It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

New Tax For The Internet Is Almost Here (For Those In The UK)

page: 2
3
<< 1   >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Mar, 2 2015 @ 12:39 PM
link   

originally posted by: stuthealien
sorry i am back again but they are on about the bbci player website that the bbc itself chose to make public ,they could instead turn this site into pay per view which would be a fairer buisness model to the uk public(like netflix service).

but instead they have decided on a buisness(mafia extorsion) method ,we the public can not allow this chosen method to prevail ,as this is not a fair method of conducting buisness in 2015 from a so called democratic country..


Thats a better idea, you should write to the BBC complaints division with your idea as I've already sent my complaint in.





posted on Mar, 2 2015 @ 02:48 PM
link   
I have a moral objection in that I do not wish to be forced into paaying for Televsion shows such as eastenders.

The BBC makes some worth while and informative programs but they also make strictly come dancing and that alone I feel is justifiable reasoning for refusing to pay an enforced tax.



posted on Mar, 2 2015 @ 04:23 PM
link   
Well, as the TV licence payers have directly contributed to the development of rural broadband, it's probably pay-back time.

The fact is that the BBC is good, clean, commercial-free programming. I don't even watch the TV, but listen to quality radio (R4 mainly). Having travelled extensively, I am quite happy to pay a meagre sum to keep the BBC alive, because what will happen if the BBC goes is pretty frightening!

The argument is that the TV license is running out of road, so a small charge per household is probably the next step. Taxing the internet is pulling a descriptor a bit too far as a means to alarm people, IMHO.

Regards



posted on Mar, 2 2015 @ 04:31 PM
link   
a reply to: paraphi

radio 4 is a different ball game entirely, MrsNonSpecific looked into it earlier as she is a big radio fan.

radio 2 is the most popular radio station provided by the BBC. Weekly listners around 14 million, Cost to run per year 28 million GBP.

As the BBC is not supposed to be a for profit organisation that would mean a yearly subscription of about 2 quid.

Radio 4 I imagine would be similar as they do not have to pay the likes of Chris Evans who I imagine as a multi multi millionare charges a fair whack for getting up that early in the morning.

Radio 4 extra is all repeats so should only cost a tiny ammount.

When they are looking at a tax that will raise billions they better come up with more than top gear, QI and mastermind for me to agree to coughing up any cash.



posted on Mar, 3 2015 @ 03:42 AM
link   

originally posted by: nonspecific
a reply to: paraphi
When they are looking at a tax that will raise billions they better come up with more than top gear, QI and mastermind for me to agree to coughing up any cash.


Sad thing is most people think those programmes are worth the license fee.

I've just ruined my eyes:

The BBC don't want Jeremy to go anywhere else. “He loves Top Gear so everyone is looking forward to putting pen to paper on this one.” Clarkson is thought to have earned £14 million for his work on Top Gear last year, including his salary and payments related to the show's global success.25 May 2014

Source
£14million for being a very, very poor actor on one of the worst scripted TV programmes of all time.



posted on Mar, 3 2015 @ 03:48 AM
link   
a reply to: and14263

that figure is a little distorted as most of that 14 million came from his dividend in the company he co owned that sold top gear worldwide and then selling his stake for around 4 million.

His presenter fee was 1 million for 12 episodes.

I personally think Clarkson is misunderstood as people do not seem to realise it is a persona created by exagerating some of his own traits.



posted on Mar, 3 2015 @ 04:14 AM
link   
a reply to: nonspecific
I see.

Thing is, would you exaggerate the worst of yourself on TV for £14 million.....?



posted on Mar, 3 2015 @ 04:16 AM
link   

originally posted by: and14263
a reply to: nonspecific
I see.

Thing is, would you exaggerate the worst of yourself on TV for £14 million.....?


There is little short of beastiality I would not do on national telivision for 14 million.



posted on Mar, 3 2015 @ 04:45 AM
link   
a reply to: nonspecific

Very very true.

In which case I should maybe appreciate what J Clarkson does, being the one who puts himself out there for people like me to hate. That's an honourable service and worthy of a few quid.

As a journalist he's clearly very talented. As his own personal PR machine he is incredibly sharp - even the bad publicity has garnered more fame for him.

Anyway, enough about that chump.



posted on Mar, 3 2015 @ 08:38 AM
link   
Nevermind.

Was going to coment on 'jeremy's' 14 Mil but read the other posts!

Anyways, I don't watch TV, so why should I and many others pay another fee for Internet usage when we already pay our Providers a Fee?
edit on CSTTue, 03 Mar 2015 08:40:58 -0600u3108x058x0 by TruthxIsxInxThexMist because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 4 2015 @ 05:09 AM
link   
And I just read this today on bbc website:

Apparently 'Tony Hall' said on BBC Interview that and I quote "People in this country want the BBC to thrive". Well, he didn't ask me personally or in any letters, I don't know about anyone else.

He also said:



A BBC "reduced in impact and reach" will leave Britain "diminished", the BBC's director general has warned. In a speech at New Broadcasting House in London, Tony Hall said "a sleep-walk into decay for the BBC" would mean "a UK dominated by global gatekeepers, partial news and American tastemakers".


www.bbc.co.uk...



posted on Mar, 4 2015 @ 06:03 AM
link   

originally posted by: TruthxIsxInxThexMist
Well, he didn't ask me personally or in any letters, I don't know about anyone else.


Well, he's got my support and he did not ask me. I have lived abroad and appreciate the quality of TV in the UK and how the BBC sets a standard. If you go all commercial, then standards would slip to the lowest common denominator - just like in the US.

To be honest I think most people want the BBC to stay.

Like most people, I think the BBC should sort out the pay of some of their employees, but that's not a reason to dislike the organisation.



posted on Mar, 4 2015 @ 07:57 AM
link   
a reply to: paraphi

The point I'm trying to make is:

Why should those who don't watch the BBC or any other station associated with the BBC have to pay?

If they make it a subscription service for the Internet for those who watch programmes associated with the BBC or their radio services, then that's fine but not everybody else... they shouldn't have to subsidise for something that they won't watch or use.

And we already pay a subscription for the Internet and Phone Line which I've stated several times already.




top topics



 
3
<< 1   >>

log in

join