that.
One of the best moves for a commercial BBC would probably be to close Salford and their other sites outside London.
In anything, they'd probably stay at Media City and consolidate everything there. Broadcasting house would probably stay as their headquarters, although hopefully with the paedophile statue out front covered up.
I do. Please watch Fox News for a few weeks. Then come back and tell me whether the BBC doesn't do a reasonable job.
All American news is horrendously biased. Just because that is the case, doesn't make the bbc good, or impartial.
And why does it have to be the BBC that provides it? Other broadcasters should be a be able to access the funding and produce said output.
And herein, lies the problem with the license fee. If it was distributed equally amongst the 4 main broadcasters (bbc, ITV, C4 & C5 viacom (ok, maybe just the bbc and C4)) against their viewing figures, people wouldn't have a problem with it, as it equally funds all the broadcasters for their needs. In it's current guise, it's a bbc tax and nothing else.
With respect, and it may seem harsh or selfish but that is a loss to some of the country. That doesn't mean that it 2022 the current funding method is the right method and there is nothing say that a % of local programming can't be legally required to continue.
Perhaps a compromise could be that all the money currently put into the bbc as a whole, can be put into regional programming and radio.
I stopped watching live TV a year and 4 months ago, cheaper to watch DVDs of shows I actually like. When I was watching TV before, BBC's schedule of Pointless, Doctors, Bargain Hunt, News with reminders every minute, and property shows, wasn't my cup of tea, so we didn't even watch the channels by the company we were forced to pay.
Correct. They barely produce anything people want to watch anymore. They have to rely on reruns and a few big ticket HBO type shows to stay relevant.
Another example are regional radio stations and regional news (which outside of the BBC have been totally decimated in the commercial world).
You mean the ones they've already butchered into a mess barely resembling their pre-covid selves?
The problem I have with the suggested move to a subscription model, is, what will have to give? If the BBC relies on almost every household in the country paying £159 per year, then I can’t see how it will be able to deliver the same content with the payment being voluntary, as it seems quite obvious that there will be a significant number of households that won’t be paying into the subscription.
Well if they offered programming that appealed to a wider audience and stopped relying on repeats... I mean, the only bbc show I actively seek out is CHM Top Gear on iplayer. Something that has been out of production since 2015, that's almost 7 years ago. In fact, in 2029, it'll tick over to having been out of production for longer than it was in production (2028 if you want to start from the point when James joined).
I'm no cheerleader for the BBC but £159 a year is an absolute snip. The License Fee is probably the least worst option overall.
No, it isn't.