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.

 

UK - The TV License Conspiracy

page: 5
31
<< 2  3  4    6  7  8 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Feb, 19 2011 @ 04:31 AM
link   
I watch all the BBC channels both on TV and on the internet, i listen to 5 live and the world service, so I have no problem in paying for what I think is a good service. I would rather keep BBC channels than any other tbh. If that make's me a willing player in this charade then so be it. I understand they use under hand techniques, but at least you have a way of dealing with it, as outlined by some in this thread.




posted on Feb, 19 2011 @ 05:02 AM
link   
reply to post by budski
 


I don't know why you all put up with it. This was abandoned in Australia years and years ago. Don't quote me to this but I believe it was also abandoned in New Zealand in the late 80's as well! I have at least 6 TV's in my house no license it is great!



posted on Feb, 19 2011 @ 05:04 AM
link   
I have never paid for a TV License and never will, it's just another tax to deprive people of their hard earned cash.



posted on Feb, 19 2011 @ 05:31 AM
link   
I personally hate the idea of having to pay a Tax to watch my television. Anyone feeling the same will probable find the article to be an interesting read www.critical-reaction.co.uk...



posted on Feb, 19 2011 @ 05:32 AM
link   
It's not illegal to own a unlicensed telly. The cops can not say “excuse me sir are you carrying any firearms, knives, pot or perhaps sir is in possession of a television”. Therefore, I suggest as long as us happy band of brothers don't get tricked into admitting actually watching our tellys, they can't touch us



posted on Feb, 19 2011 @ 06:00 AM
link   
The harrassment tactics are offensive. My brother has never owned a tv and what he went through was hilarious.

What I really really take offence at is peole like Johnathan Ross receiving £18 million quid paid for by my hard earned cash. I'm certain Rossie would have worked for a fraction of that amount of money.

During the mp's expenses scandal - who were once again playing with our hard earned money - the BBC were so careful in their reporting of it. They knew that they were using and abusing our cash in ways that made the polititians look like mere amatuers. People in glass houses and all that...

I had a friend who worked in independent TV who told me that if a job took three people in his sector - within the BBC family they would emply 20 to do the same work. Playing with other peoples' money - ye canny whack it!



posted on Feb, 19 2011 @ 06:01 AM
link   
I believe the TV detector vans are an urban myth.

However the ability to do it is not mythical. Its fact.

With the right equipment you can do a lot more than figure out if a screen is present.

en.wikipedia.org...

en.wikipedia.org...



posted on Feb, 19 2011 @ 06:01 AM
link   
reply to post by crowkey
 



Actually I think you'll find yourself in front of a criminal court for non-payment of tv license. It is a crime.



posted on Feb, 19 2011 @ 06:04 AM
link   
It's not so much the fact that you are supposed to have a licence imo - it's the bullying tactics.
By the way they have no right of entry without a warrant and you can refuse to even speak to them. Also when buying a new TV and they ask for your address - guess where that information goes!
Oh and the correct spelling in the UK is LICENCE not LICENSE (we don't have to borrow everything from the Americans)



posted on Feb, 19 2011 @ 06:16 AM
link   
I never watch programs live as they are aired, i work away all week so record things using sky+ - does that mean I don't need a license?

much love, stu

heres a story from last year... daily mail story
edit on 19-2-2011 by discostu123 because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 19 2011 @ 06:33 AM
link   

Originally posted by stumason
reply to post by Dagar
 



The license fee doesn't just pay for BBC programming, but also transmission of all terrestrial TV channels. So even if you watch ITV only (God knows why...) they are transmitted via BBC run facilities.The BBC is also largely leading the way in the digitisation of UK TV broadcasts and that needs paying for. It is a fallacy that paying the license fee is merely so the BBC can make more Eastenders or Top Gear.

All that "infrastructure and equipment it's amassed over the years" is what enables Freeview Digital and analogue broadcasts possible at all. ITV or any of the other independant channels simply cannot afford to do this themselves. Even Sky (BSkyB) could not afford to do it. The total profit for BSkyB in 2009/2010 is less than what the BBC spent on transmission of all non-sattelite/cable channels.

reply to post by rogertom
 


The license fee isn't for watching the BBC, so you don't have a leg to stand on. Watch TV? Pay the license.

EDIT: Not a BBC fan as such, just someone who actually understands what the BBC does and what the license fee is for.
edit on 18/2/11 by stumason because: (no reason given)


I don't think that's entirely accurate. I know all companies have and pay for their own frequencies, for example BBC/ITV/C4/SKY etc all pay for their own allocated frequencies from ofcom which covers everything from basic walkie talkies on site to tv and radio channels. There is an allocated band for outside broadcasts but each frequency is allocated and paid for by each companies, wireless mics are generally all used on licence free bands.

Transmitters are located on hilltops where you'll find each town gets it's signals from one transmitter for all stations, but they are each responsible for their own costs. BBC does not in any way support the other TV companies, sure, they have been around a while and have more equipment, so they may rent and lease a lot of equipment to people, but they aren't being nice and it comes at a profitable cost.

The landline system in the UK is different, and all other phone companies depend on BT for most hardline services, but this isn't how I understand it to work with TV stations at all.



posted on Feb, 19 2011 @ 06:51 AM
link   
The main issue I have with the TV licensing system is that this is meant to be the BBC's source of revenue to provide their services, so they do not have to use advertising.

Yet their shows are full of product placements, there are regular shows and news articles promoting particular brands and products. The sell programmes to other channels, they sell DVD's and magazines. It makes me sick they are allowed to do this and get away with it.

Screw the BBC, play the system. You do not have to buy a license, you can watch iPlayer without one, providing you do not watch the shows live. Theres also services like YouTube, or Blinkbox (which is saturated with ads and not really worth it) if you are desperate for TV.

It really is a shame there is corruption in the BBC because they do offer a few good programmes, albeit it hidden amongst a pile of steaming crap.
edit on 19-2-2011 by Firefly_ because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 19 2011 @ 07:00 AM
link   
I think initially the license fee was needed and helped to build and establish a great infrastructure and service.
But I have to say I don't agree with it any more.
Don't watch too much tv anyway but I only really watch football and rugby on the bbc and a few documentaries and so on.

Why not have adverts like every other channel in the country?


I think the BBC/gov get roughly £8m a DAY!!! from this fee....


Also liked this that I just read.


There are plenty of proven alternatives to the licence fee; subscription, advertising, underwriting, sponsorship, public access, membership or combination of any of the above. We are not against public broadcasting - though not financed by threatening criminal sanctions. What we oppose is financing one particular provider of broadcasting services with a poll tax levied even on those who cannot afford the services on offer, and in many cases cannot even receive them. On this site you will learn what the BBC and the government do not want you to know about the BBC, its governance and the narrowing of debate that occurs under its massive, centrally-controlled news bureaucracy.




I think the licensing fee is outdated and totally unfair.


edit on 19/2/11 by blupblup because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 19 2011 @ 07:21 AM
link   
Only a small amount of the license fee is awarded to the BBC, the rest is held by the government.

It is technically a tax albeit one of stealth.



posted on Feb, 19 2011 @ 07:55 AM
link   
One of my friends never pays his license. He works as a truck driver on the continent. He told them that he is only in the county for less than 6wks of the year and by their rules then he does not need to pay the license. Of course he is here more often than that. `6 weeks` . But it works alright for him. He doesnt get hasseled or visits from them.



posted on Feb, 19 2011 @ 09:12 AM
link   
reply to post by budski
 


Interesting, thanks for posting that. I take issue with the "BBC makes quality programming" line because they're nothing but a biased, overblown network whose only show worth watching is QI but still, nice to know the truth about those warnings



posted on Feb, 19 2011 @ 09:16 AM
link   

Originally posted by lifttheveil
I don't think that's entirely accurate.


Well no, it was a gross over simplification for the sake of easy reading. I shall explain..


Originally posted by lifttheveil
I know all companies have and pay for their own frequencies, for example BBC/ITV/C4/SKY etc all pay for their own allocated frequencies from ofcom which covers everything from basic walkie talkies on site to tv and radio channels. There is an allocated band for outside broadcasts but each frequency is allocated and paid for by each companies, wireless mics are generally all used on licence free bands.


I know, but that has nothing to do with the actual transmitting of those frequencies. I work in Telecoms and actually work for the company that, with partners, provides the BBC transmission network. You will find that terrestrial broadcasts are from BBC owned transmitting stations like Crystal Palace, or from former ITA (Independant Television Authority) sites which are now owned by Arqiva (a descendant of the ITA)


Originally posted by lifttheveil
Transmitters are located on hilltops where you'll find each town gets it's signals from one transmitter for all stations, but they are each responsible for their own costs. BBC does not in any way support the other TV companies, sure, they have been around a while and have more equipment, so they may rent and lease a lot of equipment to people, but they aren't being nice and it comes at a profitable cost.


Of course not and likewise for Arqiva. But it remains that ITV, Channel 5 etc simply cannot afford to run their own transmission networks, so lease everything out to either the BBC or Arqiva. Like I said before, the annual profit of BSkyB is significantly less than the money the BBC spends on transmission services, which is around £310 million a year. The channels themselves, however, pay only a fraction of that to be broadcast. You can launch a channel for as little as £50k, I am told.


Originally posted by lifttheveil
The landline system in the UK is different, and all other phone companies depend on BT for most hardline services,


No, they don't. Some telecoms companies (proper ones, not the tinpot leased line ones like TalkTalk or Sky) rely on BT merely for the "last mile", but have signifcant networks of their own in the UK. Companies like Virgin can even complete the last mile themselves in their former franchise regions.


Originally posted by lifttheveil
but this isn't how I understand it to work with TV stations at all.


I hope I have made my post clearer... I just didnt want to bore people with technicalities.



posted on Feb, 19 2011 @ 09:20 AM
link   

Originally posted by Beyond Creation
Only a small amount of the license fee is awarded to the BBC, the rest is held by the government.

It is technically a tax albeit one of stealth.



No, all of it goes to the BBC Trust. The Government then tops it off with the fees for those who get them free.



posted on Feb, 19 2011 @ 10:07 AM
link   
I refuse POINT BLANK to purchase a tv lisence.

I get the warning letters through my door on average once a month, and have NEVER had an "inspector" at my door yet.

the thing that grates my nerves is this...EVERY other channel gets funding from adverts so why cant the bbc? i mean if u think ..say theres is 50 million households in the uk, and the get just under 150 quid a year off every houshold well were talking a LOT of money..and fo what? eastenders? cash in the attic? songs of praise?? and how many repeats?!

and your right i mean how can the bbc fine people £1000 for not buying a lisence? i dont watch bbc..therefor i refuse to even entertain them.

if you have NEVER bought a liscence then u cant get caught...the first time u purchase a liscence u are then on the database and u will get caught if u dont purchase one annually.

so we have to buy the tv...buy the digi-box to get some decent channels other than just 5 poxy channels, then maybe sky or virgin media...and on top of that a license for the privelage of watching some crappy channels??

DONT THINK SO! we in the uk get taxed out the a$$ as it is never mind funding a channel that quite frankly is crap!

and to be forced to buy a tv license just cuz u have a laptop is utterly disgusting!
as far as im concerned they can run up my hump!!



posted on Feb, 19 2011 @ 10:08 AM
link   
reply to post by budski
 


Why I am responding to this thread (S&F)

1) I've been arguing with theses bastards for years

2) I refuse point blank to pay the TV Tax and haven't for perhaps 15 years they can go monkey themselves

3) They are now (I'm convinced) making subtle moves toward applying the license (Lie- sense ) to internet connection and computer equipment.

4) I was recently embroiled in a huge row with Tesco over this isssue. I had bought a scart lead from Tesco and was told I had to fill out my details to make the purchase for TV Licensing as a scart lead is considered "television Receiving Equipment" needless to say I went bonkers and told them to shove it at first but need the scart lead.

I fill out the form with Mickey Mouse and his address argued the point with Tesco staff that I have every right to choose a name at will and that was the end of the matter.

Then got a letter from TV Licensing telling me I needed a License, Tesco bastards had given them mys details from my Clubcard, needless to say a long battle ensued between Tesco and myself the upshot being Clubcard info is shared by Tesco.

Beware of the BBC Iplayer if you use it and download a program as apposed to viewing in pop out your info is being stored in order to make a case in the future for Licensing computer equipment.

Very informative website here -www.bushywood.com...



new topics

top topics



 
31
<< 2  3  4    6  7  8 >>

log in

join