Our system detected that your browser is blocking advertisements on our site. Please help support FoxesTalk by disabling any kind of ad blocker while browsing this site. Thank you.
Jump to content
 Share
twoleftfeet

BBC Funding

By twoleftfeet, in General Chat

Recommended Posts

Foxdiamond

Foxdiamond

Posted
Posted
2 minutes ago, The Syrup said:

Exactly, you only need a tv licence to watch live broadcast TV (from any channel by any method) or use iPlayer.

 

BBC radio or Sounds, or any of the streamers don't need a licence and you can cancel it perfectly legally

Good post. Therefore anyone that does use BBC would have to ask what would subscriptions look like or do you want another advert channel 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Strokes

Strokes

Posted
Posted
2 hours ago, Foxdiamond said:

How would you charge for listening to BBC radio ? I have no doubt this is a political anti BBC move by the Tories. Surely the licence fee is good value compared against other subscription services. 

I couldn’t care less, I don’t listen to them, so why am I finding them?

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
  • Popular Post
Fox92

Fox92

Posted
  • Popular Post
Posted
3 hours ago, Carl the Llama said:

Alternatively we could all vote for a party that isn't intent on removing all public funded services to clear room for their private investment mates.

Reminds me of David Mitchell's rant which was superb.

 

 

  • Like 9
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Foxdiamond

Foxdiamond

Posted
Posted
7 minutes ago, Strokes said:

How do I not have to pay for the radio? It’s not a divided package.

Apparently there is a way. Bottom line is 44p a day is a good deal in my view. BBC TV, films, radio, website . Still highly regarded around the world. I understand a lot of US viewers think we would be mad to lose what we have. 

  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Parafox

Parafox

Posted
Posted
3 hours ago, Corky said:

Yeah, they aren't going to chuck in a free service as an alternative.

Well, it's not a free service. Licence fee.

 

However, I'd much rather have more BBC advert free shows that commercial TV where they are allowed 12 minutes of advertising per 30 mins.

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Parafox

Parafox

Posted
Posted
5 hours ago, Foxdiamond said:

Good post. Therefore anyone that does use BBC would have to ask what would subscriptions look like or do you want another advert channel 

NO!!!!

Hate the commercial channels. 6 mins of "decent telly/film", which can be engrossing, that is then interrupted by 8 mins of shit adverts per 30 minute episode. 

Would you pay £9 or whatever, to watch a good film in the cinema, for it to broken up by ads every 15 mins?

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Foxdiamond

Foxdiamond

Posted
Posted
2 minutes ago, Parafox said:

NO!!!!

Hate the commercial channels. 6 mins of "decent telly/film", which can be engrossing, that is then interrupted by 8 mins of shit adverts per 30 minute episode. 

Would you pay £9 or whatever, to watch a good film in the cinema, for it to broken up by ads every 15 mins?

Thank you. This is exactly my opinion. It has been said that having the BBC has kept the standard of the commercial channels up 

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Spudulike

Spudulike

Posted
Posted
1 hour ago, Fox92 said:

Reminds me of David Mitchell's rant which was superb.

 

 

He's got a point, hasn't he. Not only has the BBC news stooped so low but its the sending broadcasters jetting off around the world on jollys when they could just as easily used a local reporter. Ooh look, there's Clive Myrie reporting on bush fires in Australia. Do we really need him live on the scene when decent local reporters could paint the picture for us? Not clever when the fires are caused by climate change and the BBC jet their reporters to the other side of the world all curtesy of the licence payer. That's only one example. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Foxdiamond

Foxdiamond

Posted
Posted
31 minutes ago, Spudulike said:

He's got a point, hasn't he. Not only has the BBC news stooped so low but its the sending broadcasters jetting off around the world on jollys when they could just as easily used a local reporter. Ooh look, there's Clive Myrie reporting on bush fires in Australia. Do we really need him live on the scene when decent local reporters could paint the picture for us? Not clever when the fires are caused by climate change and the BBC jet their reporters to the other side of the world all curtesy of the licence payer. That's only one example. 

Don't the other broadcasters do Same?

Link to comment
Share on other sites
  • Popular Post
Dunge

Dunge

Posted
  • Popular Post
Posted

The BBC is one of the best things we have in this country. From programs to news to website to national and local radio, for me it’s of great value to this country, let alone what it can sell abroad. It doesn’t get everything right, and there should always be room with it to adjust and consider its politics and its output. But that’s part of it - by being publicly funded it has to do so.

 

Nadine Dorries can shove it.

  • Like 6
  • Thanks 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
×
 Share
Go to topic listing

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...