Scottish logic wins.

I'm so using that next time they visit me

I got them tell me I have a tv as I have an Ariel on the chimney stack, I told them I got a chimney but not a coal fire. Bottom line shut the door don’t communicate it sterilising them and there investigation.

Oldest joke in the book

@@evi6199 Surely there were jokes around before satellite dishes

Same thing with my parents. They are scared that people will come round and do something even tho these people have no rights at all and you can just tell them to piss off lol.

My mother actually believes that they have those detector vans that go around and pick up what you're watching on TV haha

@@Janus-yv8zm To anyone who doesn't know, that used to actually be a thing.

@@Janus-yv8zm that used to be the case with analog tv’s but not with digital.

@@BaldMancTwat those vans never worked to start with. As a technician I know of various technical issues, why that entire charade is just another scam used to fool gullible people.

It is sad but funny at the same time 😂

Similar here. My mother in law died last August. My wife cancelled her mom's TV licence as the house is now empty. she'd already explained the situation, but they've since sent two letters, plus a card put through the door from a visit, saying the matter is now under investigation. I just laughed. Completely ignore it

I guess your parents never told you the difference between "you're" and "your".

@@pioruns Your point? English may or may not my first language, either. Now what?

@@Anvilshock Im getting sick of where this thread is going. To all those complaining about spelling or punctuation GET A LIFE. You kind of lose the argument when you fail to see the point. It just makes you look ignorant to other peoples points of view and pretty childish too.

@@alansharman3644 "You fail to see the point" - Mighty bold of someone to say this while exactly failing to see that making such comments isn't an indicator of seeing or ignoring people's points at all, just like having lunch doesn't mean one is ignorant of breakfast. Plus, it's exactly not childish. What is childish, however, is becoming disproportionately defensive and taking such comments as attack at one's person when it's addressing nothing more (and nothing less) than that person's CHOICE of performance. Worse yet, when it's someone's as valiant as uncalled-for white-knighting "defense".

Just tell your kids that if a stranger says their a tv licence officers then they are kidnappers, tell them no and close the door, the door is magic and will stop them trying to grab you, saying no activate the magic protection the door has 😂

Even if they bring a 🐖 👮‍♀️ along.

@@stubones They try that one after you tell them to go and do one. However the presence of plod is to "Keep the peace" not to inforce corparate robbery. You just have to ask "In what capacity are you here kuntstable!" Before informing both they have no business there.

True but I’m a complete walk over . I’m fortunate my husband is more gobby and confident . Not sure what I would do if he wasn’t around … I’ve had these letters in our new rental, literally the next day after we moved in? They soon piled up in 4 months . One actually had a window cut out on the envelope and it did scare me it said “we are coming on the 24th October” . But when I opened the letter it revealed “we are coming on the 24th oct but are you going to be available?😂😂. After this I completely ignored them. I remember in one property 10 years ago my husband let them in . I didn’t like it just feels like they’re infringing on our privacy with our toddlers around . But yeah they saw we had a TV set to use for my in law with dvds . And for videos games . We have one in my in laws still it gives her a sense of day and night . If we didn’t do this for the 3 hr increments I wasn’t there she would Sleep then all night she would stay awake . So yes she has a license but because of her age she doesn’t have to pay . So no threatening letters for her, plenty for me ;)

@@stubones you only have to start talking about the BBC being a p.eedòring then watch how uncomfortable they both become before dispersing 😄👏👍

They do try it on pretty hard these days as it's run by capita now

It was actually the army that brought that scam to its knees because the armed forces contacted the TV licensing board stating that technology would be really useful to us don't suppose you want to share it, and when they were told they were bluffing the armed forces exposed them.

@@24magiccarrot Interesting.

They could, certainly back in the days of analogue. When TV licensing enforcement used to be the remit of the GPO (now Royal Mail and BT) my dad used to have to do "TV visits" and they would knock on people's doors and tell them what they had been watching just before they got up to answer the door.

@@raithrover1976 That's because they could usually see or hear it through the window. 🤣

@@raithrover1976 Only by listening for the TV audio. There was absolutely no way they could "detect" it any other way.

The people who come out and who are on the phone are all Capita Employees :D

Just pay the license fee you thieving gimp

@@dragonflopus6425on commission nonetheless.

They have no rights of entry and are no more than door to door salesmen trying to get you to buy a licence-no different to someone knocking on your door trying to get you to buy their brushes and mops.

I deliver the letters, probably one every two weeks to the same places (quite a few of them), for the time I have been on this current route about ten years. So last month I cancelled my licence because it's obvious they never follow up on their threats. Being a postman I sent the letters back with my name on as "gone away" so they send "the occupier" ones now, which I just bin.

@@jaybe2908 Here's something I don't understand. Whatever happened to the word "occupant"? "Occupier" makes me sound like an invading army that's conquered my own home! 😂

@@berniethekiwidragon4382 thats all we are to them

@@just_saw_dust I wish I could do that, but unfortunately not, still they will be sending them in a festive red envelope soon, something to look forward to.

@@jaybe2908 Best thing is they can't take "the occupier" to court

Eurovision is free on KZfaq nowadays :3

Besides, nowadays, people watch from their phones or laptops. Television is dying and the only purpose it serves to display stuff from your phone (like a steaming app) on a larger screen.

@@parkchimmin7913 I dont know if thats true or not for families. You arent having a family sit and watch tv together on a smartphone. And I presumed the only people watchign stuff on their smartphone are kids using it for ticktok. But then again I just assume people have PC's or smart TV's so dont really watch crap on their tiny phone. Who wants to watch a beautiful movie on a phone :S

@@IncubiAkster You can connect your phone to the TV. It works on most TVs as long as you have an adapter (although, I think most TVs are smart TVs nowadays. So it comes with that function).

You don't have to say anything to them other than "Don't need a licence" and then shut the door on them. They have no right of entry and can only enter your house if you are fool enough to let them. Just fill out the on line "Dont need a licence" declaration every two years and you wont hear from them. If you do-ie they call-remember its either "Don't need one " close the door or dont bother opening the door at all.

You should've sent them email or something saying.. hey I brought cakes had the kettle on you never turned up,,,

Please turn up, I've got a little of tea and we can watch some KZfaq shorts.

I am international student in recommendation. The warden stop the ‘Tv guy’ at the front entrance😂😂

Sorry I couldn't help but laugh 😂🤣

🤔

Honestly some of them they think they’re so hard 🤣

Would be worth it just to say "Nah I'm alright" and close the door on someone reading you your rights.

@@LabradorIndependent I would do it now if it was regarding a TV licence 🤷‍♀️ but then I was no more than a kid who was excited to get her first house. He scared the shit out of me!

@@clairelovescats7175 exactually the same thing happened to me. Scared me so i payed up.

British authorities are some of the least threatening on the planet. Except for the SAS, they're terrifying.

That's rough, if you'd known better you would have just said no thank you and shut the door, you can have as many TVs as you like as long as you don't use them to watch live TV as it's broadcast or BBC iPlayer, back in those days however virtually everyone needed a TV licence, although a TV could still have been connected to a VCR, computer or games console even then without requiring a licence. Did he see the TV on? If so and it was live TV you were screwed, but it was a waste paying for a lawyer in my opinion since the fine is on average only £150 if you just plead guilty and a lawyer would cost much more (the maximum is £1000, but it's barely ever given), not sure what it was back then.

I am so sorry they were allowed to do that to you

So sorry jupiterthesun, I hate to hear people who move to GB being treated so disgracefully.

The UK makes episodes of the Twilight zone look normal.

Who knocked on the door after that Agent Smith from the Matrix?

❤

People forget that the infrastructure to watch air based or line based transmissions costs money... 99% of the time... the tax payer. It's just done differently everywhere. UK should just do what Denmark is doing and put a small tax if needed on normal tax to maintain the media infrastructure. It then should charge for streaming BBC services like every other company.

Same in Sweden.

Frankly, I think we should do that here in the UK. I don't want to lose the BBC, or the other channels it supports.

Same in Norway.

That's actually a smart idea

I agree that adverts should not be introduced but why not pay through it nationally instead of these stupid letters and licenses!?

As an almost exclusive watcher of BBC channels and content for these reasons, perhaps the advantages appeal to me far more than others, I agree. I personally hope the BBC stays publicly funded and free of influence of advertisers.

Completely agree. As a teacher, we also use so many of the BBC teach videos and resources and the BBC ‘school’ schedule throughout lockdown was so helpful. Also, being Welsh, we have so many regional specific shows that air on BBC Wales which just wouldn’t get made if it took on the same format as something like Netflix i.e. it’s not just about the ability for TV shows to get made in the UK, it’s about the regional specific shows that we just wouldn’t see if we didn’t have the platform for regional TV that the BBC gives. Yes, we have S4C but that is a predominantly Welsh language channel so not accessible to everybody. I’m sure it’s the same in other regions across the UK too but I feel it’s particularly important to us as a smaller country, allowing us to produce/consume our own forms of discrete entertainment that are important to our culture/identity (it wouldn’t be the 6 nations without Scrum V on BBC Wales). Anyway, that’s my input- I’ll save BBC radio/BBC radio Wales for another discussion 😂.

@@thegreypenguin5097 Totally agree the threatening letters are unnecessary. Same as Evan, I own a TV but it's not plugged in and I don't watch live TV or BBC iPlayer. There is a way to go online and declare this (the website should be mentioned in the letters), which then means you only get a letter once a year/every few years, where they ask you to confirm if your TV situation is the same. Maybe Evan's not noticed, or it's different in his region of the UK...? If they made citizens pay for it through a national tax instead of a license then people like Evan and I would have to pay despite not benefiting from it as TV viewers, so in my view the licensing situation is appropriate.

@@amyw9940 That's a really good point - the regional stuff that gets made, and the educational resources! In a comment further down I discussed the writers development programmes and mentoring schemes and opportunities for screen/radio writers that are provided by the BBC and will likely all disappear when the funding gets cut. There are lots of reasons to support the BBC and the licensing. I know I'm a hypocrite as I don't currently pay for a TV license, but I'm on low income and don't watch TV or use iPlayer - if I could afford to, I would pay it even if I knew I wouldn't watch much telly because there are other ways a person can benefit, and I know it's important for others out there.

legend

yea, I envy black privilege. Neighbor out a knife to the mans throat and politely told him never to return. If I had done that I would be under the jail still.

C) Private companies have no cultural or social obligation. They'll make whatever brings money even if it's utter rubbish.

@@silviasanchez648 so true

There's All4, you can pay but also option for free too! Just has ads but eh that's what you get watching it on TV too 😅

@@silviasanchez648 we can see this in Netflix currently. Some of the shows on it are ridiculous for commercial product placement.

D) Boomers can't exist without BBC

Thiiiiiiiis.

Indeed this is why they can afford things like shows for minorities like knitting shows for the elderly. I don't watch that sort of thing but I respect that these shows exist for those people, as there isn't a hope in hell this could afford to exist on Netflix as it's not profitable.

Errr it's basically the same thing though. Plus the licence is a sham, we all know that. It funds the BBC yet the BBC make money from advertising which it was never meant to do, they claim it's also for C4 / ITV etc but they're advertising based funding. It's all just another tax to make the Gov richer.

Whatever your views on the validity of the TV Licence (personally I loathe the BBC and pretty much everything they produce), what is undeniable is that the bully boy tactics used by third party so called 'enforcement' agencies is disgraceful.

@@damionyates4946 yup. TV shows like springwatch or educational content like GCSE Bitesize programming, etc all of that would be sacked off in an instant.

if you're over 74 (or live with someone who is) or receive pension credit, you can get a free one

Public TV doesn't mean Public domain

Check what the Australians do; much more civilised.

@@petergersbach7355 yeah in Australia we don’t have the Conservative party sending threatening letters demanding a license fee to sustain the ABC. Instead they have been pushing for privatization by underfunding the public broadcaster (death by a thousand cuts) so that public interest and support for it is eroded and so there’s no opposition when they eventually sell it off to Rupert Murdock or some other rich prick who will repurpose it for some kind of propaganda

IF YOU PHONE AND TELL THEM YOU DONT HAVE A TV, THEY WILL COME ANYWAY, IT SAYS SO IN THEIR THREATENING LETTERS.

It is one way scam artists try to enter your home. Not so much now as so many know you don't have to allow access to TV licensing.

They are ending CBBC!!!!!

Excuse me, what? They announced the end of CBBC?!? :O When did they do that? When will it end?

@@joewatson3386 they aren't ending it, they are just moving it online

@@BassBanj0 oh I see, still

I agree! I think so many people don't realise how much the BBC offers us and how much it invests in the UK cultural sector. Everyone complains about the threatening letters but they literally provide a link to stop receiving them if you don't watch TV (it's what I did as a student when I couldn't afford a tv license!). Whilst I agree the TV license is an outdated method of funding the BBC, I fear what will become of UK television without proper funding / if it becomes privatised.

Wow, and I thought the Nazis were purged ages ago. Sucks to live in a state like Germany.

They can't. The police needs a warrant to search your home. The same for the TV License "Authority". They are not even a government department. My ex-housemate turned one of their inspectors away, not letting him in or giving his name. Nothing they could have done.

Yep, a lot of these videos, and the people commenting on them, clearly don't know that lots of countries have a TV licence. Some, like France, make you pay it for just owning a TV, even if it is unplugged and behind the sofa, and they include it with the property tax forms so you can't just ignore it.

What if your car doesn't have radio capability? Something pre-war or a racer for example?

You can literally tell them to fuck off and nothing will happen

Exactly! I've always paid for my licence, and I am happy to. The idea of losing the BBC is abhorrent to me. Whether I watch it live or not isn't relevant.

This!

I thing you are the one missing the point of the video, it is not about whether or not the bbc is good or bad, its the way they go about getting people to pay for a licence, with lies and threats which is clearly the wrong way of doing things. I would pay for a tv licence if they didn't try to go after me and accuse me of a crime i didnt commit

That's true, but BBC needs to change. The price compare to another services is unreasonable and the way they demand the payment is close to fraud. If the payment would be symbolic like £2 a month and the rest of the tv would be funded via commercials and government funding. You can't expect people to pay £15 s month or what ever is the price now for just BBC. And people in BBC are overpaid anyway.

crazy thought: the bbc should have adverts like every other channel

Can pay, won't pay.

Or you could just ignore them.

You don't *HAVE* to write to them every year, or indeed at all.

there are some taxes where you have to make nil returns every year

@@theotherside8258 The TV tax isn't one of them.

Supposedly, life doesn't exist without a tv. No one gets chased for not having an alcohol licence, fishing licence, driving licence, shotgun licence, betting licence, etc.

They can fine you based on your words? Is a police officer present when they visit? Can't believe that would hold up in court.

The only words you say to them are "no" and "bye".

How exactly did they fine you?

@@samconroyy They get you to sign their form after they have spoken to you, in hindsight in should have carefully read the form, but like I said anxiety clouded my judgement and I didn't. They used the form to take it to court, I initially considered pleading not guilty but was warned that if I was found guilty then they could increase the fine, so I opted to just pay it and be done with the stress.

@@beeurd No judgement mate, I'm the same. Even people I'm expecting at the door I sometimes fumble my words, poor delivery drivers must think I'm special.

As an addendum to this; I think a lot of the problems here are due to government cuts on the issue. The free tv licensing has been reduced significantly in the past few years, meaning it’s a greater financial stress on people with lower incomes. The big problem of tv licensing is one that’s been manufactured over the recent decades by the government. The BBC are receiving less funding and it’s already been announced they’re going to be cutting their services; a lot of valuable ones too. Having a national broadcaster that is independent from the government that doesn’t rely on appeasing corporations is something I think we’ve come to take for granted.

It's coverage of coronavirus has been a disgrace

@@neilg4208 What do you mean?

@@shadowcat4529 They never gave anything about the age and health demographic of those at serious risk... almost exclusively those in extreme old age or with comorbidities. Those people should have been 'shielded' while the rest of us got on with our lives. The BBC has almost entirely ignored the Great Barrington Declaration, preferring instead to parrot the government line

The biggest issue here is, that we are witnessing a huge contraction in opinions and biases due to the massive concentration of publishing houses. They do like to quote how many different titles there are and that everything is well, but most of the publications have the same articles written by the same staff. The pandemic caused huge losses in ad revenue for ad financed publications (here in Switzerland up to 80%) and it is causing an acceleration of the process. Small papers either die, get bought up by a big publisher and filled with the same articles their other papers get filled, or they get bought up by wealthy people with an interest to disseminate their opinion (that generally means wealthy older conservative right wing millionaires/billionaires - in Switzerland's case, Christoph Blocher already owns 38 papers - he should be a known name since he's the "Father" of the Swiss People's Party and most people will be familiar with the fearmongering adcampaigns they launch). At the same time big publishing houses do not primarily make their money through publishing anymore, but rather through the divested classified ads that do not need a publication filled with news and information to get eyes on them. And in this time we have constant attacks on public broadcasters and attempts to get rid of them. Their deliberate setup keeps them away from most influences and they can't be bought out. This includes the financial setup with fees instead of tax money as politicians have control over taxes and budgets and could use this lever to influence the public broadcasters. There is a huge issue with switching to a subscription: We live in democracies. In democracies, everyone needs access to information to make a political decision and vote accordingly. With the switch to a subscription model not everyone needs to pay and thus not everyone will get access to the information necessary for their participation in political processes. And that even counts for people not watching public broadcasters - the information they provide is used by other media they may consume. If this is removed, who is willing to spend the money to do research? Research is expensive and it is much easier to just fill the paper with soft news (information not relevant to political processes, i.e, "The ten cutest kittens", "Princess X seen sunbathing") as they are cheap to produce and gain reach (akin to Reality TV in the entertainment sector). Additionally, making it a subscription only also means a lot less money available for research, especially on more local and regional levels.

Utter bull the BBC report what they are told to report along with the interest of the media barons......left/right its all just a show Parliament is nothing more than a Cartel looking after the interest of the rich.....the only reason we was given the vote on the EU was just a show and will have been fixed to leave even if remain had won.......why to save there tax loopholes and havens. And they never reported on that new law coming into effect for the EU before or during the vote. BBC,Media,banks,oil firms,,,,all part of the same cartel running the world Why the lockdown world wide.....Banks have crashed again....big talk of that happening before the out break of the virus and bailed out during lockdown.....gone quite on the source of the virus....was it eating bats or was it the USA funded lab in Wuhan.....funny how the virus broke out just after the world military word games in Wuhan China.....would the worlds people allow the banks to be bailed out again so soon after 2008

Why? I watch no tv and manage to function ok, and keep up with news. I don’t need to pay to watch old football matches on a Saturday night for example. What do you think I’m missing exactly?

Bollocks. BBC is owned by a massive media organisation who also own everything and any thing else you can think of in the world. BBC is one part of media that continuously providing miss information and lies to the public day in day out along with our government lies, of what is truly going on in our country and around the world. For instance If no one had a TV then there would not have been any covid threats and lies affecting people's daily lives. This is how TV media is used to brainwash people into a false reality and control their lives with Threats and lies.

They are not independent from government propaganda, it is the mouthpiece of the government

@@fanfeck2844 my sentiments exactly. I'm quite capable of informing myself about domestic and international goings on without the BBC... And over the years I've discerned the fact that I'm able to source far more accurate and truthful narratives through interdependent journalists and media, often these independent sources inform me of what's going on in front of our eyes and behind the scenes long before the patently propagandist and corrupt MSM attempt to divulge their drivel narratives.

They're not allowed to touch any of your equipment, not even the remote. They can ask you to plug it in or switch it on, but you can refuse.

I'd be tempted to argue that that is a waste of police time and make a verbal complaint.

The cops are there to prevent a breach of the peace and usually accompany bailiffs calling to collect the fine for not paying for a licence. The police only attend if they believe there is a likelihood of a BotP, i.e. the homeowner has forcefully told the Crapita official to do one, previously.

BBC Studios, the commercial arm of the BBC turns over a £1.5 billion profit or so every year roughly.

That seems like an argument for the BBC being redundant. We can cut out the middle man and just have companies like Netflix fund the shit instead.

@@peacemaster8117 Not really because the aims of the BBC are not aligned with the aims of 3rd party companies. Companies like Netflix don’t have it written into their mission statement to support learning, to reflect the UK’s cultural & community diversity, to creative content uniquely British distinct from that made elsewhere and to reflect UK culture and values both internally & internationally, putting the UK into an international context to aid our understanding of the world & our place within it. Throughout its history the BBC had made shows other platforms just would not have made because they wouldn’t have been profitable or didn’t fit current trends. The BBC’s unique position allows it to take chances where a commercial business could not and this is incredibly important for art and creativity. Not just for its own programming, but in terms of what it chooses to find in other areas as well.

Also from Scotland. Most of my life, my dad got at least one of these letters a month, but we never had iPlayer or anything like that and they have never been to our door. Even now, we still get these letters despite downgrading to a basic package and we stream just about all of our shows now. I'm not too sure of the specifics about payment though.

Shhhh the lizards will boycott you

That process means they leave you alone for 2 years. I know because I do it.

You still need a TV licence to watch KZfaq and streaming services.

@@me-myself-i787 Nope, you need it to watch channels that are broadcasting live content. Including watching paid streaming services that broadcast live content. (Like BBC iPlayer.) Check the form you need to fill in to say you don't require a TV license. It spells it out in a series of questions. (You don't need a TV License if you never watch live content on any channel, pay TV service or streaming service, or use BBC iPlayer*.) I don't have an aerial, I don't have a set top box, I don't have freeview, I don't pay for any streaming services and I don't watch live content, and I don't miss it. They keep changing their wording to frighten you into thinking you can't go online without their license - which is a nonsense.

Just never engage with their goons, say no thank you and close the door no matter what they try to say and they will have no option but to toddle off to bother someone else in an attempt to earn some commission.

@@pjcnet Nowadays I would look to suing them for defamation of character, which is what it amounted to. I think they are a bit more careful with what the reminders they send out now.

​@@OLDCHEMIST1in speech its slander, in writing its liable

@@AquaFan1998 Yes, true. Libel is writing something untrue about someone, which is actually or potentially damaging. Forgive my old school language nerdery, "liable" is responsible for something, e. g. : "He was responsible for the accident, he is liable"

They apparently still harass people even if they declare it like this

I just let my kids to play with it.

Came into the comments to say the exact same thing

I did that but they started asking me again a few years later. I don't see why I should be compelled to contact them to tell them that I don't watch TV. If you have evidence that I'm breaking the law, take it to a judge. If you don't, you're just extorting people with threats. It's not my job to argue my own innocence when you haven't even got a case.

@@gdclemo I also object to being falsely accused of illegal acts (and in a rude and threatening manner as well). @chrissiemar prepare to start getting letters againt soon - they aren't permanent.

You can get those without legally needing a license and changing an optional tax to a mandatory one is a disgusting idea for those that don't watch the BBC, watch live tv or record tv. We should stick with the same system but make it illegal for the BBC to lie and intimidate people into paying it.

The biggest issue with this argument, is that not paying £159 per year does not stop you accessing any of those services. (For now) I don’t have to pay a license fee to watch publicly owned content on All 4, but I can pay a small amount if I chose to go ad-free. I don’t think I’d object to the BBC moving to a similar model, and putting live tv behind a similar paywall. £13 per month (ish) would balance out the TV license, but I wouldn’t be surprised if they struggled to make up the full £3bn per year without threatening people into paying

@@miniaturesteamnick That issue is of their own making, they made it so every home with a tv has instant access to the BBC so they have an excuse to intimidate and threaten people to get a TV license. How about hiking up the price as all the people who watch the BBC seem to like it so much to the point they want it to be a forced tax even for those that don't use it so they can pay the fee to keep it afloat themselves.

Private TV stations could and are doing all if not most all those same things, plus they could compete and wouldn't settle for mediocrity. What matters is who's working at the public networks and who they hire for production. Just 'cause we paid a license and some through our taxes doesn't mean that it will always equate to good content.

It's heavily biased, mostly focuses on England and to more middle class

Halls of residence rent can only provide cover for a tv license in a communal area it can't provide a license for a tv you have in a bedroom which is classed as a separate address.

lmao same. they kept sending letters adressed to flat 308 but we each had our own room with a letter after it like 308A so I just ignored them

I used to get them while living in hostels. You have to be a bit of a wiley ol' scallywag to do the English hostel circuits so avoiding TV licencing wasn't a problem. It's impressive how most people's TVs would turn into out of place looking houseplants overnight.

Spot on

This, exactly.

The free licence for the elderly was never funded by the government... so the government couldn't take that money away, as you claim. It was funded from the licence fees paid by others...and it was the BBC itself that ended it. Recent years have shown how politically biased the BBC is...global warming, coronavirus, Brexit, BLM etc. If you want a proper news service you have to look elsewhere

BBC is simply an outdated model. needs to be subscription based, they wont do it...they will go bankrupt over night with the amount of dodgy dealings the public knows about.

I had not heard about Channel 4 thing. I personally think the BBC should be scrapped, the talent would still exist but would be absorbed into the private sector.

Bang on, I recognised the document instantly

Literally guessed before the video loaded 🤣

Ayy knew it

But it still had uk employees. Which makes your argument contradictory and void...? It doesn't matter who its shown to they still got employed . THATS WHAT AN ACTOR IS....

It's a nice idea for to have it dedicated to making shows for British people but British people includes young people which the BBC clearly doesn't care about. The problem is 95% of young people in the UK don't watch TV with any regularity and creative people in the UK don't want to make retirement programming. All the talent is leaving the BBC because the BBC isn't interested, they didn't give an opportunity to Charlie Brooker who had to go to Channel 4 and then Netflix to make Black Mirror. Where's the great British talent? It's not with the Beeb. I've had the option to watch TV while looking after my Grandad and there's NOTHING on there that is appealing to me. It's endless nostalgia for a time decades before I was born and I'm not that young, I'm in my 30s! It's gameshows, chatting, cookery programs, antiquing, repeats, ancient old movies and traditional sports. Even scrolling through iplayer there's so little worth watching and the little that is most is available on other streaming services that I'd be far more likely to get as they're better value for money than a TV licence fee. House of Anubis may not be the most incredibly British show but at least it exists and actually tries to appeal to young people.

Nore dose the BBC, they don't make program's for English people anymore.

I love the beeb too. I'm 43 and it's been major to my whole life too. Tbh I only pay my license fee for the radio/podcasts really (via bbc sounds), even though that is a tiny part of the cost of the BBC, I don't have a TV just laptop and rarely do I use iPlayer. But for me its worth it. I think having the World Service and all the language desks is Vital. I hear alot of Conservatives saying the BBC is biased to the Left for the last few years, but interestingly my very Leftist friends also vehemently tell me it's biased to the Right, too. My take is the beeb is neutral reporting economically actually - e.g.. look at all the Times and Telegraph journalists that regularly are on R4 if you are worried about it being too Left. But, I do think it is Socially liberal/left - which suits me fine, live and let live and all that: but I see how could that be offensive to more Socially conservative people.

Imagine living in a society where investigators working for Netflix come to your door to see if you have a valid subscription, when in fact you couldn’t care less about it? Then you find out that they are empowered by the state to do so? Do you not think that would be a bit dystopian (for lack of a better word)? I haven’t had a TV since 1993, and yet, I had someone from the TV license turn up last week. I’m all for people like yourself loving the BBC and finding good quality entertainment. But I shouldn’t have to have someone come to my door using governmental authority. Let the BBC use the same subscription idea like Netflix and Prime. Why should it be law?

@@mandarkastronomonov2962 as I said, the fact that the BBC relies on the public makes it a servant to the public (whether you think so or not, financially it's true). in my opinion, the Tories want to make it private so that it truly can be controlled and no longer has that mandate to serve the public

Or the model of paying for your public broadcaster is outdated, unenforceable, and in need of change to maintain its existence long term

@@evan Well for example bbc I player is so much better then all the other iplayers as no ads and they do have good shows on them, it would be a shame to have to watch ads plus a lot of good shows are funded by the bbc and it would be a shame to not have them. Losing the bbc would not be good, its about more then paying a fee.

It's not just the programmes though the BBC build and maintain the infrastructure for Radio and TV in this country it's not just the programmes you watch but the organisation behind it they cover live music organise concerts like the jubilee. There are the fundraising evenings for children in need etc. As well as their online education content like bitesize.

​@@evan The enforcing process is messed up but I happily pay my licence fee. I do watch some live TV, but even if I didn't I still use BBC services such as news, recipe websites, iplayer etc. I'm also conscious that the BBC fund a whole variety of cultural events in the UK, and even have their own orchestras - would that be sustainable if they switched to eg a subscription service? I suspect not.

@@evan Thing is, we can only start thinking about reform once we have a left-wing government in power. Until then, scrapping the licence fee is code for privatisation. They've already scrapped LW Radio 4, new broadcasts on BBC 4, and moved CBBC online, costing the BBC thousands of jobs, and they've frozen the BBC's funding for the next two years. They're deliberate cuts aimed at destroying one of the only British institutions I'm proud of.

That would be even better. In both postal codes you tell them no TV's here. LOL

Fuckall compared to the wages of the parasites who work for TV Licensing. I bet there's some twat at the top on like 200 grand.

Yep, same here.

Same here.

What a jobsworth! He wasn't even working!

Becky was probably not well-liked for the rest of the year 😅

Looks like you should have organised some frieghtners It’s hard to enforce taxes or license without any kneecaps

++

THIS

No

Then you can absolutely refuse to cooperate with them. You don't even have to tell them your name.

I don't even think being unoccupied is enough either 😂

Maybe I've been lucky, but my experience has been different (I also don't have a TV). Eventually the licensing people did accept that I didn't have one and left me in peace, apart from the fact that I have to send them a letter (which can be online) every couple of years or so saying that my circumstances haven't changed and I still don't have a TV.

except for the times when they do believe you and leave you alone

@Occam's Hammer Thanks. It doesn't really matter for me now because they've accepted that I don't have a TV and I don't use my computer to watch live TV broadcasts (though I do use it to listen to live radio broadcasts, which is permitted).

Completely agree, but over 75s already get a free tv license

I thought they scrapped the free TV for over 75s?? They re-instated the paying again. Not sure if they've gone back in that or not as folks were appalled by it. Just as folks are appalled that the OAP freedom pass now has a curfew again (they can only start using it after 9.30am)

@@rripley86 it's not all over 75s anymore I believe, but yeah my point was those less able to pay 😊

@@khwezik3894 it was just an example of those who may have difficulty paying - I believe they were planning to change it to only be free for over 75s receiving some kind of benefit (can't remember what it was specifically or if it was reversed)

Whats the DINK gang?

lol

No, I will not pay, I do not care what you say It is Wrong, I Do not Watch it, but even if I did I would Not Pay They Are Intimidating and it is wrong how they make a person feel

@@jackoh991 I don’t watch anything like that on KZfaq

If you have a TV in the home, you need a TV licence. It doesn't matter if you use it to only watch streaming programmes. The actual law is pretty catch-all - and for all of the Conservatives complaining about the licence, they've left most of the legal language unchanged.

@@darriendastar3941 that's not true, it's just what they want you to think.

@@darriendastar3941 What you said in your first sentence is absolutely not the case. For the best free online legal information on TV licensing - consult The Black Belt Barrister, right here on KZfaq.

@@darriendastar3941 you may have a tv but not everyone’s tv is connected to be able watch stations

Coronation Street is still very popular and was even among my peer group in primary school. We had some actors come in one day for autographs. I'm about Evan's age. I was never interested in soaps at all so I don't know how it fares today, but its still the world's longest-running soap with a fanbase so prevalent that major plotpoints are discussed on the bloody news! No idea how popular it is with kids nowadays - I'm 10 ways away from that kind of information being neither a child, a parent or a fan of the soap - but if its been enjoyed by kids for decades, it probably still is... a very specifically British experience as it may be. Edit: Oh and while I wouldn't watch TV enough to justify a licence if I were to live alone, I live with my parents and I happen to be in the same room as a lot of stuff they watch. I like the antique and home décor programmes. I'd binge watch them streamed if I could. My best friend also watches a lot of TV - mostly Britain's Got Talent and some other things I don't know the titles of. She often pauses our conversations with "brb [insert programme here] is starting on telly". TV may be dying, but there's plenty of people still watching in my experience

There is an entire generation of people who lived through the "TV years" watching the same 5 channels and through the sky TV era in the UK. People are trapped with the notion that you need to watch this stuff as it's broadcast or record it for later viewing as that is what they have always done. Children today don't need to go through the torture of watching what their parents do on live TV and as they grow up to become the next generation live TV may become a thing of the past. We haven't watched live broadcast TV at home for over 2 years now (probably longer but that's when we cancelled our TV license.) I am not anti TV license we just don't have a need for it. Our children can't stand adverts on TV channels and always used to switch it off 😂.

@@Andrew.gribbin if they can't stand ads on TV then you should watch the bbc... Which is what you were paying for with the TV licence... So cancelling it because of the channels not covered by it is a REALLY nonsensical and illogical argument that holds no water. You literally cancelled the ad free TV fee to watch TV with more ads and commercial interests and product placement and sponsorship?!?

@@niallblack2794 we were not watching anything on the conventional channels at all that's why we got rid of it. The only channels we watch anything occasionally are channel 5 and 4 via catch-up services. And not the children that's the occasional programme that us adults watch and not live. Netflix/prime are the most watched along with KZfaq.

@@Andrew.gribbin Not sure you can call it "trapped" when they're watching what they choose to watch. Like my friend who likes to be there for the premiere of shows - whether its premiering on the TV or on a streaming site makes no difference. Bit of an odd choice of word imo

That’s so sad

"local" not exactly true, maybe in England but theres only one BBC Scotland and it focuses more on the cities/larger towns. In the past year all I have watched of BBC content is Dr Who. Thats not worth £14 a month, and a lot of content if not most is English biased.

I truly hope you can be compensated for the total grief these unscrupulous people have inflicted on you. Good on you for holding your letters as they are definitely evidence of harassment if you asked them multiple times to stop. A lawyer who would be willing to file a class action lawsuit would be the next best step.

I'd have put hentai porn on it and refuse to switch it off

I totally agree with you and that’s why I’m happy to pay

the BBC and unbiased, fair reporting - never the twain shall meet

@@john_dx And it's not even impartial or even professional. Its coverage of coronavirus has been a disgrace

@@john_dx The ofcom rules only state that an individual or organisation needs to be portrayed fairly, need to be given time to respond on the issue and that their comments and contributions can't be used out of context or cut unfairly so their statement is altered. It doesn't need to be impartial. Also, already the selection process of what to cover is introducing a bias and not covered by ofcom rules. Also, ITN is the production company for ITV News, C4 and C5 news, there is no editorial independence between the channels. Sky News is owned by Comcast. Stating the TV license isn't doing anything is completely disregarding the media concentration process.

It's not the BBC that does the threatening. It is the TV Licencing Agency, based in Bristol, a government quango set up to pull in the licence fee on behalf of the BBC.

@@christophernation4793 Wrong. TV Licensing is a trade name used by the BBC, presumably so that they can distance themselves from the grubby business of intimidating people. But the only body allowed to collect the fee is the BBC itself. From their own website: "'TV Licensing' is a trade mark of the BBC and is used under licence by companies contracted by the BBC to administer the collection of the television licence fee and enforcement of the television licensing system."

They even renamed it from "Gebühr" (fee) to "Beitrag" (contribution), because apparently asking for a fee is only legal if you are actually using the service it pays for, but there's no such requirement for a contribution.

Yes Germany, says it all really.

Yh the BBC provides many great services all around