two thirds of voters want to axe bbc licence

[srb7677]

I am one of those who wants the license fee scrapped in it's current form. Either you should have the option of paying for what you want to watch or choosing not to watch it, or it should be funded by a de facto tax as at present. But if the latter it should be more progressive than the current de facto poll tax arrangement, and people should have the freedom to opt out of it if they dont want to access it's services.

As for BBC bias, it undoubtedly has a right wing bias re economic issues, and tends to want to be Thatcherite with a soft face. And yet it is irredeemably lefty liberal when it comes to identity politics issues, so called woke issues. 

In all this it is not so much Tory biased and still less left wing biased. It is in fact utterly Blairite in it's assumptions.

[Sheepy]

Who do you think you are kidding Mr H*****? Outrage at BBC 'woke cuts' on classics including Dad's Army over 'race and sex slurs' fears

• BBC is editing radio comedies to remove jokes considered politically incorrect
• Dad's Army, Steptoe and Son and I'm Sorry, I'll Read That Again were hit by cuts
• Edits are thought to have been made to some repeat shows on BBC Radio 4 Extra
• BBC spokesman said shows were edited to remove racially offensive language

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-10429151/Outrage-BBC-woke-cuts-classics-including-Dads-Army-race-sex-slurs-fears.html

Well always good to know, that lies behind the BBC doesn't have an agenda of its own then, I am with the two thirds on this one shut it down before it can damage the UK even further. 

[Thomas]

Who do you think you are kidding Mr H*****? Outrage at BBC 'woke cuts' on classics including Dad's Army over 'race and sex slurs' fears

• BBC is editing radio comedies to remove jokes considered politically incorrect
• Dad's Army, Steptoe and Son and I'm Sorry, I'll Read That Again were hit by cuts
• Edits are thought to have been made to some repeat shows on BBC Radio 4 Extra
• BBC spokesman said shows were edited to remove racially offensive language

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-10429151/Outrage-BBC-woke-cuts-classics-including-Dads-Army-race-sex-slurs-fears.html

[Thomas]

There is a lot of truth in the article, although I don't think that the BBC hates the British. It is just that it lives in a different country.

One of my neighbours is a producer or some such for the BBC and one day her children were round playing with mine. So my wife started telling a story about her life in a Yorkshire pit village and eating coal for Christmas dinner and the tots fell about laughing. Worryingly, the last to get the joke was our friend, the lady from the BBC.

i think the bbc problems are mainly as we have said it is no longer "usefull" to the elite for spreading propaganda as it once was , and secondly like mr hitler it has made one too many enemies and plenty of them are choking to take it down.

[Borchester]

found this a really good read....

Why should we pay for a BBC that hates us?

The BBC has blown whatever chance it had to bring the nation together.

BBC News gets a lot of stick for this, understandably, but the Beeb's drama, comedy and documentary output is now infested with it, too. It's the same crushingly banal suite of opinions across everything.

Life before Blair was a grey, damp horror, a cultural wasteland of prejudice where Oswald Mosley had huge amounts of support (strangely enough, insinuating that people's grandparents were all fascists doesn't endear them to you). Working-class whites are bigots who can't be trusted with basic information in case they start a race war. Fiona Bruce has kittens live on air when a doctor states the simple fact that it's impossible to change sex .The BBC's younger journalists have to be told that people have different opinions. If upper-class or working-class people can't be shamed or blamed for something, the BBC just isn't interested. It is stultifyingly bourgeois.


The BBC is often valued, and often trumpets itself, as a thing that brings the nation together. I think it has transmogrified into doing the opposite, with a superior sneer that treats Britain like something it's found on its shoe.

https://www.spiked-online.com/2022/01/19/why-should-we-pay-for-a-bbc-that-hates-us/#.YewD4tD2Mtc.twitter

There is a lot of truth in the article, although I don't think that the BBC hates the British. It is just that it lives in a different country.

One of my neighbours is a producer or some such for the BBC and one day her children were round playing with mine. So my wife started telling a story about her life in a Yorkshire pit village and eating coal for Christmas dinner and the tots fell about laughing. Worryingly, the last to get the joke was our friend, the lady from the BBC.

[Thomas]

found this a really good read....

Why should we pay for a BBC that hates us?

The BBC has blown whatever chance it had to bring the nation together.

BBC News gets a lot of stick for this, understandably, but the Beeb's drama, comedy and documentary output is now infested with it, too. It's the same crushingly banal suite of opinions across everything.

Life before Blair was a grey, damp horror, a cultural wasteland of prejudice where Oswald Mosley had huge amounts of support (strangely enough, insinuating that people's grandparents were all fascists doesn't endear them to you). Working-class whites are bigots who can't be trusted with basic information in case they start a race war. Fiona Bruce has kittens live on air when a doctor states the simple fact that it's impossible to change sex .The BBC's younger journalists have to be told that people have different opinions. If upper-class or working-class people can't be shamed or blamed for something, the BBC just isn't interested. It is stultifyingly bourgeois.


The BBC is often valued, and often trumpets itself, as a thing that brings the nation together. I think it has transmogrified into doing the opposite, with a superior sneer that treats Britain like something it's found on its shoe.

https://www.spiked-online.com/2022/01/19/why-should-we-pay-for-a-bbc-that-hates-us/#.YewD4tD2Mtc.twitter

[Sheepy]

Ed Davey

You have to admit if they weren't so frigging dangerous with filling their own nests, they would be funny.

[Barry]

Ed Davey 

[papasmurf]

Whilst I wish the BBC to remain a public service Broadcaster funded by the TV licence, one thing increasing irks me, the massive BBC teams at events and outside broadcasts. That could be cut down drastically.

[cromwell]

I havent changed any view. My original view to you was the bbc quite self evidently wouldnt be the state broadcaster of an indy scotland.

I have added views , not changed them , to the growing list of evidence over he years that shows the bbc and state broadcasting as it stands is doomed. Doesnt matter a jot how many nations currently have state broadcasters.

Im sorry if you dont like change cromwell , but change happens wether you like it or not. As for paying the government , taxes are inevitable as we all know. The idea you seem to be suggesting is the government is going to keep taxing us for a state broadcaster with no viewers really is nonsense.

Is YouTube And Netflix's Rise Spelling Traditional TV's Eventual Doom?

The Ofcom annual report, published August 7, warns that the future of traditional TV is on shaky grounds if TV broadcasters do not deal with the rise of video-on-demand.

However, the rise in viewing numbers for free and subscription video-on-demand (SVoD) signals a more profound and long-term impact on the audiovisual sector in the U.K. What the report reveals is that our viewing habits are transforming to the detriment of traditional TV in the long run.

https://www.forbes.com/sites/sheenascott/2019/08/07/is-the-rise-in-viewers-of-youtube-and-netflix-a-sign-of-traditional-tvs-eventual-doom/?sh=6cb4433a2f1e

Audiences for TV will fall by a third in a decade on current trends as younger viewers are currently tuning in for just 25 hours a year, according to a former BBC News executive.
Richard Sambrook also said that older people were increasingly adopting the digital consumption habits of younger viewers and watching less TV news.

Sambrook, director of the Centre for Journalism at Cardiff University, co-authored a report for the Reuters Institute for the Study of Journalism which found that audiences for TV are declining by up to 4% a year.

https://www.theguardian.com/media/2016/apr/21/tv-news-audiences-bbc-richard-sambrook

You're doing it again,"Sorry if I don't like change" I haven't said that anywhere,in fact all I've ever said is the beeb sometimes produces some good stuff and it does and you and a few others go off on one.

So it disappears you think that's the end of it? Govts all over the world like to control what people see hear and read to some extent or another.

You think it doesn't affect us now? Already  some sites such as downloads,sport and film streams are blocked,people turn to a vpn and iptv do you think these won't be blocked eventually?

Im well aware of changes,just pointing out the obvious.

[Thomas]

That is probably true Ollie and nothing will stop Auntie from being a patronising pain in the arse. But it behooves us to make the acquisition of any funding as tricky as possible.

good article here from years ago showing how entertwined shall we say the labour party was at bbc hq in scotland borkie.

Really is the modern day pravda.

Oh what a tangled web we weave, When first we practise to deceive: BBC Scotland and the Labour Party


Please take time to read the blog linked below – an extensive unpicking of the unhealthy relationship between Labour in Scotland and the BBC. There is a holy trinity at work encompassing BBC Scotland, the Labour Party in Scotland and Glasgow University that has become unpleasantly incestuous and hugely undemocratic.

https://lenathehyena.wordpress.com/2014/08/29/oh-what-a-tangled-web-we-weave-when-first-we-practice-to-deceive-bbc-scotland-and-the-labour-party/

[Thomas]

That is probably true Ollie and nothing will stop Auntie from being a patronising pain in the arse. But it behooves us to make the acquisition of any funding as tricky as possible.

As i said , cromwell is merely sticking his head in the sand and denying reality. He now appears almost the lone voice on this forum , never mind elsewhere in support of the bbc.

The trend is there for al to see  , and how the bbc `s audience and funding is shrinking and predicted to shrink further .

BBC set for further cuts but warned that audience share and licence fee cash will shrink


The BBC is on pace to hit current savings targets – but is likely to have to go further and faster in the coming years, according to a new National Audit Office report.
Balancing the challenge of a falling audience share and dwindling licence numbers, the BBC is undertaking a five-year programme to deliver targeted savings of just over £1bn a year by 2021-22.
This will start once the BBC  finishes its negotiations with the government on the level of the licence fee from 2022-23.
https://www.cityam.com/bbc-is-largely-on-track-to-meet-savings-targets-despite-fall-in-audience-share-and-tv-licences/

[Thomas]

And you're attributing a view you've changed to suit your argument,all I'm saying is practically every nation on earth has a state broadcaster funded in one way or anther by the people,you might not like it think it's obsolete but pay for it you will.

I havent changed any view. My original view to you was the bbc quite self evidently wouldnt be the state broadcaster of an indy scotland.

I have added views , not changed them , to the growing list of evidence over he years that shows the bbc and state broadcasting as it stands is doomed. Doesnt matter a jot how many nations currently have state broadcasters.

Im sorry if you dont like change cromwell , but change happens wether you like it or not. As for paying the government , taxes are inevitable as we all know. The idea you seem to be suggesting is the government is going to keep taxing us for a state broadcaster with no viewers really is nonsense.

Is YouTube And Netflix's Rise Spelling Traditional TV's Eventual Doom?

The Ofcom annual report, published August 7, warns that the future of traditional TV is on shaky grounds if TV broadcasters do not deal with the rise of video-on-demand.

However, the rise in viewing numbers for free and subscription video-on-demand (SVoD) signals a more profound and long-term impact on the audiovisual sector in the U.K. What the report reveals is that our viewing habits are transforming to the detriment of traditional TV in the long run.

https://www.forbes.com/sites/sheenascott/2019/08/07/is-the-rise-in-viewers-of-youtube-and-netflix-a-sign-of-traditional-tvs-eventual-doom/?sh=6cb4433a2f1e

Audiences for TV will fall by a third in a decade on current trends as younger viewers are currently tuning in for just 25 hours a year, according to a former BBC News executive.
Richard Sambrook also said that older people were increasingly adopting the digital consumption habits of younger viewers and watching less TV news.

Sambrook, director of the Centre for Journalism at Cardiff University, co-authored a report for the Reuters Institute for the Study of Journalism which found that audiences for TV are declining by up to 4% a year.

https://www.theguardian.com/media/2016/apr/21/tv-news-audiences-bbc-richard-sambrook

[Borchester]

And you're attributing a view you've changed to suit your argument,all I'm saying is practically every nation on earth has a state broadcaster funded in one way or anther by the people,you might not like it think it's obsolete but pay for it you will.

That is probably true Ollie and nothing will stop Auntie from being a patronising pain in the arse. But it behooves us to make the acquisition of any funding as tricky as possible.

[cromwell]

Nope . Dont know whats going on today mate , but why do people keep attaching views to me i dont hold?

Quite obviously if scotland and england split , the bbc would no longer be the state broadcaster in scotland. If you remmber though ,our last conversation on the matter a while back was me pointing out the fact in my opinion , modern technology is gradually doing away with the need for a state broadcaster , with the younger generations barely if at all watching the bbc.

Live TV is never broadcast in my house or in many of my family and friends. Kids and adults spend much time on social media , you tube  , and watching films on netflix and the like.

What i said to you was the bbc as it stands would pass with the older generations. How could you justify the trouble and expense of a state broadcaster like the bbc with no audience? What would be the point?

And you're attributing a view you've changed to suit your argument,all I'm saying is practically every nation on earth has a state broadcaster funded in one way or anther by the people,you might not like it think it's obsolete but pay for it you will.