All posts by Trevor Harris
Below are all of Trevor Harris's postings, with the most recent are at the bottom of the page.
Actually Dave it has become very complicated. It is based on whether the video was "broadcast or not". Anyone who records a broadcast program needs a licence to play it back. You do not need a licence if you watch the same program on catchup iplayer. You cannot watch a live program on iplayer without a licence. Many people avoid paying the licence fee by only watching catchup.
| link to this comment |
As far as I can see there is nothing to stop the BBC charging for the iplayer. They could give every licence payer a login or they could charge a seperate fee.
In times of recession an increase in the licence fee is politically unacceptable. Why should poor of this country continue to finance the fat cats at the BBC.
| link to this comment |
Another example of BBC's failure to provide what people wanted was in classical music as well. I can remember when the BBC insisted on playing far too much wayout classical music on radio 3. Many questioned wether Classic FM would be able to survive when it was muted. It now claims to be the most successful commercial station in the world. The BBC still does not cater for this market.
| link to this comment |
Well if I was the new Managing Director this is what I would do
I would keep BBC 1, BBC 2, cbbc and cbeebies free to air financed by adverts. BBC 2 would be a repeats channel.
Subscription channels are a bit more difficult. the BBC curently gets much of its quality sports from the protected rights which I assume will be abolished. There is already alot of competition for both film and sport.
So I would try to put together a Subscription Sports package and a film package.
BBC News is another difficult area as news services tend to be loss making.
| link to this comment |
To put it simply decriminalization is the right thing to do. We do not know what effect it will have on avoidence and everything the BBC says is pure speculation.
The compulsary licence fee means the the BBC's income is not related to it's performance. It does not matter how badly the BBC perform they still can rely on the Licence fee. Reducing services has no effect on BBC income. The BBC still carries on in the same old way. A good example is the massive number of people they sent to the winter olympics. Without a compulsary Licence Fee cost effectiveness comes into play.
| link to this comment |
No one seems to be able to answer this simple question.
If I pay £12.50 per month for BT Sports why should I have to pay the BBC £12.12 per month extra for nothing. Even worse if I have BT Internet I get BT Sports for free and I still have to pay the BBC.
As far as I can see I would be subsidising other peoples viewing and keeping the BBC fats cats in the luxury they have become accustomed to.
| link to this comment |
Can I live without the BBC? Well the answer for me is yes there is plenty of television to choose from. The assumption 4 out of 5 homes willing to pay £18pm for the BBC channels is ridiculous when Sky offers 35 channels for £21.50 pm with 11 million subscribers. There is no reason why some BBC channels could not survive from advertising alone. The BBC is already involved in subscription services eg Gold etc.
We can live without freeview as well. Television can be delivered by Satellite, Cable, Broadband and 4G.
| link to this comment |
@brianist
My arguments are not childish but may be childlike. I would disagree with your tax argument.
You said:
Sometimes it is better for society as a whole for the state to intervene and use it's powers to benefit the majority of citizens.
The licence fee was not originaly a tax. When the BBC was the only choice the licence fee was only charged to people would wanted to view BBC services. In my view a fair system. It was the introduction of ITV that changed the licence fee into a tax.
Income tax is based on the ability to pay but the same BBC License has to payed by rich and poor alike. This means that some very poor families are paying for the excesses of the BBC when they only want to watch free television. The licence fee is just not fair for poorer people.
You clearly believe that the BBC is a "benifit to people as a whole" but I find it difficult to find anything the BBC outputs which is not available else where. It certainly cannot justify being financed by tax.
| link to this comment |
There is one guiding principle that the BBC should be paid for by the people who use it's services. You seem to have left out advertizing and voluntary contributions.
| link to this comment |
Saturday 22 March 2014 10:31AM
The problem is that the current system is not working. The BBC trust was setup to protect the interests of viewers but has time and time again failed. Patterson has no broadcasting experience and so seems to be out of his depth most of the time.
The licence fee is not fit for purpose any more. The Government is now using it as another form of tax by using it to finance the World Service and broadband. Having a compulsory fee to watch any broadcast television has meant that the BBC is underfunded during a time of economic hardship.
The BBC is also notorious for waisting money as has been pointed out on many occasions by the Parlimentary Finance Committee.
Another problem is the protected rights system which makes certain events available at below thier market value. This deprives certain rights holder from realising the true value of thier events.
Another issue is the fact that the BBC news has been described as "State Sponsered" and so the BBC has an advantage over other news organisations.
Recently there has been alot of concern about the non payment of licence fee being a criminal offence when all other debts of this type are a civil offence. The BBC has said that would increase non payment but there is no evidence that will happen. One issue here is that the BBC deliberatly made Freeview a non encrypted service in order to preserve the licence fee. If it was encrypted they would not even need to prosecute they could just switch them off.
In short the licence Fee is not fit for purpose in a multi channel and multi media world.