Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

TV detector vans once prowled the streets of England

hackaday.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

271–280 of 562 posts

Re: TV detector vans once prowled the streets of England

#271

Post by tannhaeuser »

jonathanstrange wrote: post #216
haspok wrote: post #91

Earlier quoted context omitted.

At least in the UK there is content on TV worthy of watching (I got addicted to snooker while there, also some quite interesting shows like "Benefits Britain: Life on the Dole"), also, when I moved overseas they paid back the licence fee for the remaining part of the year, no questions asked. Now I'm in Austria and the "content" on TV channels is just ridiculous. Targeted at 70+ pensioners, but why should I pay for t…

BBC is awesome, their news is very good and they produce some of the best series in the world. It's a shame that they have split up BBC UK and BBC International so strictly and do everything they can to lock all BBC UK offerings to citizens of the UK. It infuriates me that I'm redirected from bbc.co.uk to bbc.com and are being displayed something else than people in the UK. If I go to bbc.co.uk, I do that to find out…

Re BBC nature documentaries

That's interesting what you have to say about international vs domestic documentaries. Could you give an example of either group?

I mean, I appreciate the BBC documentaries that I've seen for their high production quality and photography, innovative CGI and all, and I think they inspired and pushed the limits and budgets for TV documentaries worldwide. But personally, I prefer old-school quiet and scientific documentaries having extended interviews with leading scientist of a field and generally are about a scientific discourse rather than CGI-heavy interpretations of historic, cosmic, or paleo events; you know the kind where dinosaurs look up to an approaching meteorite in sorrow, or idk Alexander the Great is portrayed as a vulgar commander yelling at his men, with lots of made-up ethno kitsch and sensationalist commentary. But perhaps these latter ones are exactly the kind you're not so appreciative of.

Re: TV detector vans once prowled the streets of England

#272

Post by Yaggo »

doikor wrote: post #154
lqet wrote: post #38

> The United Kingdom is somewhat unique in the world for requiring those households which view broadcast television to purchase a licence for the privilege. I know at least three countries (Germany, Austria and Switzerland) which do the same (edit: according the Wikipedia [0], such a fee exists in basically every European country, Japan, Israel, South Korea and Namibia). In Germany, the situation changed a few years…

Here in Finland they just moved the payment into taxes in 2013. Basically 2.5% starting from income after 14000€ and maxes out at 163€ collected. https://www.vero.fi/en/About-us/newsroom/visual_aids_for_pre...

IMO, YLE actually publishes pretty good content, watchable via streaming. Commercial channels are mostly full of shit. 163 €/year makes ~14 €/month, a fair price, if you accept that public broadcaster is a tolerable compromise.

Re: TV detector vans once prowled the streets of England

#273

Post by mattlutze »

ChuckNorris89 wrote: post #183
stkdump wrote: post #177

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How does the state exert power over the broadcasters if their income doesn't come from the government? Edit: When I say 'how' I don't mean 'why', I mean 'by what means'.

Because the government is the one who gave them the authority to levy the fees from you and the people running the public broadcasters are all directly or indirectly politically connected to the major parties. Which other independent private business can just straight up charge you without you signing up for their service beforehand? In Germany and I guess, in most countries, the public broadcasters are basically low…

The public broadcasters in Germany aren't propaganda arms of the government and are generally respected across political affiliation, except perhaps by the sort of folks that think AfD has the right approach. They may exhibit some editorial lean (https://www.dw.com/en/a-dual-broadcasting-system/a-435426), but from everything I've seen not even to the level that folks in the US complain about CNBC or Fox News.

Germany, in fact, comes in with one of the highest press freedom scores from Reporters without Borders:

https://rsf.org/en/germany , https://mediabiasfactcheck.com/germany-media-profile/

National public Radio and the Public Broadcast Company in the US, in further illustration, hasn't been Donald Trump's megaphone.

Just generally, independent journalism is important and can be subverted whether the sources are public or private. Open pluralistic oversight is most important to maintaining balance and Germany seems to get it right, while also making sure the media can be accessible to any resident.

Seems a not-awful approach to trying to ensure a more-educated population, which is also good for a democracy.

Re: TV detector vans once prowled the streets of England

#274

Post by UK-Al05 »

LatteLazy wrote: post #66
CodeGlitch wrote: post #54

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Thanks for your response - feel free to rant. I agree with what you said, but given there's only so many hours in the day, and I only watch TV to "switch my brain off", I didn't feel it worth the cost given that Netflix et al fills that hole just fine- for far less. To get my science / nature / news I turn to podcasts.

Thanks for YOUR response! Sorry if mine was too confrontational. I definately know what you mean. I've spent more time vegitating in front of Brooklyn Nine-nine than watching enriching educational material myself. May I recommend 2 BBC podcasts for science etc as our ships pass in the night? The life scientific 40 to 60min interviews with scientists about what they do, how they did it, why they ended up in the field.…

There's tons science courses, maths courses and stats courses on the internet where you learn these things in depth. Most documentaries are often 'pop' takes at things.

Re: TV detector vans once prowled the streets of England

#275

Post by entropyie »

agent008t wrote: post #239
entropyie wrote: post #187

Earlier quoted context omitted.

As an Irish person, I firmly believe this. While our our public broadcaster, RTE, is far from perfect (and sometimes mediocre), they are financed / run at arms length from government. They often run exposés on government mess ups and criticise their actions. On a more practical level, who else is going to make quality non sensationalist content specific to Ireland? One of the downsides of being a small native English…

TG4 is class! Problem is, BBC (and to a lesser extent RTE) are not these unbiased services simply presenting facts. Their staff have certain views on political issues and they present stories in a way that is biased to those views. They effectively tell their viewers the range of acceptable opinions they are supposed to have. A lot of their entertainment shows are junk too and I do not see why they should be funded t…

I take your point 100%. I also love TG4's style of programming, but the problem with your approach is that you will be accused of "elitism" and being "out of touch with ordinary people" . I agree that a lot of the content on RTE and even BBC is a bit gimmicky or even trashy, but it is a difficult balancing act. Economy of scale is a huge issue for Ireland. We could never hope to cover even what the BBC does. I feel the answer ia more funding, not less. As for news bias, I agree that it is somewhat biased, but it is at least a common starting point for a discussion, as everyone sees the same message at least. The bias is more nieve, being towards centre left "good Irish morals" than some sinister government plot...

Re: TV detector vans once prowled the streets of England

#276

Post by hef19898 »

ChuckNorris89 wrote: post #221
xorcist wrote: post #207

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's not just any private business. Compare with social insurance fees that must also be paid, it is not something you can opt out of while being part of the society. The fact that it is not a state owned organization is a feature, not a bug. In Germany specifically it is not a revolving door between public broadcasting and politics, and there is clearly journalistic pride in taking down corrupt politicians, so while…

You're contradicting yourself. You say it's good that the TV tax is levied by the government like social insurance fees but instead of it going directly to the government like social insurance fees, it goes to an "independent" organization and that's the "feature"? LOL, what?! Do you really think that money is no strings attached? Ideally it would be and I guess that's the idea on paper but in practice, the public br…

That money has no strings attached, unless the amunt is about to be changed. An changes to the fee have to be agreed upon by both chambers, Bundestag and Bundesrat. The Bundesat, representing the individual states, means state parliaments have to agree first. That's the reason why the last fee increase fell through after one state feared backlash from the AfD leaning members of the CDU (Merkals party) and voted against it.

Once the fee is agreed upon, it cannot be changed either way with out every parliamnt agreeing to do so. The money cannot be held back by te "government" (we have coalitions, and those change regularly every 10 years or so). Neither can it be held back for state broadcasters (third programms) by the local governments or parliaments. Sounds pretty tempering free to me.

And the debate did happen in 2015, or didn't you see the same panel discussions I saw? It also happened in print and the public broacasters reported aboutthat debate in their news segments. The nature of these news segments being to report facts and not to debate.

It just turned out that only one party really opposed the opening of boarders, along with the right wings of the cnservative parties CDU and CSU. Thos are not the majority but rather a very very loud minority.

Re: TV detector vans once prowled the streets of England

#277

Post by UK-Al05 »

Nux wrote: post #98

Unpopular opinion: I agree to and support the BBC TV license. I think most of their TV and radio programmes are as good as they come. The Brits are lucky to have it. "But Netflix, Prime!.." - sorry, that's 99% dopamine inducing mindless entertainment, Idiocracy-style. I want more than that, for me and my family. They can never replace quality programmes done without so much pressure for investment returns, engagement…

Only a small percentage of the BBC is quality educational tv. Most of it is soaps, reality competition shows, and bad comedy(Mrs brown boys).

Advocates vastly over estimate how much educational content they put out. It's very small compared to the mindless entertainment part.

If you only paid for the education side of the BBC, you licence fee would probably be around 20 GBP annually.

Re: TV detector vans once prowled the streets of England

#278

Post by lozf »

gambiting wrote: post #225
spuz wrote: post #134

Earlier quoted context omitted.

In the UK, you must pay if you are capable of receiving live TV, not only if you do receive live TV. Even if it was never switch on, a TV that is plugged into an aerial qualifies as meeting that requirement.

That is absolutely 1000000% not true. You only have to pay the TV Licence if you ever watch live TV, not if you merely have a televion set. I've never paid the fee because I don't watch live TV, ever, and when you go on the TV licence page to fill out the form why you don't need a licence, one of the options on the form is "I only use my TV for games consoles, netflix, dvd players etc". So it's not some "clever hack"…

You're right except a few years ago the law was amended to include the licence requirement for watching anything on BBC iPlayer whether live or not. Other streaming services remain free.

Re: TV detector vans once prowled the streets of England

#279

Post by bb123 »

forgingahead wrote: post #174

"Television license fees" are a peculiar concept if you've not lived in a country that requires them, but as another commenter pointed out, several countries, mainly in Europe but outside as well, have this "system" in place. Quite frankly it's ridiculous - imagine needing to pay a "fee" to CNN/Fox News/NYTimes/Yahoo/whatever-well-connected dotcom just because you have an internet connection and web browser.

I'm not sure using CNN and Fox News as examples of how the system should work is a great counterpoint. The US has a massive problem with terrible quality TV and web news sources. The licence fee system at least attempts to create an alternative to that.

Re: TV detector vans once prowled the streets of England

#280

Post by vidarh »

agent008t wrote: post #239
entropyie wrote: post #187

Earlier quoted context omitted.

As an Irish person, I firmly believe this. While our our public broadcaster, RTE, is far from perfect (and sometimes mediocre), they are financed / run at arms length from government. They often run exposés on government mess ups and criticise their actions. On a more practical level, who else is going to make quality non sensationalist content specific to Ireland? One of the downsides of being a small native English…

TG4 is class! Problem is, BBC (and to a lesser extent RTE) are not these unbiased services simply presenting facts. Their staff have certain views on political issues and they present stories in a way that is biased to those views. They effectively tell their viewers the range of acceptable opinions they are supposed to have. A lot of their entertainment shows are junk too and I do not see why they should be funded t…

The perpetual problem here is that while BBC is required to "be boring" in many respects, if it loses too many viewers its value is questioned. So they have an ongoing struggle that they're told off if they focus too much on doing things that is or becomes popular with commercial broadcasters, while at the same time they face threats of cuts in funding if they don't bring in the viewers.
Post reply on HN