What your TV licence money goes on..

[RogerS]

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article ... paign=1490

apologies it is from the Mail.

Just finished watching Lucan. Brilliant drama. But on ITV. Once upon a time one would have watched decent drama like this on the BBC. Once upon a time.

Too busy sending people around the world.

 

[Phil Pascoe]

Years ago I worked in a fifty bedroom hotel when Ian Botham did a John o'Groats - Lands end walk. The ITV had three rooms, the BBC forty seven.

 

[thick_mike]

"BBC sent THREE TIMES as many staff to cover Mandela death than all rival British broadcasters combined"

Beautiful use of the English language :roll: ...I'm sure that if this enmanglement of Her Majesty's English language had occurred on the beeb the Mail would have been having a go at them for that too.

 

[Phil Pascoe]

Yes... but it doesn't alter the fact.

 

[thick_mike]

True...plenty of jollies at the Beeb. They brag about it too on their Radio 5 trails...sending presenters round the world at the drop of a hat. It is a gravy train.

It's just I hate the Daily mail as much as they hate the BBC. I can't resist sticking the knife in.

 

[Phil Pascoe]

The main difference is that you don't have to buy the Mail if you choose to read something else, but you do have to pay for the BBC if you want to watch something else.

 

[thick_mike]

True, but the BBC does actually produce something positive (Sherlock, Luther, The Thick of it, endless Attenborough docs, QI, most of BBC four, Radio 4, Radio 6 Music etc.). I'd rather pay £3 a week for that than £60 a month for Sky and endless adverts, but I appreciate that many do not agree.

The Daily Mail is just a black hole of negativity and bigotry, whose main aim appears to be to terrify people so that they daren't set foot outside their front door, but again many will not agree with that either!

 

[MMUK]

Yet another reason why I sent my TV license back four years ago. And I've not missed it one bit!

 

[RogerS]

Yet another reason why I sent my TV license back four years ago. And I've not missed it one bit!

But I bet the TV Licensing SS are still hassling you to get one!

 

[MMUK]

Yet another reason why I sent my TV license back four years ago. And I've not missed it one bit!

But I bet the TV Licensing SS are still hassling you to get one!

When I was renting yes every few weeks. Once I bought though and sent them a letter revoking their right of access to my property, they've not dared hassle me :mrgreen:

 

[Rhossydd]

True...plenty of jollies at the Beeb.

Really ? How do you know that ? Any actual experience of working for the BBC ?

I despair of people giving the Daily Mail any credence at all, it's appalling.
Do they work out how much the coverage costs and seeing who is more efficient ?
Do they compare the number of people other major international broadcasters sent ?
Do they even bother to point out it's not all funded by the licence fee anyway ?

 

[Chippygeoff]

I resent paying such a high fee for a TV licence to watch what is mostly rubbish. I gave up my TV years ago and every week I would get a threatening letter saying things like, we will come to your address when you least expect us or we are monitoring your area and we are going to visit you in the next few days. I do however have about a 100 channels on my computer and now and again watch a good documentary or a good film.

 

[nanscombe]

Perhaps the BBC had a bit more work to do than ITV, Channel 4 and 5.

According to The Times, ITV and Channel 4 sent nine people to cover the event in South Africa, while Channel 5 sent four.

A BBC spokesman told MailOnline: 'Over ten days we’ve deployed around 120 journalists, technicians and support staff for this huge international story.

'We started scaling back significantly following Tuesday’s memorial service.
…
'Unlike other UK networks, we’ve been providing coverage across numerous domestic and global outlets from a number of different locations for TV, radio and online, including live broadcasts on BBC Two, rolling news on the News Channel and World News, BBC Breakfast, three daily news bulletins, coverage across a number of radio programmes and bulletins on 5live, Radio 4 and Radio 2.

'As always we sought to ensure maximum value for money.'

The BBC has defended its coverage and said Mandela's death was of 'considerable interest' to audiences in the UK and across the rest of the world.

 

[Cottonwood]

True, but the BBC does actually produce something positive (Sherlock, Luther, The Thick of it, endless Attenborough docs, QI, most of BBC four, Radio 4, Radio 6 Music etc.). I'd rather pay £3 a week for that than £60 a month for Sky and endless adverts, but I appreciate that many do not agree.

I personally find bbc output to be almost without exception to be politically partial, biased, patronising, infantilising, condescending, know it all, holier than thou, middle class, hypocritical etc etc. If you like paying "£3 a week" for your "positive" content thats fine, but I dont like being legally compelled to pay for it as well (me subsidise your viewing habits) when I have zero interest in it...
LOL you can just imagine the "outerage" if all the middle class liberal humanists of Bwitain were legally compelled to buy a copy of the daily mail every dayy......

 

[Mark-numbers]

It's 3 quid a week!

 

[Sheffield Tony]

The Mandela coverage was excessive. But news coverage often is. I don't understand why a story about the PM means someone needs to be sent to stand in Downing street to read it either.

But - I'm happy to pay my license fee. If it were not for the BBC, I would have no need for a TV.

 

[mailee]

Well I view the BBC like all the rest of the channels....rubbish! I agree when they do make a documentary or a drama they are very good quality but they are very few and far between. Instead they turn out fly on the wall documentaries, cooking programs, and any other rubbish they think they can get away with! I for one am not interested in celebrities eating worms in a jungle or watching people watching TV! There news programs are overkill and if they put all that effort into 'real' programs we could have some good entertainment. I have given up counting the amount of repeats they all show I guess they must buy a job lot of them for a knock down price and just keep putting them on until the VT is worn out! :evil:

 

[thick_mike]

True, but the BBC does actually produce something positive (Sherlock, Luther, The Thick of it, endless Attenborough docs, QI, most of BBC four, Radio 4, Radio 6 Music etc.). I'd rather pay £3 a week for that than £60 a month for Sky and endless adverts, but I appreciate that many do not agree.

I personally find bbc output to be almost without exception to be politically partial, biased, patronising, infantilising, condescending, know it all, holier than thou, middle class, hypocritical etc etc. If you like paying "£3 a week" for your "positive" content thats fine, but I dont like being legally compelled to pay for it as well (me subsidise your viewing habits) when I have zero interest in it...
LOL you can just imagine the "outerage" if all the middle class liberal humanists of Bwitain were legally compelled to buy a copy of the daily mail every dayy......

Thanks for subsidising my viewing comrade

 

[thick_mike]

I'm not a regular reader of the Daily Heil, but did they run a similar story about BBC blanket coverage when Maggie died?

 

[Phil Pascoe]

EDIT