@spinfryman Great to hear you worked on making this promo for the BBC! Glad that it is a memorable souvenir of all your hard work! I love it!!!! Where was it filmed?
I worked on this special promo for the Beeb just before Christmas 1985. What a joy working with all this talent, not least Alan Parker who directed it.
I don't pay for water I don't use, electricity, gas and my council tax bill is itemised with the majority of services being to my benefit. Why exactly do I have to pay for TV and radio channels I don't use because they carry no programming I want? I asked myself this question ten years ago and haven't bought a licence since and never will. For all their adverts their actual licensing division is toothless and all I have to do is shred a letter or two and tell some idiot at the door to piss off.
@Silkie341 Because they're a public service broadcaster - they offer programmes which have a benefit to the nation, alongside entertainment, which is also a benefit and human requirement.
Why do you think commercial channels don't bother with BBC4 or impartial news, or schools programming, or British-made children's television?
We all pay for public services we don't want. No programmes you want? Seeing as the range of programming is so wide on the BBC, that sounds like a slight exaggeration!
@AidanLunn what no come back on how the bbc dont give us a choice.... ive read your previous comments and you just dont get it. Before you go on about logic read some of your previous comments your arguments just dont stand up.
@rnewton182 I get it. if you don;t get my reply then that's your fault for you not understanding it.
The BBC allow you to have a choice of paying through you having the choice of whether to own a TV or not. You can watch TV via other means. And if your "choice" is about channel choice, then would you kindly explain to me why the BBC have much more than just one channel and one radio station? ;)
Right, so these goons are highly qualified people who are devoted to their career?
@rnewton182 To me, my arguments do stand up. If you'd like to point out two contradicting points from me (of which there aren't any) then I'll gladly explain why that part of my argument does stand up.
Funny how the BBC says they don't do adverts, that’s why we have to pay the horrendous license fee,
Strange thing is you've just watched one, by the BBC promoting the BBC, if that isn’t an advert, what the fuck is, BBC hope you get dissolved & fucked by European political agenda’s governing media.
its on its way, i can't wait for it to happen you bunch of brown nosed queeers.
@victormeldroo It'll do you good not to take that so literally. If you're promoting yourself then you're trailing yourself, not advertising yourself. This is a trailer.
They say the BBC isn't allowed to advertise because then it can earn money from other means.
How can the BBC earn money from the above video? It's the BBC paying the BBC - the money is not being earned at all.
@AidanLunn they shouldnt have the option of taking any money for a tv set which isnt theres in the first place channel 4 gets by on its own so bbc can do just fine without my money.
@rnewton182 Channel 4 doesn't do just fine. It receives government funding and is currently being throttled by the advertising revenue it receives.
How do you arrive at the conclusion that the BBC will do just fine without your money? If the BBC were commercialised, you'd *still* be paying for their services out of choice. You'd be paying money on the products you buy that will go towards supporting the channels that the advert for that product is shown on. Which actually costs more then the LF
NO the whole point of choice is i wouldnt BE paying for bbc channels i dont watch BBC channels so why would i be paying for their services out of choice, i want the choice to ditch their channels instead of paying for them. you dont seem to understand the concept of CHOICE.
@rnewton182 You don;t *just* pay for their services. The TVL does also go towards other costs, like transmitter maintenance - none of which are owned by the BBC.
You can ditch their channels. watch stuff using on demand services. You don't have to watch their stuff, neither do you have to pay the TV licence.
£58? My god, it's £145 or something now (25.11.10). AQ television tax so these bastards can squander on useless c#nts like Jonathon Ross, Russell Grant and Mark Lawrenson.
i think the BBC is doing an excellent job compared to our Japanese public broadcaster. Even people outside the UK, like me, depend on its news coverage and websites.
In particular, the number of correspondents and journalists around the world, or the intelligence it has concerning international affairs are the things no other broadcasters achieve.
yes, the BBC World News is run commercially, but i'm sure its professionalism and skills reflect greatly on the BBC News itself.
@newtontrickie No, its a company in association with the Government promoting the official PC propaganda.
If I came round to your house without asking and cleaned your windows, then charged you on threat of legal action, would you be happy as long as the windows were nice and clean?
@newtontrickie So many fallacies within that short sentence and such little space to address them. Yes the BBC have an agenda, to deny it can only mean you are deluded, ignorant or both..pro EU, pro immigration, pro state ownership, anti capitalism, pro IRA, pro Labour, anti Israel, ethnocentric, anti Republican, pro Obama, anti Christian, pro Islam..the list goes on and on. They promote a broadly leftist agenda. If you don't like what a private company sell, at lease u can CHOOSE not 2 buy it!
@uksclavain They are your views & the views expressed by the BBC. At least be honest about it FFS, you like the BBC because you share their philosophy. This is what really irks me about socialists who advocate state owned TV, so often they dishonestly argue that the BBC is impartial when they know damn well it is slanted to the left.
So f****** what if it says so in their charter, that means nothing.
@AidanLunn No it doesn't "resemble" to your question but it is absolutely relevant. The BBC exists because the state have decreed that private citizens must purchase a government license to own a telly. If you don't pay they take your property by force. It is therefore entirely appropriate to call the BBC state TV. Are you saying the government doesn't own the BBC because the BBC is called the BBC and not actually called the government broadcasting corporation? I don't understand your point.
@anyfekinnamewilldo No they don't take your property by force. That's just absolute bullshit of the highest order!
The BBC is not owned by the government. Research that properly, instead of relying on biased newspapers and biased blogs. it is independent of the government and thus is not owned by them in any way. The only real influence the government has over the BBC is how much the BBC can charge for the licence fee.
@AidanLunn But it's not bullshit. If you don't want to pay for the BBC but use a TV set, thugs can (and regularly do) enter your property (if a window or door is open) and take your TV. The entire institution is funded through violence or the threat of violence yet everyone at the BBC thinks their farts don't stink. Owned by the government or paid for by the government, whatever, it is British state TV. How anyone can think coercive monopolies are a good thing is beyond me.
Anyway, you can own a TV without paying the licence - the licence covers the fact if you are able to receive live transmissions or not. Hence why banks, petrol stations etc don't have to pay a licence - they use monitors, which don't have tuners, and therefore lack the ability to tune in to a live TV transmission.
I don't pay one because of the poor reception in the area I live, on both analogue and Freeview, and the fact that cable and $ky are way too much means I can't afford either of them.
@AidanLunn Imagine there was a state monopoly on dishwashers. What you're saying is akin to saying "you can own a dishwasher as long as you don't wash plates in it."
@anyfekinnamewilldo Well a monitor isn't a television if it's not capable of receiving television programmes is it?
As I say and as the licence fee documentation says on their website, if you possess a TV set that is not capable of receiving TV broadcasts, then you do not need a TV licence.
You can still watch TV programmes on a TV with no aerial connection. videos, DVDs etc.
@AidanLunn Yes you are allowed to own a TV but are not allowed to use it to receive TV broadcasts. You have defined the "law" but not justified it. You have also yet to retract your statement that the state doesn't use coercion or confiscate private property to enforce the "law". You said this was "absolute bullshit of the highest order!" Not so. Are you ignorant of how the state TV tax is collected?
@anyfekinnamewilldo I have nothing to retract seeing as that statement is 100% accurate. Please prove that I'm wrong. That's if you even have the tiniest shred of evidence from a credible source rather than bullshit newspaper and bullshit blogs and shit-spreading websites.
The TV licence is collected by a privately-owned and run company, Capita, on behalf of a privately-owned, publicly funded corporation. Public funded does not necessarily equal state-owned.
@AidanLunn Right so if you don't pay the state licence fee you can be kidnapped and put in a state prison or if you are lucky Capita sell the debt onto thugs who can enter your property and take your posessions by force. If you resist you will be kidnapped. So I'm not really wrong am I Aidan?! LOL
@anyfekinnamewilldo Capita don't sell the debt on to bailiffs or anyone else. They don't have the legal right to do so and they never have done, in spite of the bullshit source you are using as "credible" evidence.
And no, they don't kidnap you, because again, that's bullshit.
@AidanLunn The methods the debt collectors use to extract license fee money was actually detailed in a BBC documentary a few years back. Astonishingly an 18 stone guy is filmed telling a small child her mother will go to prison if she doesn't pay the fee. Likewise it showed another debt collector climbing in through an open window and he is legally allowed to do so as they have an "implied right of entry."
@anyfekinnamewilldo I'd like to know the name of this BBC documentary. I'm at the Windmill Road archive soon, I'll be able to dig it out and see if you're really telling the truth!
They're just TV licence bailiffs. Yes bailiffs are bastards, but blame that on our political system for making them legal, not the BBC.
@AidanLunn I have no reason to lie. The BBC has an agenda. Pro EU, pro immigration, pro state ownership, anti capitalism, pro IRA, pro Labour, anti Israel, ethnocentric, anti Republican, pro Obama, anti Christian, pro Islam..the list goes on and on. They promote a broadly leftist agenda and I'm FORCED to pay for it. My objection to the BBC is therefore in my mind entirely reasonable.
@anyfekinnamewilldo Oh, so that's why there are actually more Tories at the BBC per square inch than there are at Tory party conferences??? And the only reason The Guardian is so popular there, like it is in so many other media establishments, is because it is the only newspaper out there with a decent media jobs section. Seeing as 95% of all media jobs are freelance, they're likely to look for the next job while currently in work.
Leftist agenda, or just facts you don't agree with?
@AidanLunn Aidan have you completely lost the use of your critical faculties? The entire institution has a leftist bias, even Andrew Marr admits it. I suggest you read a book by Robin Aikin called "can we trust the BBC" to get a revealing insight from somebody who worked there for over 30 yrs.
@anyfekinnamewilldo Bias is subjective, so he is stating it *from his own point of view*.
Or are they just saying these things to gain popularity and get paid a quick buck "on the side" by the press?
It's just because the BBC doesn't state what they want to hear. I've been upset by the BBC quite a few times, and I'd count myself as quite left-wing. Most recently in the amount of coverage that they devoted to the wedding of those tax-leeching neo-Nazis, and because of their obituary to Osama.
@AidanLunn Of course he is stating it "from his point of view", who else's point of view would he be expressing? Some things can be objectively bias Aidan.
I have no more a problem with bias news coverage as I do bad music, so long as I am not compelled to pay for it. It's like me taking your money by force and buying Take That CD's. Don't like it? .well that's just your subjective opinion..get over it!
@anyfekinnamewilldo So why you state someone's opinion as a fact, I've no idea. I've seen plenty of left-wingers accusing it as being right-wing.
Anyway, *if* the BBC are biased in any way, then I'd suppose that they're on the left-wing of the Tory party. Remember which pro-Europe government it was which allowed us to enter the EU? ;)
@AidanLunn LOL but I didn't state someone elses opinion as fact, I said it was insightful. Yes the Tories got the UK into the EU..and? There is very little difference between the political parties anyway but I'm glad you acknowledge the BBC is pro EU!
Oh and your assertion that Robin Aitken was "just saying these things to gain popularity and get paid a quick buck on the side" is baseless. What's wrong with making a profit? Would you discredit Chomsky on the same basis I wonder?
"If" is the most powerful word in the English language!
There's nothing wrong with making a profit. Just that he is much more likely to be lying, maybe even about his own opinion, to earn money.
You were the one complaining of Britain being in the EU. I assumed you were of these Daily Hate Mail-reading nutters, who blame the Labour party for everything, seeing as they conveniently forget which party it was that entered the EU.
Priests don't earn money but tell lies all the time.
Leftists often believe anybody with opposing opinions must by default be a monsterous Daily Mail reading, unenlightened homophobe. I find Daily Mail / Guardian readers equally creepy and sinister. 2 sides of the same coin mate.
@AidanLunn But Aidan the point is the bias is reflected in the BBC's program content not just the private views of BBC staff. Yes Aitken could have left earlier..so what?
@anyfekinnamewilldo Well I don't see any bias, seeing as I've seen them attacking both Labour and tories.
There is a socially liberal bias at the BBC, but not a political one. Seeing as being socially unbiased is not a condition of the BBC's charter, they aren't breaking any rules if that rule doesn't exist.
I am pro-EU as far as trade is concerned. As far as the EU making up laws for their constituent countries, surely it's up to each individual country to decide their own laws?
@AidanLunn If u acknowledge that u can be sent to prison for non payment is it really that much of a stretch of imagination that they can seize property equivalent to the value of outstanding monies owed? It isn't complicated Aidan, you pay or you get locked up or robbed. Have you ever been in debt Aidan? You can say "bullshit" until you're blue in the face but the fact remains licence fee is extracted by force, unless you think being sent to prison is somehow voluntary.
@AidanLunn But it IS extracted by force Aidan if you don't want to watch the BBC. What exactly do you want me to prove .. that debt collectors can take property of equivalent value to monies owed? Would that somehow prove the license fee is taken by force when being sent to prison wouldn't? Does that make any sense at all?
I assume they do take property based upon the BBC documentary which said they do. Why would they lie? The fact that they can kidnap u if u don't pay the fine is actually much worse! It's far from unbelievable people don't use a BBC service but even if they do so what? If the state had a monopoly on bananas would I be a hypocrite for eating a banana whilst advocating voluntary banana production?
@anyfekinnamewilldo I didn't say that it's taken by force, because you're not forced to have a TV set. However, if you do have one, capable of receiving live TV transmissions, and you refuse to pay the licence, then you are forced to pay for it through a fine that's not the same as being forced to pay for a TV licence when you may not watch live TV broadcasts, which is what you evidently meant!
@anyfekinnamewilldo The state doesn't have a monopoly on TV - hence why the BBC is not state funded. It is publicly funded but the money doesn't go via the government! So, not state funded!
@AidanLunn Just belatedly read this comment. How can you say the BBC is independent of the state, when the state courts, laws and prisons are used to enforce the collection of and the determine the size of the TV licence fee and central government determine budgets. I really am struggling to understand the logic of your argument Aidan. Are you being honest with yourself (let alone me)?
@anyfekinnamewilldo It's independent of state control. However, the funding of the BBC is enforced by law - just as non-payment of a privately-owned item is.
If Sainsbury's start fobbing off dodgy stuff to customers, they can still be brought to account in a court of law, regardless of who or what owns them.
@AidanLunn It is fundamentally different to the way Sainsburys operates. Firstly Sainsbury don't sell shit food cos if they did people would stop elsewhere, not cos the state passes a law. If BBC produces biased news coverage what do they care?..they still get paid. The state doesn't set the price of Sainsburys food. Neither does the state decide for the shoppers what items they buy. Imagine if everyone was compelled to buy the same shopping list?! Nobody would get what they want.
@anyfekinnamewilldo Well the BBC produces such a wide range of programmes (unlike some other broadcasters) that it's impossible to denounce their whole range as "shit". They make downmarket crap like that Don't Scare the Hare thing because other licence payers may like that stuff (though they'd have to be insane!) This is what I interpret "Firstly Sainsbury don't sell shit food" as meaning. They do sell some shit food as it would be impossible to like everything they sell.
@anyfekinnamewilldo The state does have a hand in the price of Sainsbury's food, just as the license fee is negotiated between the incumbent government and the BBC. Some foods and drinks have VAT on food, only the basics (bread, milk, eggs and a few other things I've forgotten). And the state (or the EU) do have a certain hand in controlling what you can and can't buy.
For example, I've seen white Oreos in portugal, not allowed here because of certain additives in them.
@AidanLunn Crikey. The state taxes some products but food distribution is obviously privately managed and thank **** it is. If it weren't we would either have empty shelves or piles of rotting food. Do you feel safer with the nanny state mollycoddling us, telling us what we can and can't eat Aidan?
Food distribution = consumer choice + market allocation of resources (with some state interference), BBC = state run monopoly. It really isn't that complicated mate but you know that already.
@anyfekinnamewilldo Well the BBC is privately managed and part-privately funded. but the government still impose a tax on it, whether you use the services that that tax funds or not. I fail to see the difference here.
If the BBC is a state-run monopoly, why is it we have several hundred privately-run channels? If it doesn't have a monopoly on broadcasting, then what does it have a monopoly on? Nothing as far as I can see.
Not even all your TV licence goes towards the BBC . . .
@AidanLunn Fair enough the BBC is not a monopoly in the sense that it is the only broadcaster, but it is the only broadcaster which is able to pay for itself through a state enforced tax. They also have a disproportionate share of radio coverage.
If you can't or refuse to see the difference between Sainsburys (customer choice and free market allocation of resources) and the BBC (financed through taxation) then that's a shame.
@anyfekinnamewilldo Well Channel 4 receives some funding from the government, so they're paid through state enforced taxes as well. They may have a disproportionate number of national radio stations (regional stations is about the same ratio between the BBC and ILR), but compared to the many hundreds of radio stations accessible on the internet, they own nothing!
Well the BBC is optional, like Sainsbury's. Don't watch live TV on TV. Use the internet for that.
@AidanLunn Yes come to think of it channel 4 extort money from the public too.
Tell you what, I'm gonna arbitrarily impose a £2.00 tax on socks. Everyone who wear socks must pay me £2.00 or face prison. Don't like it? Your choice ..wear sandals!
@AidanLunn But my socks r brilliant, look here's an opinion polls that say so. They r the envy of the world! I cater for the young and old, rich and poor and all ethnic groups (and we never discriminate). We champion the cause of the sockless and those who are footless and discriminated against by the mainstream sock wearing population. We are proud of our socks..if u don't like us you must be a sandal wearing, fascist! But don't think about wearing anyone elses socks without paying my sock tax!
@AidanLunn WTF does "public service" actually mean?
Right so socks are not a public service broadcaster so no analogy other than another "public service broadcaster" (i.e. the BBC) will do? So no analogies are applicable!
Um..that reminds me.. may I see your sock license please Aidan?!
@anyfekinnamewilldo "Public service" means serving the public with things that are required: education, information and entertainment. I.E. most of the things that commercial stations don;t do. When was the last time you saw a commercial channel providing a channel entirely devoted to British politics?
I say that's not a very good example because it's not a very good example. That's like comparing a garden lawnmower to the Eiffel Tower.
Buy the shows you like on dvd. Watch sport down the pub with your mates. Read the news on the net. Buy cds or music files you actually like. Interact with your kids, kick a football around with them. Live aid? you think you can buy respect bbc? Fascists!
I hate the BBC, I've never liked anything they show and hate the fact I'm forced to pay them to watch other channels!! No adverts I hear? they just show adverts for their programmes, still adverts!
I stopped paying for and watching TV about a year ago. I have had visits and lots of nasty letters. As a familly, we are all now much happier and would never go back to the lies on TV.
I've learnt to enjoy the letters and visits! I never let them in, and don't respond to the letters. I haven't told them I don't have a TV — they haven't asked.
@johnson9dantheman that's because back in those days the BBC was actualy value for the money, nowerday's it's nothing but biased news, repeats and awful quality 'dramas'. They have to threaten now because there is NO WAY to justify charging £140 for the tripe they're getting away with showing.
@johnson9dantheman that's because back in those days the BBC was actualy value for the money, nowerday's it's nothing but biased news, repeats and awful quality 'dramas'. They have to threaten now because there is NO WAY to justify charging £140 for the tripe they're getting away with showing.
I had the pleasure to work on this project. We shot it over two days at Ealing studios, with Alan Parker directing, just a few days before Christmas in 1985. What a joy that was. All the staff and talent volunteered their time, because we all felt the Beeb was a very important institution and needed our support. Thanks to whomever posted this, it brings back a lot of great memories.
@uksclavain The BBC belongs to the state, not "the people." If the people are the state, then following that logic the victims of the Holocaust were actually Nazis who committed an act of mass suicide.
@uksclavain If by your own admission BBC is savaged the mistakes and dishonesty of all colours of government" then all the more reason to take it out of the hands of the state. Why do you say "your" Tory Murdoch empire? I don't like the Tories or Murdoch, so I choose not to subscribe to them.
You advocate a system where funds r extracted by force by gangsters by violence irrespective of whether or not the end user wants the service. It is u who advocates tyranny my friend not I.
@uksclavain In any case why should it be means tested? If you walk into a grocery store to buy an apple & the store owner wanted to see proof of your income in order to calculate what he should charge you..would that make any sense at all?
The TV taxes r collected through violence, intimidation & violation of private property rights. The BBC doesn't even fulfill its' own stated aim of impartiality, it is institutionally politically biased to the political left as r it's braindead votaries.
@uksclavain What are you talking about..this is white noise. You haven't addressed a single one of my objections. So it is seriously your contention that we need a centrally managed monopoly who extorts money through violence & coercion in order to appreciate the majesty of humanity? That's without doubt the most ridiculous justification for the TV tax I've ever heard in my life.
@anyfekinnamewilldo "That's without doubt the most ridiculous justification for the TV tax I've ever heard in my life."
The BBC is the envy of the world and a servant to it.
Keep it owned by the people and let the free market Murdochs etc have something to aim to - believe me there's only HBO and a few others that come close
@uksclavain You're deluded. No "the people" (whatever that means)are servants to the BBC, not the other way around.. as the TV tax is mandatory & collected by coercion. If it provides such a wonderful, unrivalled service then let people subscribe to it voluntarily?
135 pounds (US$197.68) a year... not only is that less than two months of cable here in the colonies, but there's no commercials. Why doesn't the BBC broadcast to the US?
No, I mean that the License Fee by itself is cheaper for one year of Freeview (not incl. box fee) than 2 months of cable (not incl. box rental) in the US.
Because you wouldn't lock people up for not paying their TV license, if you stop paying your cable subscription you simply get your signal switched off, if you stop paying the television license you get a fine of £1000 or a short prison sentence.
This was superbly spoofed by Spitting Image with various celebrity puppets citing some of the less exciting aspects of the BBC like repeats, dreary regional programmes and Little & Large. I'd love to see that again!
Weird, back then it was about bigging themselves up for people to pay the TV liscence. Nowadays its about scaring people with talking furniture and PC Microcips. Saying "We know where you live!"
I look forward to the day when the Bloated Brainwashing Corporation have to stand on their own two feet.
That is one THOROUGHLY BENT organisation, if you watch their 'news' it's what they DON'T say that proves their bias.
I want nothing to do with the BBC. Yet if I want to watch other channels, I'm still expected to pay for the 'national institution'.
Screw the BBC. Your time is over.
The86416 2 months ago
and you can get ALL that on ITV, CHANNEL 4 and Channel 5
So what do you get from the BBC ?
RIPPED OFF
firefly5339 3 months ago
@spinfryman Great to hear you worked on making this promo for the BBC! Glad that it is a memorable souvenir of all your hard work! I love it!!!! Where was it filmed?
fraserkatie 7 months ago
I worked on this special promo for the Beeb just before Christmas 1985. What a joy working with all this talent, not least Alan Parker who directed it.
Spinfryman 7 months ago
I don't pay for water I don't use, electricity, gas and my council tax bill is itemised with the majority of services being to my benefit. Why exactly do I have to pay for TV and radio channels I don't use because they carry no programming I want? I asked myself this question ten years ago and haven't bought a licence since and never will. For all their adverts their actual licensing division is toothless and all I have to do is shred a letter or two and tell some idiot at the door to piss off.
Silkie341 8 months ago
@Silkie341 Because they're a public service broadcaster - they offer programmes which have a benefit to the nation, alongside entertainment, which is also a benefit and human requirement.
Why do you think commercial channels don't bother with BBC4 or impartial news, or schools programming, or British-made children's television?
We all pay for public services we don't want. No programmes you want? Seeing as the range of programming is so wide on the BBC, that sounds like a slight exaggeration!
AidanLunn 6 months ago
They make excellent dramas, but they also carry f**king commercials!!!
MIKON8ERISBACK 9 months ago
(You can ditch their channels. watch stuff using on demand services. You don't have to watch their stuff, neither do you have to pay the TV licence)
you see this is where the bbc will disagree with you, with their hired goons out to get our money.
rnewton182 9 months ago
wouldnt surprse me if this AidanLunn actually worked for the bbc
rnewton182 9 months ago
@rnewton182 Hmmmm, a 20 year old working for the BBC?
I doubt it.
It's the most logical conclusion to you lot of brain-dead morons (sarcasm) - I like it therefore I must work for it.
Using your logic, I must work in Paris, seeing as I like it!
AidanLunn 9 months ago
@AidanLunn what no come back on how the bbc dont give us a choice.... ive read your previous comments and you just dont get it. Before you go on about logic read some of your previous comments your arguments just dont stand up.
rnewton182 9 months ago
@rnewton182 I get it. if you don;t get my reply then that's your fault for you not understanding it.
The BBC allow you to have a choice of paying through you having the choice of whether to own a TV or not. You can watch TV via other means. And if your "choice" is about channel choice, then would you kindly explain to me why the BBC have much more than just one channel and one radio station? ;)
Right, so these goons are highly qualified people who are devoted to their career?
AidanLunn 9 months ago
@rnewton182 To me, my arguments do stand up. If you'd like to point out two contradicting points from me (of which there aren't any) then I'll gladly explain why that part of my argument does stand up.
AidanLunn 9 months ago
This was back in a day when the bbc had real talent on its books and was worth the fee...not now, not now.
LionheartNh 10 months ago
Funny how the BBC says they don't do adverts, that’s why we have to pay the horrendous license fee,
Strange thing is you've just watched one, by the BBC promoting the BBC, if that isn’t an advert, what the fuck is, BBC hope you get dissolved & fucked by European political agenda’s governing media.
its on its way, i can't wait for it to happen you bunch of brown nosed queeers.
victormeldroo 10 months ago
@victormeldroo It'll do you good not to take that so literally. If you're promoting yourself then you're trailing yourself, not advertising yourself. This is a trailer.
They say the BBC isn't allowed to advertise because then it can earn money from other means.
How can the BBC earn money from the above video? It's the BBC paying the BBC - the money is not being earned at all.
AidanLunn 10 months ago
my god what aloud of sh*t bbc are thieves plain and simple
rnewton182 10 months ago
@rnewton182 the BBC are thieves? When you allow them the option of taking money from you by you owning a TV set?
AidanLunn 10 months ago
@AidanLunn they shouldnt have the option of taking any money for a tv set which isnt theres in the first place channel 4 gets by on its own so bbc can do just fine without my money.
rnewton182 10 months ago
@rnewton182 Channel 4 doesn't do just fine. It receives government funding and is currently being throttled by the advertising revenue it receives.
How do you arrive at the conclusion that the BBC will do just fine without your money? If the BBC were commercialised, you'd *still* be paying for their services out of choice. You'd be paying money on the products you buy that will go towards supporting the channels that the advert for that product is shown on. Which actually costs more then the LF
AidanLunn 10 months ago
NO the whole point of choice is i wouldnt BE paying for bbc channels i dont watch BBC channels so why would i be paying for their services out of choice, i want the choice to ditch their channels instead of paying for them. you dont seem to understand the concept of CHOICE.
rnewton182 9 months ago
@rnewton182 You don;t *just* pay for their services. The TVL does also go towards other costs, like transmitter maintenance - none of which are owned by the BBC.
You can ditch their channels. watch stuff using on demand services. You don't have to watch their stuff, neither do you have to pay the TV licence.
AidanLunn 9 months ago
I prefer the Spitting Image one ^^
systemhalodark 11 months ago
Fifty-eight quid, small price to be brainwashed by marxist propaganda 'news', eh.
Even the hitherto decent programmes they did are now awash with pro-BBC bullshit.
Google 'Newsround Climate Change', to see how they brainwash kids.
The86416 11 months ago
Nevermind, keep paying the fee sheep people.If you do not agree do not pay.
lukenukemable 1 year ago
that sure is a cool video
JettaJ1 1 year ago
BBC bleached blonde hair nazi domination of women isn't normal. its racial social engineering. don't pay a licence fee for racism.
BBCRacismWatch 1 year ago
£58? My god, it's £145 or something now (25.11.10). AQ television tax so these bastards can squander on useless c#nts like Jonathon Ross, Russell Grant and Mark Lawrenson.
StevieWasp 1 year ago
@StevieWasp BBC bleached blonde hair nazi domination of women isn't normal. its racial social engineering. don't pay a licence fee for racism.
BBCRacismWatch 1 year ago
Bob Geldof outta nowhere! Love it!
metaxus2 1 year ago
if they didnt spend all day talking about the tv license i would definately go to this pub
monteoner 1 year ago
i think the BBC is doing an excellent job compared to our Japanese public broadcaster. Even people outside the UK, like me, depend on its news coverage and websites.
In particular, the number of correspondents and journalists around the world, or the intelligence it has concerning international affairs are the things no other broadcasters achieve.
yes, the BBC World News is run commercially, but i'm sure its professionalism and skills reflect greatly on the BBC News itself.
newsmaniaingaidai 1 year ago
Comment removed
newtontrickie 1 year ago 3
@newtontrickie No, its a company in association with the Government promoting the official PC propaganda.
If I came round to your house without asking and cleaned your windows, then charged you on threat of legal action, would you be happy as long as the windows were nice and clean?
Lorddoucheington 1 year ago
@newtontrickie So many fallacies within that short sentence and such little space to address them. Yes the BBC have an agenda, to deny it can only mean you are deluded, ignorant or both..pro EU, pro immigration, pro state ownership, anti capitalism, pro IRA, pro Labour, anti Israel, ethnocentric, anti Republican, pro Obama, anti Christian, pro Islam..the list goes on and on. They promote a broadly leftist agenda. If you don't like what a private company sell, at lease u can CHOOSE not 2 buy it!
anyfekinnamewilldo 1 year ago
@anyfekinnamewilldo
Pro EU Yes just like you love your united states
Pro immigration Yes cause skilled and unskilled migrating workers help run capitalism :)
Pro state ownership - sometimes
Anti capitalism -Best model we have but not perfect
Pro IRA Labour History
Anti Israel - hey you suffered no doubt but you cause alot
Anti Christian pro Islam - think modern capitalist society doing away with religion and look at X Factor
Choose to think
uksclavain 1 year ago
@uksclavain So you admit it IS BIASED. I rest my case.
anyfekinnamewilldo 1 year ago
@anyfekinnamewilldo Nah they are my views
Impartiality is a pillar of the BBC - read its charter
uksclavain 1 year ago
@uksclavain They are your views & the views expressed by the BBC. At least be honest about it FFS, you like the BBC because you share their philosophy. This is what really irks me about socialists who advocate state owned TV, so often they dishonestly argue that the BBC is impartial when they know damn well it is slanted to the left.
So f****** what if it says so in their charter, that means nothing.
anyfekinnamewilldo 1 year ago
@anyfekinnamewilldo the BBC expresses my views :P I wish and want
People owned since the 1920s take a bow for 80 years of excellence
Your so wrong your almost right :/
uksclavain 1 year ago
@uksclavain Right so the BBC express your views, which are basically left wing. I appreciate your honesty ;-)
Like I said the "people" and the state are not the same thing.It is STATE owned since 1920.
anyfekinnamewilldo 1 year ago
@anyfekinnamewilldo you maybe right
I stick with the best non advert ever :p
Come on the right market lead media must love a spanner :P_
uksclavain 1 year ago
@anyfekinnamewilldo How can it be state owned if it's not owned by the government?
AidanLunn 10 months ago
@AidanLunn Taxation is not voluntary.
anyfekinnamewilldo 10 months ago
@anyfekinnamewilldo That doesn't really bear any resemblance to an answer to the question I posed, does it?
AidanLunn 10 months ago
@AidanLunn No it doesn't "resemble" to your question but it is absolutely relevant. The BBC exists because the state have decreed that private citizens must purchase a government license to own a telly. If you don't pay they take your property by force. It is therefore entirely appropriate to call the BBC state TV. Are you saying the government doesn't own the BBC because the BBC is called the BBC and not actually called the government broadcasting corporation? I don't understand your point.
anyfekinnamewilldo 10 months ago
@anyfekinnamewilldo No they don't take your property by force. That's just absolute bullshit of the highest order!
The BBC is not owned by the government. Research that properly, instead of relying on biased newspapers and biased blogs. it is independent of the government and thus is not owned by them in any way. The only real influence the government has over the BBC is how much the BBC can charge for the licence fee.
AidanLunn 10 months ago
@AidanLunn But it's not bullshit. If you don't want to pay for the BBC but use a TV set, thugs can (and regularly do) enter your property (if a window or door is open) and take your TV. The entire institution is funded through violence or the threat of violence yet everyone at the BBC thinks their farts don't stink. Owned by the government or paid for by the government, whatever, it is British state TV. How anyone can think coercive monopolies are a good thing is beyond me.
anyfekinnamewilldo 10 months ago
Anyway, you can own a TV without paying the licence - the licence covers the fact if you are able to receive live transmissions or not. Hence why banks, petrol stations etc don't have to pay a licence - they use monitors, which don't have tuners, and therefore lack the ability to tune in to a live TV transmission.
I don't pay one because of the poor reception in the area I live, on both analogue and Freeview, and the fact that cable and $ky are way too much means I can't afford either of them.
AidanLunn 10 months ago
@AidanLunn Imagine there was a state monopoly on dishwashers. What you're saying is akin to saying "you can own a dishwasher as long as you don't wash plates in it."
anyfekinnamewilldo 10 months ago
Comment removed
AidanLunn 10 months ago
@anyfekinnamewilldo Well a monitor isn't a television if it's not capable of receiving television programmes is it?
As I say and as the licence fee documentation says on their website, if you possess a TV set that is not capable of receiving TV broadcasts, then you do not need a TV licence.
You can still watch TV programmes on a TV with no aerial connection. videos, DVDs etc.
AidanLunn 10 months ago
@AidanLunn Yes you are allowed to own a TV but are not allowed to use it to receive TV broadcasts. You have defined the "law" but not justified it. You have also yet to retract your statement that the state doesn't use coercion or confiscate private property to enforce the "law". You said this was "absolute bullshit of the highest order!" Not so. Are you ignorant of how the state TV tax is collected?
anyfekinnamewilldo 10 months ago
@anyfekinnamewilldo I have nothing to retract seeing as that statement is 100% accurate. Please prove that I'm wrong. That's if you even have the tiniest shred of evidence from a credible source rather than bullshit newspaper and bullshit blogs and shit-spreading websites.
The TV licence is collected by a privately-owned and run company, Capita, on behalf of a privately-owned, publicly funded corporation. Public funded does not necessarily equal state-owned.
AidanLunn 10 months ago
@anyfekinnamewilldo No I'm not ignorant of how it's collected. But you seem to be.
AidanLunn 10 months ago
@AidanLunn Aidan, what do you think happens if you fail to pay the state TV tax? Please enlighten me!
anyfekinnamewilldo 9 months ago
@anyfekinnamewilldo You get taken to court and have to pay a fine that is maximised at £1000 but rarely gets above a tenth of that.
AidanLunn 9 months ago
@AidanLunn Right! A state run court orders that you must pay a fine. And what happens if you don't pay that fine Aidan?
anyfekinnamewilldo 9 months ago
@anyfekinnamewilldo Well, you go to prison, as everyone else knows.
You claim it takes private property away those who refuse to pay. And I quote "If you don't pay they take your property by force."
errrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrr, wrong.
AidanLunn 9 months ago
@AidanLunn Right so if you don't pay the state licence fee you can be kidnapped and put in a state prison or if you are lucky Capita sell the debt onto thugs who can enter your property and take your posessions by force. If you resist you will be kidnapped. So I'm not really wrong am I Aidan?! LOL
anyfekinnamewilldo 9 months ago
@anyfekinnamewilldo Capita don't sell the debt on to bailiffs or anyone else. They don't have the legal right to do so and they never have done, in spite of the bullshit source you are using as "credible" evidence.
And no, they don't kidnap you, because again, that's bullshit.
Please state your sources.
AidanLunn 9 months ago
@AidanLunn Are the insults really necessary Aidan?
anyfekinnamewilldo 9 months ago
@anyfekinnamewilldo No, not really, but neither are your insults, such as saying my girlfriend has a shit job.
AidanLunn 9 months ago
@AidanLunn The methods the debt collectors use to extract license fee money was actually detailed in a BBC documentary a few years back. Astonishingly an 18 stone guy is filmed telling a small child her mother will go to prison if she doesn't pay the fee. Likewise it showed another debt collector climbing in through an open window and he is legally allowed to do so as they have an "implied right of entry."
anyfekinnamewilldo 9 months ago
@anyfekinnamewilldo I'd like to know the name of this BBC documentary. I'm at the Windmill Road archive soon, I'll be able to dig it out and see if you're really telling the truth!
They're just TV licence bailiffs. Yes bailiffs are bastards, but blame that on our political system for making them legal, not the BBC.
AidanLunn 9 months ago
@AidanLunn I have no reason to lie. The BBC has an agenda. Pro EU, pro immigration, pro state ownership, anti capitalism, pro IRA, pro Labour, anti Israel, ethnocentric, anti Republican, pro Obama, anti Christian, pro Islam..the list goes on and on. They promote a broadly leftist agenda and I'm FORCED to pay for it. My objection to the BBC is therefore in my mind entirely reasonable.
anyfekinnamewilldo 9 months ago
@anyfekinnamewilldo Oh, so that's why there are actually more Tories at the BBC per square inch than there are at Tory party conferences??? And the only reason The Guardian is so popular there, like it is in so many other media establishments, is because it is the only newspaper out there with a decent media jobs section. Seeing as 95% of all media jobs are freelance, they're likely to look for the next job while currently in work.
Leftist agenda, or just facts you don't agree with?
AidanLunn 9 months ago
@AidanLunn Aidan have you completely lost the use of your critical faculties? The entire institution has a leftist bias, even Andrew Marr admits it. I suggest you read a book by Robin Aikin called "can we trust the BBC" to get a revealing insight from somebody who worked there for over 30 yrs.
anyfekinnamewilldo 9 months ago
@anyfekinnamewilldo Bias is subjective, so he is stating it *from his own point of view*.
Or are they just saying these things to gain popularity and get paid a quick buck "on the side" by the press?
It's just because the BBC doesn't state what they want to hear. I've been upset by the BBC quite a few times, and I'd count myself as quite left-wing. Most recently in the amount of coverage that they devoted to the wedding of those tax-leeching neo-Nazis, and because of their obituary to Osama.
AidanLunn 9 months ago
@AidanLunn Of course he is stating it "from his point of view", who else's point of view would he be expressing? Some things can be objectively bias Aidan.
I have no more a problem with bias news coverage as I do bad music, so long as I am not compelled to pay for it. It's like me taking your money by force and buying Take That CD's. Don't like it? .well that's just your subjective opinion..get over it!
anyfekinnamewilldo 9 months ago
@anyfekinnamewilldo So why you state someone's opinion as a fact, I've no idea. I've seen plenty of left-wingers accusing it as being right-wing.
Anyway, *if* the BBC are biased in any way, then I'd suppose that they're on the left-wing of the Tory party. Remember which pro-Europe government it was which allowed us to enter the EU? ;)
AidanLunn 9 months ago
@AidanLunn LOL but I didn't state someone elses opinion as fact, I said it was insightful. Yes the Tories got the UK into the EU..and? There is very little difference between the political parties anyway but I'm glad you acknowledge the BBC is pro EU!
Oh and your assertion that Robin Aitken was "just saying these things to gain popularity and get paid a quick buck on the side" is baseless. What's wrong with making a profit? Would you discredit Chomsky on the same basis I wonder?
anyfekinnamewilldo 9 months ago
@anyfekinnamewilldo I never said it was. I said ***IF***.
"If" is the most powerful word in the English language!
There's nothing wrong with making a profit. Just that he is much more likely to be lying, maybe even about his own opinion, to earn money.
You were the one complaining of Britain being in the EU. I assumed you were of these Daily Hate Mail-reading nutters, who blame the Labour party for everything, seeing as they conveniently forget which party it was that entered the EU.
AidanLunn 9 months ago
@AidanLunn
Priests don't earn money but tell lies all the time.
Leftists often believe anybody with opposing opinions must by default be a monsterous Daily Mail reading, unenlightened homophobe. I find Daily Mail / Guardian readers equally creepy and sinister. 2 sides of the same coin mate.
anyfekinnamewilldo 9 months ago
@anyfekinnamewilldo Oh yeah, the Guardian is just as bad as the DM. But it's not the Guardian that's anti-EU.
Priests may tell lies all the time, but they tell lies because they believe the bullshit that is in the Bible.
If Robin Aitken didn't like the private political agenda of the BBC's staff, then why didn't he just leave. he spent almost 30 years there!
As long as the bias doesn't reach my TV screen, then I couldn't care less what way BBC staff members vote.
AidanLunn 9 months ago
@AidanLunn But Aidan the point is the bias is reflected in the BBC's program content not just the private views of BBC staff. Yes Aitken could have left earlier..so what?
Are you pro EU?
anyfekinnamewilldo 9 months ago
@anyfekinnamewilldo Well I don't see any bias, seeing as I've seen them attacking both Labour and tories.
There is a socially liberal bias at the BBC, but not a political one. Seeing as being socially unbiased is not a condition of the BBC's charter, they aren't breaking any rules if that rule doesn't exist.
I am pro-EU as far as trade is concerned. As far as the EU making up laws for their constituent countries, surely it's up to each individual country to decide their own laws?
AidanLunn 9 months ago
@AidanLunn If u acknowledge that u can be sent to prison for non payment is it really that much of a stretch of imagination that they can seize property equivalent to the value of outstanding monies owed? It isn't complicated Aidan, you pay or you get locked up or robbed. Have you ever been in debt Aidan? You can say "bullshit" until you're blue in the face but the fact remains licence fee is extracted by force, unless you think being sent to prison is somehow voluntary.
anyfekinnamewilldo 9 months ago
@anyfekinnamewilldo It is not extracted by force if you are capable of receiving live TV broadcasts.
I didn't ask you to use a stretch of the imagination. I asked you to ***PROVE*** it!
AidanLunn 9 months ago
@AidanLunn But it IS extracted by force Aidan if you don't want to watch the BBC. What exactly do you want me to prove .. that debt collectors can take property of equivalent value to monies owed? Would that somehow prove the license fee is taken by force when being sent to prison wouldn't? Does that make any sense at all?
anyfekinnamewilldo 9 months ago
@anyfekinnamewilldo I want you to prove that the *licence fee collectors* take possession of personal property.
Because my girlfriend works for TV licensing and i can assure you, they do nothing of the sort!
Because of the size of the BBC, I would find it very, very unbelievable if someone doesn't use at least one BBC service a week!
And yes, the license fee is taken by force as punishment - through something called 8a fine*.
AidanLunn 9 months ago
@AidanLunn Sounds like a shit job.
I assume they do take property based upon the BBC documentary which said they do. Why would they lie? The fact that they can kidnap u if u don't pay the fine is actually much worse! It's far from unbelievable people don't use a BBC service but even if they do so what? If the state had a monopoly on bananas would I be a hypocrite for eating a banana whilst advocating voluntary banana production?
Glad you accept it is funded by force Aidan!
anyfekinnamewilldo 9 months ago
@anyfekinnamewilldo I didn't say that it's taken by force, because you're not forced to have a TV set. However, if you do have one, capable of receiving live TV transmissions, and you refuse to pay the licence, then you are forced to pay for it through a fine that's not the same as being forced to pay for a TV licence when you may not watch live TV broadcasts, which is what you evidently meant!
AidanLunn 9 months ago
@anyfekinnamewilldo The state doesn't have a monopoly on TV - hence why the BBC is not state funded. It is publicly funded but the money doesn't go via the government! So, not state funded!
AidanLunn 9 months ago
@AidanLunn Just belatedly read this comment. How can you say the BBC is independent of the state, when the state courts, laws and prisons are used to enforce the collection of and the determine the size of the TV licence fee and central government determine budgets. I really am struggling to understand the logic of your argument Aidan. Are you being honest with yourself (let alone me)?
anyfekinnamewilldo 9 months ago
@anyfekinnamewilldo It's independent of state control. However, the funding of the BBC is enforced by law - just as non-payment of a privately-owned item is.
If Sainsbury's start fobbing off dodgy stuff to customers, they can still be brought to account in a court of law, regardless of who or what owns them.
AidanLunn 9 months ago
@AidanLunn It is fundamentally different to the way Sainsburys operates. Firstly Sainsbury don't sell shit food cos if they did people would stop elsewhere, not cos the state passes a law. If BBC produces biased news coverage what do they care?..they still get paid. The state doesn't set the price of Sainsburys food. Neither does the state decide for the shoppers what items they buy. Imagine if everyone was compelled to buy the same shopping list?! Nobody would get what they want.
anyfekinnamewilldo 9 months ago
@anyfekinnamewilldo Well the BBC produces such a wide range of programmes (unlike some other broadcasters) that it's impossible to denounce their whole range as "shit". They make downmarket crap like that Don't Scare the Hare thing because other licence payers may like that stuff (though they'd have to be insane!) This is what I interpret "Firstly Sainsbury don't sell shit food" as meaning. They do sell some shit food as it would be impossible to like everything they sell.
AidanLunn 9 months ago
@anyfekinnamewilldo The state does have a hand in the price of Sainsbury's food, just as the license fee is negotiated between the incumbent government and the BBC. Some foods and drinks have VAT on food, only the basics (bread, milk, eggs and a few other things I've forgotten). And the state (or the EU) do have a certain hand in controlling what you can and can't buy.
For example, I've seen white Oreos in portugal, not allowed here because of certain additives in them.
AidanLunn 9 months ago
@AidanLunn Crikey. The state taxes some products but food distribution is obviously privately managed and thank **** it is. If it weren't we would either have empty shelves or piles of rotting food. Do you feel safer with the nanny state mollycoddling us, telling us what we can and can't eat Aidan?
Food distribution = consumer choice + market allocation of resources (with some state interference), BBC = state run monopoly. It really isn't that complicated mate but you know that already.
anyfekinnamewilldo 9 months ago
@anyfekinnamewilldo Well the BBC is privately managed and part-privately funded. but the government still impose a tax on it, whether you use the services that that tax funds or not. I fail to see the difference here.
If the BBC is a state-run monopoly, why is it we have several hundred privately-run channels? If it doesn't have a monopoly on broadcasting, then what does it have a monopoly on? Nothing as far as I can see.
Not even all your TV licence goes towards the BBC . . .
AidanLunn 9 months ago
@AidanLunn Fair enough the BBC is not a monopoly in the sense that it is the only broadcaster, but it is the only broadcaster which is able to pay for itself through a state enforced tax. They also have a disproportionate share of radio coverage.
If you can't or refuse to see the difference between Sainsburys (customer choice and free market allocation of resources) and the BBC (financed through taxation) then that's a shame.
anyfekinnamewilldo 9 months ago
@anyfekinnamewilldo Well Channel 4 receives some funding from the government, so they're paid through state enforced taxes as well. They may have a disproportionate number of national radio stations (regional stations is about the same ratio between the BBC and ILR), but compared to the many hundreds of radio stations accessible on the internet, they own nothing!
Well the BBC is optional, like Sainsbury's. Don't watch live TV on TV. Use the internet for that.
AidanLunn 9 months ago
@AidanLunn Yes come to think of it channel 4 extort money from the public too.
Tell you what, I'm gonna arbitrarily impose a £2.00 tax on socks. Everyone who wear socks must pay me £2.00 or face prison. Don't like it? Your choice ..wear sandals!
Flawless logic Aidan!
anyfekinnamewilldo 9 months ago
@anyfekinnamewilldo Well a sock is hardly a public service, is it? Hardly a good example!
AidanLunn 9 months ago
@AidanLunn But my socks r brilliant, look here's an opinion polls that say so. They r the envy of the world! I cater for the young and old, rich and poor and all ethnic groups (and we never discriminate). We champion the cause of the sockless and those who are footless and discriminated against by the mainstream sock wearing population. We are proud of our socks..if u don't like us you must be a sandal wearing, fascist! But don't think about wearing anyone elses socks without paying my sock tax!
anyfekinnamewilldo 9 months ago
@anyfekinnamewilldo well I wear socks too. But they're still not a public service broadcaster, so hardly a good example.
AidanLunn 9 months ago
@AidanLunn WTF does "public service" actually mean?
Right so socks are not a public service broadcaster so no analogy other than another "public service broadcaster" (i.e. the BBC) will do? So no analogies are applicable!
Um..that reminds me.. may I see your sock license please Aidan?!
anyfekinnamewilldo 9 months ago
@anyfekinnamewilldo "Public service" means serving the public with things that are required: education, information and entertainment. I.E. most of the things that commercial stations don;t do. When was the last time you saw a commercial channel providing a channel entirely devoted to British politics?
I say that's not a very good example because it's not a very good example. That's like comparing a garden lawnmower to the Eiffel Tower.
AidanLunn 9 months ago
@anyfekinnamewilldo Oh, that reminds me, I have to go and get some socks tomorrow.
I can send you the receipt if you want.
AidanLunn 9 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@uksclavain BBC bleached blonde hair nazi domination of women isn't normal. its racial social engineering. don't pay a licence fee for racism.
BBCRacismWatch 1 year ago
Comment removed
uksclavain 1 year ago
Buy the shows you like on dvd. Watch sport down the pub with your mates. Read the news on the net. Buy cds or music files you actually like. Interact with your kids, kick a football around with them. Live aid? you think you can buy respect bbc? Fascists!
02634288 1 year ago
I hate the BBC, I've never liked anything they show and hate the fact I'm forced to pay them to watch other channels!! No adverts I hear? they just show adverts for their programmes, still adverts!
gabrielthomas84 1 year ago
I stopped paying for and watching TV about a year ago. I have had visits and lots of nasty letters. As a familly, we are all now much happier and would never go back to the lies on TV.
Try it for a year. It is easier than you think
carzzzzzzzzzz 2 years ago
I've learnt to enjoy the letters and visits! I never let them in, and don't respond to the letters. I haven't told them I don't have a TV — they haven't asked.
richardjohn89 2 years ago
Once upon a time.. but now the BBC is outdated.
UKNightClubber 2 years ago
At least this license fee promo isn't threatening like the license fee promos you see these days....
johnson9dantheman 2 years ago 6
Comment removed
thewr0ngchild 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@johnson9dantheman that's because back in those days the BBC was actualy value for the money, nowerday's it's nothing but biased news, repeats and awful quality 'dramas'. They have to threaten now because there is NO WAY to justify charging £140 for the tripe they're getting away with showing.
thewr0ngchild 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@johnson9dantheman that's because back in those days the BBC was actualy value for the money, nowerday's it's nothing but biased news, repeats and awful quality 'dramas'. They have to threaten now because there is NO WAY to justify charging £140 for the tripe they're getting away with showing.
thewr0ngchild 1 year ago
I had the pleasure to work on this project. We shot it over two days at Ealing studios, with Alan Parker directing, just a few days before Christmas in 1985. What a joy that was. All the staff and talent volunteered their time, because we all felt the Beeb was a very important institution and needed our support. Thanks to whomever posted this, it brings back a lot of great memories.
megadoubleu 2 years ago 3
Comment removed
uksclavain 2 years ago 11
@uksclavain The BBC belongs to the state, not "the people." If the people are the state, then following that logic the victims of the Holocaust were actually Nazis who committed an act of mass suicide.
anyfekinnamewilldo 1 year ago
@anyfekinnamewilldo ???
the people own the state in a democracy! your reference to nazis is slightly offensive
uksclavain 1 year ago
@uksclavain "the people own the state in a democracy".. yeah sure they do, if you call being given the option of 2 violent alternatives choice.
If the BBC is so fantastic let people choose to subscribe to it's programmes.
anyfekinnamewilldo 1 year ago
Comment removed
uksclavain 1 year ago
@uksclavain If by your own admission BBC is savaged the mistakes and dishonesty of all colours of government" then all the more reason to take it out of the hands of the state. Why do you say "your" Tory Murdoch empire? I don't like the Tories or Murdoch, so I choose not to subscribe to them.
You advocate a system where funds r extracted by force by gangsters by violence irrespective of whether or not the end user wants the service. It is u who advocates tyranny my friend not I.
anyfekinnamewilldo 1 year ago
@uksclavain In any case why should it be means tested? If you walk into a grocery store to buy an apple & the store owner wanted to see proof of your income in order to calculate what he should charge you..would that make any sense at all?
The TV taxes r collected through violence, intimidation & violation of private property rights. The BBC doesn't even fulfill its' own stated aim of impartiality, it is institutionally politically biased to the political left as r it's braindead votaries.
anyfekinnamewilldo 1 year ago
@anyfekinnamewilldo *In any case why should it be means tested?"
sense of humour and the majesty of humanity
tax owning a tv more please and give it to artists journalists scientists teachers the people
thats the bbc i want
uksclavain 1 year ago
@uksclavain What are you talking about..this is white noise. You haven't addressed a single one of my objections. So it is seriously your contention that we need a centrally managed monopoly who extorts money through violence & coercion in order to appreciate the majesty of humanity? That's without doubt the most ridiculous justification for the TV tax I've ever heard in my life.
anyfekinnamewilldo 1 year ago
@anyfekinnamewilldo "That's without doubt the most ridiculous justification for the TV tax I've ever heard in my life."
The BBC is the envy of the world and a servant to it.
Keep it owned by the people and let the free market Murdochs etc have something to aim to - believe me there's only HBO and a few others that come close
uksclavain 1 year ago
@uksclavain You're deluded. No "the people" (whatever that means)are servants to the BBC, not the other way around.. as the TV tax is mandatory & collected by coercion. If it provides such a wonderful, unrivalled service then let people subscribe to it voluntarily?
anyfekinnamewilldo 1 year ago
Ken Campbell! What a true eccentric he was.
vanillaorchid 2 years ago
As far as add go; I think this is a fantastic add for the BBC!!!
squareeyedgran 2 years ago
Comment removed
brollytom 2 years ago
135 pounds (US$197.68) a year... not only is that less than two months of cable here in the colonies, but there's no commercials. Why doesn't the BBC broadcast to the US?
kantotv 2 years ago
no you still have to pay for cable and sky aswell as paying the bbc, even if you don't watch bbc you have to pay
measuringstick 2 years ago
No, I mean that the License Fee by itself is cheaper for one year of Freeview (not incl. box fee) than 2 months of cable (not incl. box rental) in the US.
uktvfan01 2 years ago
Because you wouldn't lock people up for not paying their TV license, if you stop paying your cable subscription you simply get your signal switched off, if you stop paying the television license you get a fine of £1000 or a short prison sentence.
TashkentFox 2 years ago
I'd easily pay $16/mo for the BBC to broadcast in the US. Not the BBC America we do get with commercials.
mintotook 2 years ago
Frank boff in his S&M mask that what they gave us in 1986, now we get Ross on £6M
nsxjl 2 years ago
This was superbly spoofed by Spitting Image with various celebrity puppets citing some of the less exciting aspects of the BBC like repeats, dreary regional programmes and Little & Large. I'd love to see that again!
cumberl4nd 3 years ago
They've given us Jonathen Fuckin Ross!
LukeChucky 3 years ago
Weird, back then it was about bigging themselves up for people to pay the TV liscence. Nowadays its about scaring people with talking furniture and PC Microcips. Saying "We know where you live!"
theidentman 3 years ago