tax payers alliance criticise BBC

[B0ycey]

proof please?

https://www.bbc.co.uk/mediacentre/2021/bbc-reaches-record-global-audience

Read the article.

[Thomas]

As I said Thomas, the BBC now reach a bigger audience then they ever did in the analogue era.

proof please?

[B0ycey]

Good. In that case they must be wallowing in cash and they don't need any of mine.

So everybody is happy.

The BBC doesn't have advertising so relies on the licence fee. Although it should be said they do sell off content. In any case, the licence fee will go and be replaced with something less visual or noticeable and then nobody will moan, whilst still using it all the time I expect.

[B0ycey]

aye i know , and i disagree. Cromwell said much the same , and as i said its more wishfull thinking than reality.

As I said Thomas, the BBC now reach a bigger audience then they ever did in the analogue era. So clearly the only thing that has changed is how people use the BBC. So no government can just sell that control off. You might think people are turning off television and going online and perhaps you are right. But the BBC is also an online service which people use. Again, you can't just sell that off.

[Thomas]

[Thomas]

. What I said is the BBC will remain a state run enterprise and as such you will still be paying for it one way or another. Most likely via income tax.

aye i know , and i disagree. Cromwell said much the same , and as i said its more wishfull thinking than reality.

[Borchester]

Firstly, you're wrong that nobody uses the BBC. They now reach more people than they ever did in the analogue era.

Good. In that case they must be wallowing in cash and they don't need any of mine.

So everybody is happy.

[Thomas]

Firstly, you're wrong that nobody uses the BBC. =

Where did i say no one uses the bbc? Please stop making things up boycey , i said their audience is dropping.

They now reach more people than they ever did in the analogue era.

and yet just 14 % of the uk public think it value for money?

Without control of your nations media, you are at the mercy of who controls it. Under every single coup in history, the first place they take over is the broadcaster, not government buildings. Control of the narrative is very important if you want control of your audience and defacto nation. That is the national security concern.

the yonger generations dont buy newspapers ,and dont watch live tv . I go back to what i said earleir , if no one is consuming your propaganda as they re using other platforms for news and entertainment , why bother with the current model?

You are so out of date boycey its unreal.

[B0ycey]

irrelevant. We are talking about funding and relevance of the current model .brilliant , so if its such a popular and in demand service , they will have no fackin problems getting people to subscribe to it.

Their audience has been decreasing massively for years now .
two thirds of people want the licence fee scrapped , and they are are losing 4 % of their viewers on average each year.for the second time now , please elaborate on what you are talking about in terms of national security?

Thomas, I have not said the licence fee shouldn't be scrapped. What I said is the BBC will remain a state run enterprise and as such you will still be paying for it one way or another. Most likely via income tax.

I have explained clearly why it is a national security concern, not just today but before. And anyone with half a brain and a smidgen of history would know that.

[B0ycey]

Im not sure i have heard of anyone wanting rid of the bbc . The argument is about how it is funded , and if a private organisation wants to call itself the bbc and compete in the market place using subscription services then thats their affair.
i doubt it dont you?

Thats been addressed earlier , why would the gov tax for a service that no one is watching? I suspect this would be a deeply unpopular move , and more wishfull thinking on your part boycey.
That isnt certain at all , and is exactly what is comig under consideration , wether the bbc should remain state funded and offering up its woke nonsense , or become self sufficient and see if people want to pay freely for the guff they offer up..you will have to explain that one.

Firstly, you're wrong that nobody uses the BBC. They now reach more people than they ever did in the analogue era. You are looking at television audiences and seem to forget that we no longer have 4 channels and that people stream television off the iplayer. But in any case, entertainment isn't the national security concern. Without control of your nations media, you are at the mercy of who controls it. Under every single coup in history, the first place they take over is the broadcaster, not government buildings. Control of the narrative is very important if you want control of your audience and defacto nation. That is the national security concern. 

[Thomas]

You think the BBC is just a television service?

irrelevant. We are talking about funding and relevance of the current model .

They are the UKs global propaganda mouthpiece. If the only thing in offer was Eastenders and Strickly then you might have a point. But it also operates a digital service, website, radio, a news network, sport, debates, world service, along with entertainment. Even if the audience are moving to Netflix or whatever for their entertainment, they still use the BBC for their general news and may well use the BBC via other platforms such as YouTube in any case. The BBC website is viewed over 400 million times EACH WEEK. Between 7 and 10, BBC One has 10 million viewers daily which increases on the weekend, the iPlayer gets 150million streams each week. Radio ones breakfast show has over 8 million listeners and Radio 2s breakfast show is even better with 14 million viewers.

brilliant , so if its such a popular and in demand service , they will have no fackin problems getting people to subscribe to it.

Their audience has been decreasing massively for years now .

You think people are tuning off the BBC?

two thirds of people want the licence fee scrapped , and they are are losing 4 % of their viewers on average each year.

omeone must of informed Johnson the importance of the BBC to national security before he made a pigs ear statement in parliament

for the second time now , please elaborate on what you are talking about in terms of national security?

[B0ycey]

No because as we keep saying there is no justification for state funding in any form when their audience numbers are dropping massively , by an estimated 4 % every year.

The whole purpose of state propaganda is to send a message to the public via a platform like the bbc. If ever increasing numbers are no longer tuning in , then it no longer serves the purpose for what the government need it for , and eventually it becomes of no use to them , and funding will stop one way or the other.

I keep saying its becoming increasingly irrelevant , and woe betide any government trying to force payment for a service no one uses.

Using twentieth century propaganda in the twenty first century where most folk are using online streaming services doesnt work. A bit like your argument.

You think the BBC is just a television service? They are the UKs global propaganda mouthpiece. If the only thing in offer was Eastenders and Strickly then you might have a point. But it also operates a digital service, website, radio, a news network, sport, debates, world service, along with entertainment. Even if the audience are moving to Netflix or whatever for their entertainment, they still use the BBC for their general news and may well use the BBC via other platforms such as YouTube in any case. The BBC website is viewed over 400 million times EACH WEEK. Between 7 and 10, BBC One has 10 million viewers daily which increases on the weekend, the iPlayer gets 150million streams each week. Radio ones breakfast show has over 8 million listeners and Radio 2s breakfast show is even better with 14 million viewers. You think people are tuning off the BBC? You're being too one dimensional. It is true people are moving to digital services for entertainment, which should be said includes the iPlayer, but the BBC is more than that. No government would get rid of the BBC. In fact, I reckon the idea two weeks ago may have even been to sell it off given Dorries didn't even have a plan to replace the licence fee when she spoke in parliament last week. I guess someone must of informed Johnson the importance of the BBC to national security before he made a pigs ear statement in parliament. Because as it happens the BBC has moved to the 21st century. They have already moved to digital. And they have the streaming and online figures to prove it.

[Thomas]

Sure, but the Tories have said they will restructure how the BBC is funded, not get rid of the service.

Im not sure i have heard of anyone wanting rid of the bbc . The argument is about how it is funded , and if a private organisation wants to call itself the bbc and compete in the market place using subscription services then thats their affair.

It maybe they put a penny on income tax or NI or whatever.

i doubt it dont you?

Thats been addressed earlier , why would the gov tax for a service that no one is watching? I suspect this would be a deeply unpopular move , and more wishfull thinking on your part boycey.

The licence fee may go, but the BBC remains a state run enterprise

That isnt certain at all , and is exactly what is comig under consideration , wether the bbc should remain state funded and offering up its woke nonsense , or become self sufficient and see if people want to pay freely for the guff they offer up.

Getting rid of the BBC is a national security concern

.you will have to explain that one.

[B0ycey]

But as a de facto tax, the license  fee is a very poor one, effectively a poll tax that takes no account at all of means, nor any account of how much or how little you choose to watch the BBC.

Sure, but the Tories have said they will restructure how the BBC is funded, not get rid of the service. It maybe they put a penny on income tax or NI or whatever. The licence fee may go, but the BBC remains a state run enterprise. Getting rid of the BBC is a national security concern.

[Thomas]

If you take away the licence fee, the BBC is likely to be state funded and as such you'll be paying for it one way or another anyway. But whilst we still have a licence, I suggest it stays frozen until 2027 if the BBC refuses to address over paying primadonnas. A large chunk of the shortfall over 7 years can rectified by getting them onto other networks to continue their obscene levels of pay whilst giving a platform for others to start their media careers.

No because as we keep saying there is no justification for state funding in any form when their audience numbers are dropping massively , by an estimated 4 % every year.

The whole purpose of state propaganda is to send a message to the public via a platform like the bbc. If ever increasing numbers are no longer tuning in , then it no longer serves the purpose for what the government need it for , and eventually it becomes of no use to them , and funding will stop one way or the other.

I keep saying its becoming increasingly irrelevant , and woe betide any government trying to force payment for a service no one uses.

Using twentieth century propaganda in the twenty first century where most folk are using online streaming services doesnt work. A bit like your argument.