Il canone della BBC ha un “scarso rapporto qualità-prezzo”, dicono i telespettatori in un nuovo sondaggio
BBC licence fee is ‘poor value for money’, viewers say in new poll
di endofdays2022
Il canone della BBC ha un “scarso rapporto qualità-prezzo”, dicono i telespettatori in un nuovo sondaggio
BBC licence fee is ‘poor value for money’, viewers say in new poll
di endofdays2022
34 commenti
It pays for: BBC 1, 2, 3, 4, CBBC, CBeebies, BBC News and BBC Parliament TV channels.
Radio 1 to 6 plus something like 40 local radio stations.
BBC iPlayer, Sounds, News, Sport, Weather and Bitesize websites.
Not the worst value for money.
Agreed, we watch so few BBC programmes now, we have had to turn to Sky (we’re on Virgin TV) for a lot of content now. BBC offerings seem to be so cheap/rubbish now
in other news bears defecate in woodland environments
They try to appeal to so many they appeal to very few with everything
I maybe see 2-3 things a year on bbc iPlayer be it a series or a single show and that’s pushing it
No radio ..
Maybe have it on at Christmas?
That’s about it
Tbh when you compare it to licence fees in other countries its genuinely insane value for money, hell just BBC News *alone* costs £68 pounds a year in America.
It’s not just the beeb, most traditional media is overpriced and poor quality. In fact they’re one of the better ones, just not interesting in the slightest to me.
Why should I have to pay a fee to watch TV that is so old, may parents would have paid the fee. Why do I have to fund a millionaire’s (Sir Alan Sugar) interview process so that he can maker more money.
Why am I forced to pay for Z list “celebrities” to dance and then form innapropiate relationships with others in the show.
Why do I have to pay an organisation, on pain of prosecution to employ people that may or may not be sexual predators?
I’d rather watch/listen to advertising.
> The BBC acknowledged the current licence fee model required “radical reform to secure a funding model that is universal, fair, sustainable, and future-proof”.
“Universal” seems a significant word there. They seem to have a general desire to “fix” the issue of people not buying their service by making people pay for it even if they don’t want it.
There is no obligation to have a TV license if you don’t watch live broadcasted content.
However, imagine if Apple or Netflix sent threatening letters letting you know you better not be watching their stuff, and people around your house to check just to make sure, and periodically they want you to contact them to let them know you’re still not watching their stuff.
That’s what happens if you don’t have a TV license the BBC regulate.
It pays for lots of stuff, you get shitloads actually. It’s just not all of it is stuff people will watch/listen to and I can understand not wanting to pay for the stuff you don’t engage with.
Personally I think without such a subsidy those things may well die out. May sound weird, but while I’ve never given a fuck about documentaries about….I dunno…..lawnmowers, I’m glad the people that do have it. Never know, one day I will be older, more boring and more willing to learn about lawnmowers I dunno. I’m very staunchly anti giving it to some fuck to be run for profit. That has historically never gone well.
I am surprised anyone actually watches TV these days
I dunno I feel I get value for my money from the radio content alone. I feel paying the licence fee is fine and I just think a lot of British people at times just want something for nothing. Adverts will invade all of our content.
It’s insanely expensive for most people and all the claims of “look at all it pays for” don’t change that given most people do not use all of it. Those who use none of it feel especially annoyed by the situation.
It should be a subscription service and ideally with multiple tiers so people can actually get something close to what they pay for specifically.
I don’t care what it costs or what they make, a license to watch ‘live TV’ is no longer even slightly justifiable.
The BBC can find its worth by switching to a subscription model.
I wouldn’t mind at all if educational, news and children’s TV were funded via taxes.
It provides British-made television and educational resources for British children. I’m not sure how you can quantify the value of that compared with the alternative: American shows, short-form video, and YouTube.
” Our poll asked 100 Reform voters in Wetherspoons in Billericay: ‘Do you agree that the woke BBC represents poor value for money?’ “
Still wish they would let you throw £5/m at them to use iPlayer without the screaming letters being sent.
It’s such an antiquated way of funding a content creator / distributor.
Maybe someone could answer this. Why hasn’t the BBC gone to a paywall model already? I get there are still non tech savvy people, but surely it would be more beneficial to lock out non license payers with user logins? Would save them the cost of the license goons too.
What you don’t enjoy paying for your state brainwashing channel? Keep a 6ft distance, safe and effective, flatten the curve, smash the gangs..
If I had to drop either BBC and all its services, Sky, Netflix, Prime, Disney, Apple or Paramount, BBC would be last on my list to drop on a value for money basis.
The BBC needs to survive and survive strongly to combat the likes of the Mail, DT, Express, GBN and whilst imperfect, is and has been the best global news source for 100 years. Without the BBC our culture would have been significantly impoverished, and we wouldn’t have had Attenborough.
Less than £15 a month, TV, news, weather app, radio, some great documentaries, podcasts, audio series, a range of old and new films, I think it’s better value than most. No adverts, no paying to get rid of adverts! Oh, and edit to add all the educational and children’s content too!
Bonus that they’re not one of these massive US firms that seem to run on spending and debt, or Sky and Co who seem to have a “we can charge what we want, you’ll pay” service for sports on TV, because the consumer is bent over a barrel on that front, and they can outbid the BBC for pretty much everything!
The BBC could shed an awful lot of dead weight by cutting a lot of the editorial / comment stuff. The state broadcaster should be giving me facts, not the opinions of its ‘editorial team’.
It does loads of stuff really well and we absolutely must save the world service (fund it with the FCDO budget) and the documentaries and cultural stuff it does so well. Conversely, I and the wider public can live without Laura Kuensburg and her band of idiots. Question time, Sunday Politics, and beyond – they’re incompetent and they’re harming public trust.
The TV license does pay for a lot of channels and radio stations but the quality of shows on them has dropped dramatically
I can’t remember the last time the bbc had a show I had to watch….. Line of Duty maybe. So 2020
BBC 2 was renowned for finding amazing comfy shows, now we get Miranda and Mrs Brown boys.
People don’t realize how much this stuff costs. Watch the weather forecast 3 times a year?The license fee is paid off.
I happily consume BBC News, BBC Radio 2, Radio 4 and most of their high quality podcast documentaries.
It’s cheaper than Netflix, Disney, Apple TV and whatever else. And there’s no ads. I don’t know what these people want anymore.
Yep I agree licence fee is extortionate for not great programmes and terrible news reporting. Make it a reasonable price for the quality we get
I wonder whether people would complain about the BBC as much if it were funded directly through taxation rather than the licence fee. Obviously there are some people who think it shouldn’t exist at all (or are morally opposed to the idea of being taxed for things) but it largely seems to be the heavy-handed tactics of TV Licensing that people object to.
And I do laugh whenever I see people grousing about how they shouldn’t have to pay the licence fee because they never use BBC products… in the comment section of a BBC News article.
As far as being a news service, it is poor value. It used to be amazing but now it’s an embarrassment. People think everyone in other countries worships it, but nothing could be further from the truth. When I travel abroad, hardly anyone mentions it these days and when they do, it’s mostly along the lines of ‘what happened to the BBC?’
CBeebies, Radio 6, ad free football coverage is worth it for me alone, never mind the rest of the TV offering which I’ve always considered good value.
BBC shows are all eye-rolling nonsense nowadays.
And the news is just the same shit, different day, I can see the news for free. Why should I pay just to get shit depressing news?
I’m willing to bet without clicking the article that this isn’t actually a poll of BBC “viewers”, rather a poll of the general public. The licence fee represents great value for money, you have to actually engage with the platform(s) to see the value. The argument of “The licence fee isn’t good value, because I only watch Netflix” doesn’t really apply here.
The terrestrial channels with catch-up are better value than prime, netflix, etc. I watch more of BBC and Ch4 that way than I do subscription streaming services.