The Post Office Horizon Enquiry
News0 min ago
Is The End Of This Quasi Poll Tax In Sight?
24 Answers
Lets hope so.
A tax payer funded organisation should be totally impartial, and that applies both ways left and right. It really shouldn't be difficult, just report facts and dont opine anything.
But even so this method of funding is so wrong in this day and age.
https:/
A tax payer funded organisation should be totally impartial, and that applies both ways left and right. It really shouldn't be difficult, just report facts and dont opine anything.
But even so this method of funding is so wrong in this day and age.
https:/
Answers
Best Answer
No best answer has yet been selected by youngmafbog. Once a best answer has been selected, it will be shown here.
For more on marking an answer as the "Best Answer", please visit our FAQ.
Tricky one.
I heard an MP get up at PMQ the other day (after most of the Partygate fuss had died down) urging the PM to support some sort of Bill he was sponsoring about BBC funding and claiming that there is "no place for a state broadcasrer in this day and age"
It infuriares me when the BBC is called a "state broadcaster" (often curiously by the same people who brand it anti-British, which seems a bit of a contradiction.
Plainly the licence system needs reform, but I don't see how a public sevice broadcaster can be subscription funded - which was one option touted.
Didn't we have similar calls for a "public debate" on this several years ago?
What happened to that?
I heard an MP get up at PMQ the other day (after most of the Partygate fuss had died down) urging the PM to support some sort of Bill he was sponsoring about BBC funding and claiming that there is "no place for a state broadcasrer in this day and age"
It infuriares me when the BBC is called a "state broadcaster" (often curiously by the same people who brand it anti-British, which seems a bit of a contradiction.
Plainly the licence system needs reform, but I don't see how a public sevice broadcaster can be subscription funded - which was one option touted.
Didn't we have similar calls for a "public debate" on this several years ago?
What happened to that?
Careful what you wish for. Have you ever seen US channels? It is no coincidence that streaming by Netflix and Amazon started in the US, it is they only way they can see any decent telly, by paying for it.
That is not to say the current funding model is ideal. It is out of date for the digital streaming era. They should put everything on a pay to view BBC channel first. After 12 months it goes on the free BBC channels. They should scrap S4C which is currently license fee funded.
That is not to say the current funding model is ideal. It is out of date for the digital streaming era. They should put everything on a pay to view BBC channel first. After 12 months it goes on the free BBC channels. They should scrap S4C which is currently license fee funded.
The BBC already earns £millions from its commercial activities.
It should be run commercially properly not as a PBS. It should not be obligated to make minority interest programmes such as religious and polices. It should be set free to make the programmes it wants, to sell them on subscription here and with commercial partners oversees.
If the Government want a channel full of politicians talking *** it should set up its own channel and not expect the licence fee payer to fund them.
It should be run commercially properly not as a PBS. It should not be obligated to make minority interest programmes such as religious and polices. It should be set free to make the programmes it wants, to sell them on subscription here and with commercial partners oversees.
If the Government want a channel full of politicians talking *** it should set up its own channel and not expect the licence fee payer to fund them.
That of course is how the BBC is funded abroad which is unfortunately why BBC World is not available here.
I’d have no objection to some commercial funding at home but the minority interests so called must be catered for.
Channel 4 manages along those lines.
I agree with your “worrying” comment.
And I have to confidence whatever in Dorries. Foxes and henhouses spring to mind
I’d have no objection to some commercial funding at home but the minority interests so called must be catered for.
Channel 4 manages along those lines.
I agree with your “worrying” comment.
And I have to confidence whatever in Dorries. Foxes and henhouses spring to mind
" It really shouldn't be difficult, just report facts and dont opine anything. "
Surely not. As long as news and opinion are separated, something which alas doesn't happen with GB News fo the most part.
I can't think of any news presenter on the BBC who is overtly or even covertly political, whereas GB News, for example, has a plethora of presenters who are all too keen to let us know what they think. I personally find that irritating, whether from the left or right.
Still GB News wasn't set up for my benefit I realise.
Surely not. As long as news and opinion are separated, something which alas doesn't happen with GB News fo the most part.
I can't think of any news presenter on the BBC who is overtly or even covertly political, whereas GB News, for example, has a plethora of presenters who are all too keen to let us know what they think. I personally find that irritating, whether from the left or right.
Still GB News wasn't set up for my benefit I realise.
Related Questions
Sorry, we can't find any related questions. Try using the search bar at the top of the page to search for some keywords, or choose a topic and submit your own question.