Revolting

[David Brent]

I see the latest news release from the UK states that viewing figures for the BBC are currently the lowest on record.
Something must be keeping the punters away.
Not really worth 10 quid a month if your not watching it.Being forced into paying for the service must also rankle many members of the UK public.
A fair system? I think not.

Dave.

[Jim]

</div><div class='quotemain'>David Brent: I see the latest news release from the UK states that viewing figures for the BBC are currently the lowest on record. Something must be keeping the punters away. Not really worth 10 quid a month if your not watching it.Being forced into paying for the service must also rankle many members of the UK public. A fair system? I think not. Too right Dave, but there's no political will to change it. I'm sure there could be some form of advertising on the BEEB. Just so long as it doesn't take the form of the other commercial channels - you know, adverts every 20-25 minutes!! And all repetition! Dave. [/b]

:mad:

[Steve Crook]

</div><div class='quotemain'>David Brent: I see the latest news release from the UK states that viewing figures for the BBC are currently the lowest on record. Something must be keeping the punters away. Not really worth 10 quid a month if your not watching it.Being forced into paying for the service must also rankle many members of the UK public. A fair system? I think not. Dave. [/b]

Just as fair (if not fairer) than paying for ABC through your taxes :)

They say the figures are down - but from what to what and by how much? Just saying they are down doesn't really tell us much.

What's keeping the punters away is probably their attempt to dumb down into reality television. Which they say they're now going to abandon.

If most people (not all, but the vast majority) here are fairly happy to pay it, why does it upset you so much?

Steve

[Guybrush Threepwood]

The viewing figures are indeed down, but then they are down for both ITV and the BBC.
The more "minor" channels that come on-stream so the audiences must drop for the big ones. ITV at the moment are having a hugely difficult time attracting advertisers, they have had to drop their prices a lot to try and get some revenue in.

I personally am happy to pay my licence fee if for no other reason that it prevents the Beeb
from falling into the hands of someone like Murdoch. ( Rupert....not Richard )

It has been / is a shame that the Beeb has got caught in a ratings war though...they should ingnore the ratings and get on with what they are good at.....quality programmes.

BBC3 and 4 have started to become fine channels...from the new comedy showcased on 3 to things like QI and "Flashmob the Opera" on 4 ( I was in Paddington Station that night and it was simply stunning)

The REALLY scary part of all this is where it may end. This headlong rush to get as many Z list celebs to humiliate themselves on TV in order to either kickstart a failed career or try and launch a new one is terribly sad (as are the people who watch it ) (IMHO)

Apparently the next celebrity Big Brother has already signed up Germaine Greer and David Icke...( signed up? some of them should be locked up, if you ask me )

More and more extreme cases ( known patronisingly as " ordinary people " ) will be allowed on our screens in the name of "entertainment"...some of these people need professional help rather than exposure to public ridicule. Many moons ago the public could pay a penny to enter Bethlehem* Asylum and watch / bait the "lunatics"...this practice was eventually stopped........although it looks like it may be making a return to our screens soon, if indeed it's not already here.


Threep.


* the diminutive of this became the word "Bedlam"

[David Brent]

SteveCrook [/qb]

If most people (not all, but the vast majority) here are fairly happy to pay it, why does it upset you so much?

Steve [/QB][/quote]

Steve,

Are you absolutely sure of that? Has there been an opinion poll done recently in the UK regarding this?
Most of my relatives still live in the UK and i can tell you that not one of them would willingly pay the licence fee.
It doesn't upset me Steve it's the poor sod's over there that should be upset.

Dave.

[Steve Crook]

</div><div class='quotemain'>David Brent: </div><div class='quotemain'>SteveCrook: If most people (not all, but the vast majority) here are fairly happy to pay it, why does it upset you so much? Steve [/b] Are you absolutely sure of that? Has there been an opinion poll done recently in the UK regarding this? Most of my relatives still live in the UK and i can tell you that not one of them would willingly pay the licence fee. It doesn't upset me Steve it's the poor sod's over there that should be upset. Dave. [/b]

We get asked fairly regularly. It all depends exactly who they ask as their "representative sample" and what question they ask.

If they ask something like "Are you happy in paying the BBC £200+ every year?" then a lot of people will say "No".

If they ask something more like "Would you like to see the BBC become a fully commercial channel?" then the vast majority say "No".

Maybe we just like saying "No" to things :)

But how come you're content to pay for ABC through your taxes even if you don't watch it? Do you know how much they get from your taxes?

Steve

[David Brent]

Straight answer Steve is that i do not know how much of our taxes go towards the funding of the ABC.
There have been threats from the government here in the past to cut funding if the ABC is felt to be underperforming.
Funny thing is that our ABC is the main channel here for showing BBC programs.(And very fine most of them are.)
Does all of your licence fee go to the BBC?
As i mentioned before,it must cost a lot of money to collect,administer and police your licence fee.
Remember that on top of that you are still paying high government tax.
Let's remember that,by my understanding,if you do not pay the fee in the UK then by law you are judged to be a "criminal". Bit harsh dont you agree?
Seems a bit heavy handed and the fee itself does seem high. If the monies from the licence fee are really needed by the Beeb then wouldn't an extra tax on televisions be a simpler way and less offending way to collect it?
Still if you are correct Steve, as you indeed usually are bow that the average viewer is happy to pay the fee then everythings fine.
BBC programs particularly their docos and nature programs are second to none.

Cheers

Dave.

[Steve Crook]

Maybe that's the answer, maybe we should fund the BBC through the taxes. Then people wouldn't realise how much money they're paying towards the BBC so they wouldn't complain about the license fee :)

The trouble is that then the government would have some say in how much money the BBC got. And as one of the many things the BBC is good at is annoying the government (whoever is in power) there is a fairly continuous battle between the BBC and the government. The politicians want more control, the BBC wants more freedom. While they're both complaining I reckon the balance is about right thumbs_u

I suspect (without any definite figures) that the administration & policing of the license fee is fairly similar to administration & policing of the tax system. If you don't pay your taxes you can be deemed to be a criminal for that as well.

I think that really both systems are very similar but the license fee keeps it out of the control of the politicians (a bit). If the government manages to stay in power for a long time then they can have some say by appointing someone friendly towards them as the Chairman of the Beeb - but the programme makers can still make programmes that annoy the government. There's a limit to what the politicians can do.

As is usual in this country without a written constitution, there's no formal set of rules but there is a system that works.

Steve

[samkydd]

Originally posted by Martin New@Dec 14 2004, 08:07 AM I see the latest news release from the UK states that viewing figures for the BBC are currently the lowest on record. Something must be keeping the punters away. Not really worth 10 quid a month if your not watching it.Being forced into paying for the service must also rankle many members of the UK public. A fair system? I think not. Dave. <div align="right">Quoted post</div>

Yo

I can never understand why the BBC has to chase ratings anyway. It has a guaranteed income every year so it can quite comfortably raise two fingers at the opposition and concentrate on making the sort of quality programmes we used to associate with the Corporation.

But no, it has to sink deep into the gutter and broadcast so-called “reality” TV shows, makeover drivel, and stage-managed fly-on-the-wall documentaries. Most of its shows are bought off the shelf these days, from companies who also make stuff for the other channels. Radio shows too are often bought in.

So this tells me that the BBC management cannot manage its budget properly, because what do they do with the vast amounts saved on production costs by buying third party programmes? I assume it’s all spent on funding Freeview channels, prizes and huge salaries for their many presenters and soap employees!

If I was Director General I would feel too ashamed to draw my salary!