Good value is so subjective. Do I get good value from it? Probably not. I probably watch about 3 hours of bbc a week on average, so that works out about a pound an hour.
I know that I COULD watch it for more but choose not to, so I'm going to say yes - good value based on potential usage, but not on actual usage.
I'd like to see iplayer mandate the tv license number to access it rather than just trusting you to answer truthfully.
Nor do I think pensioners be exempt.
Yes I do pay it, and yes I believe it's worth it.
The BBC provides so much content that can benefit a lot of people and it does so in various ways, without ad breaks as it always has.
Whether there is a better way for them to go about it, I don't know, but it is certainly crucial that it continues to be funded.
No, don't watch TV and i think the BBC is rubbish
Nope, exempt anyway, but also a cord cutter who doesn't see any value what-so-ever in the TV License or the programs it produces.
The BBC does provide a lot of good content, especially BBC2 & BBC4 but at the same time it's news reporting is clearly biased and I think a publicly funded broadcasting body should be completely impartial. It's not blatant bias but the reporting is “presented” in such a way as to subtley influence the less critical viewer.
All that content - advert free - and aimed at all sectors of society; and all for less than the cost of a pint of beer a week? Absolutely good value for money!
My views on this have definitely shifted in the past few years. I used to be a huge supporter of the TV license, but now the bulk of our viewing is done on Netflix and Amazon with the very odd occassion that I might watch something live on a channel OTHER THAN the BBC (F1 or Football) - therefore I do not see why I should have to pay for something I don't watch. The BBC (and others funded by the TV license) should get with the times and move to a subscription service for its programs or sell their programs/content to other subscription services. This cannot go on for much longer.
In addition to the above - why do they think its OK to harass people and make them feel like criminals if they do not have one? Their tactics are absolutely ruthless, letters, surveillance, people banging down your door.
Irish state broadcaster RTE has advertising on both radio and TV; they want €160 for a license.
I can't remember when I last watched a live broadcast, maybe the world cup, I do check out iPlayer every now and then, so I guess that considering the lack of ads, I don't mind paying it.
I do pay for it but it does not represent good value for money for me. Every show I have ever liked except Top Gear has gone, Sky and BT have nabbed all the decent sport and it's just full of reality crap. I watch Netflix more than anything and could easily do without terrestrial TV as I think I watch about 2% worth of what my licence costs…if that.
peterb
All that content - advert free - and aimed at all sectors of society; and all for less than the cost of a pint of beer a week? Absolutely good value for money!
For me, that.
Is there a better way?
Arguably (and no doubt someone will) …. yes. General taxation.
If you are being taxed you have an income. Fund BBC etc from that.
It will be far harder to evade, and while we'recat it, we can stop paying for all the enforcement action, wasted court time and, by the way, stop harrassing people that have made the perfectly legal decision to not watch anything that requires a licence.
And I agree with the suggestion earlier about requiring a licence number, and some form of pin/code, to access iPlayer.
Nope. Haven't had live TV for 5 years now, and don't miss it either to be honest. Even though I'm paying for Netflix and Prime, it still works out less per year than the TV license the BBC imposes on people, even if they aren't watching BBC channels. They need to modernise really, because in a generation's time, the TV license won't be a reliable source of income for them.
Not me, I stopped years ago when I stopped watching tv, I'd rather spend £154 on something I'm going to watch more than an average of 16 or so hours a year (Top Gear). If I want to watch topgear now I watch with my neighbor who has a full tv licence and sky subscription.
My problem is their attitude when you're not paying. You're treated like a criminal. I legitimately didn't have a TV licence, paid for individual shows from the BBC store (when it existed) and bought other things on DVD. I received several threatening letters which were basically trying to con and threaten me into paying, making out I was a criminal. I just decided that Amazon Prime was better for what I wanted and the BBC had NOTHING I wanted to watch. I personally think they should migrate to a subscription model and stop threatening people. They send someone to your door and “caution” you like a copper. They have no right to be doing this and you are not under any kind of caution, but they act like they have enforcement power when really they're just agents of Crapita pretending to be coppers and threatening people.
The BBC does have a political purpose as well, it's used internationally to generate “soft power” for the UK and its interests. Like RT.
Yes I do pay it, and yes I do believe it's very good value for money. So many people forget that the fee doesn't just pay for BBC1/2/4/radio - it also helps to part fund local TV channels and for content creation that is either syndicated or just plain broadcast on other, commercial channels. A good chunk of the content on netflix & prime is actually original BBC content and whilst netflix/amazon do pay for use of that content, it was originally made & created with licence fee money.
Would I like to see some reform and for it to be made optional/easier to track than the current system? Yes of course, but doing so would almost certainly necessitate an increase in cost which wouldn't be great, and i'm not really sure how they would do it…either way, I pay for a licence and don't regret it :)
I pay, and generally find BBC productions to be “a cut above”, although I must admit that I find many of the BBC's behaviours/practises outside of its programmes to be at odds with its mandate. The bbc.co.uk website is full of clickbait headlines with little to no insight, for example, not to mention the general, but pervasive, political slant.
I feel quite strongly that content should remain on iPlayer more-or-less indefinitely given how the BBC is funded. If you have a TV licence, you co-funded the production, and should have access to the content. This new joint-venture with ITV for a “UK netflix” just seems like an opportunity to re-monetise what we've already funded. I suppose it isn't much different to them selling the DVDs, but we can keep those for posterity. The new service just seems like an excuse to reduce iplayer content and put it behind a paywall, rather than using iPlayer to expand customer choice and make it how we consume TV in the 21st century.
I suppose that's the thing - I see a future where iPlayer effectively replaces broadcast TV for most of us. The BBC don't.
I don't pay anymore. Biased Pro-remain organization.
There are no decent shows either. No more Weakest link or Hustle or Voyager
Yes, I pay it and I do think it's worthwhile even though I hardly watch TV. Well, not broadcast - I usually pick what I want via some catchup method. The BBC funds, or partially funds some great television shows.
I spend more a year on lattes than the TV licence - it's very good value in my opinion.
People crying that BBC news is biased - if you say so, but I doubt there are many truly impartial news outlets and the beeb is far from overtly biased; especially in comparison to the alternatives. Seriously though, you can't watch the news and distil fact from rhetoric? How in hell's name have you survived this long? You want bias? Read the Express or Daily Fail.
No. recently went cordless. the few programs i watched simply were not worth the ongoing costs. plus with new program's being for genres i simply wasn't interested in
It's high time thos stealth tax was abolished in favour of more modern choices…
Well, for a start it's not advert free given the amount of time they spend promoting themselves.
What used to be a reliable new source is now a hugely biased fake news outfit, principally through ommission of news that tells the wrong story and through political soliloquis dressed up as ‘human interest’ stories placed front and centre amongst the headlines.
Privatise it by giving shares to those who've paid for the past 5 years, then make it advert funded. The state can fund local news etc through general taxation (a few 10s of million vs the £4000 million the BBC extorts each year).
Rancid organisation, truly beyond saving.
.
Agreed on the self-promoting adverts but at least they only occur between programs, not in the middle of them. And I don't much mind that. Adverts breaking up the story drive me nuts though, because it ruins my enjoyment. Which is why I record all such programs to HD, and edit out (with frame accurcy) adverts, before watching. It generally takes me about 3 minutes to delete the ads in a 1hr program, abd I usually do half a dozen at a time. It's a pain, but less so than having story flow wrecked by adverts …. usually with an ear-drum wrecking increase in volume too.
As for biassed reporting, bear in mind it's not a simple thing to assess. They aren't required, for instance, to be neutral within every program but neutral overall. On Brexit, they do come accross to me as firmly pro-Remain but then, I've seen people state they're biased in favour of Leave. Maybe it depends exactly what you watch.
I don't pay the licence fee. I haven't owned a TV since 1999 and I never got around to trying iPlayer. My exposure to the BBC podcasts from Radio4 and the occasional visit to the news page of the website
Saracen999
peterb
All that content - advert free - and aimed at all sectors of society; and all for less than the cost of a pint of beer a week? Absolutely good value for money!
For me, that.
Is there a better way?
Arguably (and no doubt someone will) …. yes. General taxation.
If you are being taxed you have an income. Fund BBC etc from that.
It will be far harder to evade, and while we'recat it, we can stop paying for all the enforcement action, wasted court time and, by the way, stop harrassing people that have made the perfectly legal decision to not watch anything that requires a licence.
And I agree with the suggestion earlier about requiring a licence number, and some form of pin/code, to access iPlayer.
why should I fund the BBC's political rubbish.
will19565
why should I fund the BBC's political rubbish.
For the same reason many people fund all sorts of services they'll never use through taxation - it's how most services are funded.
Saracen999
will19565
why should I fund the BBC's political rubbish.
For the same reason many people fund all sorts of services they'll never use through taxation - it's how most services are funded.
Big difference: I can't walk into a private hospital and take services. A company won't build a road between A and B for the fun of it for people to use.
But there are numberous other, free TV stations that don't require a subscription, that provide news, documentaries and educational programming that are massively disadvantaged by the BBC competing directly against them.
Less of the veiled sweary things please guys, even that word is in our sweary filter, so please dont try and evade by using ****
Yes I pay the license fee and yes I think it's good value for money. Just wish their news coverage was better on both TV and online. Too little indepth coverage & investigation too much reporting & attention given to what idiots are saying on twatter & failbook.
Yep I pay for it but rarely watch it.
g8ina
Less of the veiled sweary things please guys, even that word is in our sweary filter, so please dont try and evade by using ****
Is that really a swear word in this day & age, rude in certain contexts maybe?? and considering what Hexus has covered in the past …………..
I seem to watch a few things on BBC, mostly dramas and documentaries. Likewise I don't mind the BBC adverts as they do point me to other things to watch and likewise they are never int he middle of anything I am watching.
I will say if you have children Cbeebies is a life saver, great programs and much short birthday/christmas lists due to no adverts.
So I don't mind paying it and to me its great but do see how it may annoy others.
Am Irish, don't pay the license for Irish TV, refuse too, will never pay it, I'd rather take the conviction and spend the night in jail if it ever came to it, not a chance in hell I'll pay for something that I never even watch or listen too.
I pay it because I have to for my virgin media package, but I don't feel I get personal good value from it at all, it just feels like something I have to pay so that the wife can watch coronation street and I am not harassed and prosecuted for it. I barely even watch TV, and if I do, on goes Netflix.
I think it's good value.
But, i don't think it should be compulsary to watch live TV.
It should be/become a subscription based service. If you want the BBC, you pay for it. If you don't pay for it, you don't get BBC.
No TV licence shouldn't stop you watching channel 4 or ITV live.
It wouldn't be a big loss at the moment, half of thier shows end up on Dave or Netfix anyway. Box sets of shows can be bought as one off items. And recently when the BBC does have successful shows, they don't always take them on anyway. Ripper street going to Amazon, and the Last kingdom becoming a Netflix exclusive. It's odd that proven shows don't get that backing.
If i could watch live TV without a TV license, and just not have BBC. I would do that.
You should be able to choose the channels even programmes you want and I would agree the tv license is a good deal, in other words it needs to modernise and have a month commitment option too.
The value proposition is in my opinion irrelevant. It's the way it's administered that is the problem. If BBC were a £12 a month standalone subscription, I'd probably say that's not terrible value, though not as good as Netflix. However, the gatekeeping of content from other providers who don't receive a penny of that payment is the problem I have. It's like requiring a Netflix subscription to be able to get a Prime Video subscription or Google asking for a tenner on top of your Spotify membership. It's just absurd and I will not watch live TV in my house until it changes.
IF, the BBC cut its price in half as well as all “entertainment” programs I'd consider it. Cut it to the bare minimum: news, education, kids and local radio and also being a stepping stone for people new to the industry rather than the big names. But I'm not paying for BBC to broadcast the Olympics or World Cup and the salary of Gary Lineker.
No. I have enough content elsewhere to keep me going without the need for the BBC.
I think A lot of people confuse what you pay for with the TV Licence' it's a Licence on the receiving device. So you need a licence to watch or record any live TV programme, on any channel. It applies to any provider you use, including BBC iPlayer, ITV Player ITV Hub, All 4, Sky Go, Virgin Media, BT TV, Apple TV, Now TV, YouTube, Roku and Amazon Prime Video.
Saracen999
will19565
why should I fund the BBC's political rubbish.
For the same reason many people fund all sorts of services they'll never use through taxation - it's how most services are funded.
you need defense, law enforcement, Roads, schools, hospitals and (begrudgingly) governments etc.
you DO NOT need the BBC (or a foreign aid budget)
will19565
you need defense, law enforcement, Roads, schools, hospitals and (begrudgingly) governments etc.
you DO NOT need the BBC (or a foreign aid budget)
You don’t need schools if you don’t have children or hospitals (unless you are ill)
But by the same logic you don’t
need a television either. If you object to the licence fee, get rid of your TVs and any other applicable equipment!
Nope, I don't watch broadcast TV, it's a depreciated media format.
peterb
You don’t need schools if you don’t have children or hospitals (unless you are ill)
But society does need schools and hospitals. Society wont come to a grinding halt if the Beeb ceases to exist.
Tomsk
I think A lot of people confuse what you pay for with the TV Licence' it's a Licence on the receiving device.
Yep and it's completely outmoded. Imagine paying a license fee to operate your mobile phone or WiFi. It's about time the Beeb raised it's own funds, like C4.
I pay the license fee but I resent it.
will19565
you need defense, law enforcement, Roads, schools, hospitals and (begrudgingly) governments etc.
you DO NOT need the BBC (or a foreign aid budget)
That would be better put as
you (and no doubt lots of others) don't need the BBC. but a good chunk of society wouldn't agree. And that's why society provides many services, and funds them from general taxation.
It is, however, (and IMHO) getting towards the end of it's lifespan. Time is approaching when it'll go.
I have to pay it, as I use BBC iplayer. Even though I only watch it about 2 hours a month. Might just uninstall it and save my £154
Saracen999
will19565
you need defense, law enforcement, Roads, schools, hospitals and (begrudgingly) governments etc.
you DO NOT need the BBC (or a foreign aid budget)
That would be better put as you (and no doubt lots of others) don't need the BBC. but a good chunk of society wouldn't agree. And that's why society provides many services, and funds them from general taxation.
It is, however, (and IMHO) getting towards the end of it's lifespan. Time is approaching when it'll go.
what i meant was that you need what i listed absolutely for the efficient running of the country.
if the BBC was wiped from existence tomorrow, society would grind to a halt
As soon as they decided to add adverts into the iPlayer, we decided to end our TV Licence. I'll find my content elsewhere. I am absolutely not going to pay £150 a year to have to choose to skip adverts for shows I don't want to watch.
An advert is an advert. It doesn't matter if it's for Doctor Who or Stella Artois. It's an advert. And I will not pay the BBC for the privilege.
Also, their ridiculous method of charging 2x monthly payments for the first 6 months of any direct debit charge is utterly ludicrous. Who on Earth thought that was the best method? And why?
To be honest, I hope the whole system the BBC operates spirals into a nothing so we can get rid of it. It's a stupid system and I won't care to see the back of it.
I do pay the license, despite the fact that I do not think the BBC is unbiased and I get a lot of content from other sources. However, overall the quality of the content is good and I feel UK benefits as a country, so we should maintain it.
Nope didn't watch it and the BBC has been slipping in terms of bias, so I no longer wanted to fund them anyway with the dozens of alternative options.
I don't watch normal TV, I don't want my life to revolve around someone else's schedule or watch watered down versions of films. I'm more about watching films on Blu-ray and shows on Netflix at times that suit me. I'm not going to pay for something I don't use.
Slowly but surely it will disappear imo.
AGTDenton
I don't watch normal TV, I don't want my life to revolve around someone else's schedule or watch watered down versions of films. I'm more about watching films on Blu-ray and shows on Netflix at times that suit me. I'm not going to pay for something I don't use.
Slowly but surely it will disappear imo.
I agree on most things, but news, sport and some other major events are better experienced live.
I actually do pay for a TV license atm, but hopefully soon it will change , On average I watch maybe 10 hours per week at most on the TV, so it's pretty poor value in anyone's eyes, given the fact that 10 hours is mainly other channels rather than the BBC… it's very poor value.
I would pay double for a tv that cant tune BBC channels and watch for free… no fee's etc
Maybe this is something they should work on ?
spacein_vader
I agree on most things, but news, sport and some other major events are better experienced live.
I agree somethings are good live but the news is a depressant for me and sport isn't my thing unless it's Rally sport or Boxing but as its only on Sky or BT I can't be bothered to have both just to get a fight that I have to pay on PPV at 5am or very un live Rally racing repeats from a year ago
In CZ we pay ~70GBP a year for similar service (25% of that is for ‘radio’ but if you have TV you are required to pay for radio as well). Alas, the program is full of ads, reality shows and biased political junk depending on where the wind blows atm. Automatically when you have a power line you are expected to pay. You get mails starting with “Explain why you are not paying fees” in pretty rude way. You are required to pay if you have any device capable of receiving DVB-T,C or S (except mobile phones I think). But the ‘blackmailing’ strategy you folks write about sounds almost same like one that happens here.
Self-promotion isn't really advertisements but looking at the BBC way of doing it, 1 or 2 minutes between shows, is hardly a tough watch.
Unlike SKY, for example. 4 breaks per 1-hour episode, if you include the last one. When watching the likes of SKY Witness each break starts with a SKY advert and ends with 3 SKY adverts. Usually in the order of Sports, Movies then one or two regular programming episodes. We never watch live TV anymore, everything is on demand or the day after so we can fast-forward the adverts.
The BBC is way better in this regard. And to be fair their programming of the big shows is way better. They just have more… quality, than say ITV.
spacein_vader
I agree on most things, but news, sport and some other major events are better experienced live.
I can see why you say that, but it's not really an issue for me.
There's very little sport I watch, or would be bothered about if I couldn't watch it at all. I'm certainly not bothered enough about TV news to worry about live and, ‘major events’ …. I can't think of any that bother me there, either.
Completely! Non-advertising tv is priceless.
No its Bias Crap we have to pay for on BBC, the only thing good to come out of the BBC is Sir David Attenborough, the rest is utter crap and over priced.
I've heard a lot of people with wildly different political views complain about BBC bias over the years. Oddly not a single one thinks it's biased in favour of their viewpoint.
The natural history unit and the children's programming are both superb, as is a fair chunk of the radio output which oddly is also funded by the TV licence.
We have to get it because my wife watches live tv. But NOT the BBC. That's why I think the whole thing is a con. Having to pay more than the cost of Netflix and Spotify for a service I don't use?
It should be subscription based. I.e. if you want to watch the BBC then you pay for it. If not, then you don't. However, they will never do that as they know the majority of the public wouldn't pay for it and it would cease to exist.
I used to love the BBC back at the turn of the century, but a few years ago I released that as a British white male I was always the villain in every story. While still really love some BBC stuff, I can't stand that I'm paying the salary's of a bunch of people who's purpose seems to be undermine and vilify me at every opportunity.
Haven't paid it for years. Our viewing habits have changed massively and we only tend to watch online streaming programs now. For a while we stopped watching telly altogether and its slowly crept back in but in a much more controlled way which suits our lifestyle much better.
I remember someone once pointing out that most commercial channels don't exist to make you watch TV. They exist to make you watch the adverts. I know that Netflix upsets this trend, but I still find the BBC to be refreshingly different in that regards.
And I know there are complaints about BBC news, but I think they make an effort to try to be fair and balanced.
I think it's worth it :)
I watch a bit of TV, so have a TV license. It's probably not good value for me personally but I don't mind paying it.
Most of my favorite shows/media come from Youtube or Netflix and I haven't been watching much Netflix recently either.
BTW the bit about it covering for all live broadcast TV I believe is because part of the license fee goes towards the transmitter/broadcasting infrastructure, which the BBC maintains.
Better things to do than sitting on my arse watching tv and getting fat.
Top_gun
Better things to do than sitting on my arse watching tv and getting fat.
Like what? Sitting on your PC spouting dribble?
The BBC is utter rubbish and I object to having to fund the BBC's politically biased propaganda even if I don't watch it.
As such I removed my connection years ago and this has allowed me to stop paying.
If the BBC wants to exist it should be a subscription service that covers BBC only so that it has to compete on a level field with other channels.
emperoralku
The BBC is utter rubbish and I object to having to fund the BBC's politically biased propaganda even if I don't watch it.
As such I removed my connection years ago and this has allowed me to stop paying.
If the BBC wants to exist it should be a subscription service that covers BBC only so that it has to compete on a level field with other channels.
Removing your connection (presumably aerial connection) is not necessarily enough, these days, to mean you don't (legally) need a licence.
It used to be, because the licence was needed to watch or record broadcast TV
live. So removing the aerial (and for certainty, detuning receivers) prevented you receiving live broadcasts.
These days, however, receiving live broadcasts on any device, including a computer, will trigger a need, as will using iPlayer. The iPlayer bit is not restricted to live material. So if you use iPlayer, be it live, catch-up or on-demand usage, you need a licence.
It may well be that you, emperoralku, don't use iPlayer at all and so don't need a licence, but for anybody else reading this thread, that aerial disconnection isn't quite enough. Avoid any use of iPlayer, in any context, too.
Saracen999
Removing your connection (presumably aerial connection) is not necessarily enough, these days, to mean you don't (legally) need a licence.
It used to be, because the licence was needed to watch or record broadcast TV live. So removing the aerial (and for certainty, detuning receivers) prevented you receiving live broadcasts.
These days, however, receiving live broadcasts on any device, including a computer, will trigger a need, as will using iPlayer. The iPlayer bit is not restricted to live material. So if you use iPlayer, be it live, catch-up or on-demand usage, you need a licence.
It may well be that you, emperoralku, don't use iPlayer at all and so don't need a licence, but for anybody else reading this thread, that aerial disconnection isn't quite enough. Avoid any use of iPlayer, in any context, too.
I believe the iPlayer issue resolves itself. IIRC you need to be logged in to a BBC account to use it and need to give said account your TV licence number.