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

391–400 of 562 posts

Re: TV detector vans once prowled the streets of England

#391

Post by pjc50 »

haspok wrote: post #91
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…

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…

> "Benefits Britain: Life on the Dole"

This is the kind of TV program that I think has contributed to the UK's extreme stinginess and bureaucracy of benefits; in aggregate it's probably got people killed. Cherry-picking the most lurid stories to make people look bad.

It's also not a BBC show, it's by Channel 5!

I'm with a lot of people that the BBC can produce great stuff, but only when it remembers to be Reithian and the managers aren't looking. These days most of the BBC content I watch comes from BBC4, plus the output of David Attenborough.

(ORF produce exactly one show with an international reputation: the New Year's Day concert from Vienna, which is lovely)

Re: TV detector vans once prowled the streets of England

#392

Post by galeos »

In the late 90's I went for an interview at a Sony store in London. At the start of the interview the store manager told me that he had been busy preparing the shop's regular report of addresses of everyone who had purchased a new TV for TV licensing. I imagine these were then cross-referenced against who had a TV license for potential follow-up. I struggle to see how the idea of TV detector vans were more than 'enforcement theatre', although possibly a cheap and effective strategy in the past.

Re: TV detector vans once prowled the streets of England

#393

Post by dsego »

doctorfoo wrote: post #360
saberdancer wrote: post #255

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What is the point of this license fee in this day and age? Everyone has a TV, so everyone pays the license fee. Wouldn't it be simpler to just use a part of the taxes already collected to go to BBC. My problem with this type of license fee collection is that it bring forward a number of costs associated with it that could be removed if it went directly from taxes and that today everyone has TV so it doesn't really "t…

Not true. I and others I know use a TV only as a screen for videogames and do not watch TV in any form. You explicitly do not need a license just to own a TV.

Interesting, in Croatia it's specifically a fee on owning any type of radio or tv receiver. Nowadays that applies to almost anything, from TVs and car radios to PCs and smartphones.

Re: TV detector vans once prowled the streets of England

#394

Post by criddell »

lotsofpulp wrote: post #388
api wrote: post #379

Earlier quoted context omitted.

On advertising and consumerism: we may be seeing that come back around. My kids have only watched Amazon Prime, Netflix, etc. and have barely ever seen an ad. We've banned YouTube for multiple reasons.

The ads just moved directly into the shows and storylines for Amazon Prime and Netflix (and most everyone else).

Has anything really changed? There have always been kids programming that was primarily about selling toys. I'm thinking of Care Bears, GI Joe, Transforms, Voltron, etc...

When shows like that move to Netflix or Amazon Prime the native ads remain, but the interstitials are gone.

Re: TV detector vans once prowled the streets of England

#395

Post by denton-scratch »

tomxor wrote: post #372
saberdancer wrote: post #255

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What is the point of this license fee in this day and age? Everyone has a TV, so everyone pays the license fee. Wouldn't it be simpler to just use a part of the taxes already collected to go to BBC. My problem with this type of license fee collection is that it bring forward a number of costs associated with it that could be removed if it went directly from taxes and that today everyone has TV so it doesn't really "t…

I don't have a TV... But that's not the point, it's no longer relevant today as made apparent by their threatening letters that make it sound as though it's impossible to avoid paying them. What is relevant: I don't watch BBC, period. And yet every 2 years or every time I move I am threatened again for the offense of not wanting to watch the BBC. I recognize that in the UK at one point this licensing model made sense…

You don't have to watch the Beeb to become liable for the licence fee. You become liable if you watch any broadcast television channel.

Re: TV detector vans once prowled the streets of England

#396

Post by bonzini »

dsego wrote: post #393
doctorfoo wrote: post #360

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Not true. I and others I know use a TV only as a screen for videogames and do not watch TV in any form. You explicitly do not need a license just to own a TV.

Interesting, in Croatia it's specifically a fee on owning any type of radio or tv receiver. Nowadays that applies to almost anything, from TVs and car radios to PCs and smartphones.

In Italy it doesn't apply to PCs and smartphones. It does apply to DVB-T dongles though.

It used to be a separate tax, now it's collected as part of the electric bill. You have to opt out explicitly instead of "opting in" by paying; this makes it much worse for people to evade the payment, since they would be making a false statement when opting out. So many people were evading the fee, that it has since been reduced by a third or so.

Re: TV detector vans once prowled the streets of England

#397

Post by bidirectional »

wackro wrote: post #310
whywhywhywhy wrote: post #297

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I mean I wasn't against the licence fee until they invaded my privacy detecting the purchase of a new TV and started sending me threatening letters under the guise of "TV Licencing" which is a sub-brand they use to harass people to protect the image of the BBC. I'll never pay it again.

They might feel personal but I'm fairly sure those letters are sent out blanket style. I've had 4 or 5 in the past and none have been addressed to me personally.

The whole thing is just horrible and leaves such a poor taste in the mouth. Threatening letters with "You are under investigation" in bright red capitals and 'inspectors' who heavily imply you need to let them in to look at your TV despite that not being a legal requirement. The BBC act like thugs.

Re: TV detector vans once prowled the streets of England

#398

Post by denton-scratch »

aqsalose wrote: post #308
captainbland wrote: post #287

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It seems impossible to imagine the BBC being truly unbiased when the government occassionally likes to show it has power over the organisation by sabre-rattling over continuing to allow the TV license fee. https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2019/dec/09/boris-johns... Honestly I think it has a general pro-government-of-the-day-bias - as you say, 'used to be the witty cry', indeed! Under New Labour it was still broad…

I agree with your general thesis. However, this line got me thinking: >It seems impossible to imagine the BBC being truly unbiased Thought example. If there was a truly objective, unbiased source of information about political and physical reality, wouldn't it be far too valuable to put in charge of a news desk. They should be running the government in place of the parliament and politicians! Of course, if you find t…

"Truly objective, unbiased source"

It's not possible to be an unbiased news reporter. The only thing we can wish for is reporting that wears its bias on its sleeve.

What is this "unbiased" reporting anyway? It can only mean that I happen to share the bias.

Any reporter who thinks their work is unbiased is a reporter who is unaware of their bias; which is much more dangerous than a reporter who is biased, and doesn't care who knows it.

Re: TV detector vans once prowled the streets of England

#399

Post by RobertKerans »

da_big_ghey wrote: post #329
powderpig wrote: post #317

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The new chairman has apparently donated to the Tory party. https://bylinetimes.com/2021/01/06/new-bbc-chairman-richard-... The DG was also a former deputy chairman of Hammersmith and Fulham Conservative party. https://inews.co.uk/news/tim-davie-new-bbc-director-general-...

Should making a donation, campaigning for a candidate, or exercising other forms of political speech disqualify one from working as a civil servant?

No, but it just raises valid questions regarding motivations. Civil servants are supposed to not be biased toward a particular political party. In practice, that may well not be the case, but questioning his appointment is fair enough. The Tory party has for many years attacked the BBC, using those attacks as a political tool. So people draw conclusions from the appointment of a prominent Tory donor to the post of DG.

Re: TV detector vans once prowled the streets of England

#400

Post by andyjohnson0 »

saberdancer wrote: post #255
boffinism wrote: post #128

The BBC is currently dedicating hours of airtime a day to educational content to match our primary and secondary curricula because the schools are shut and lots of kids can't access online provisions. And still people complain about the licence fee in terms of whether or not they enjoy BBC gameshows...

What is the point of this license fee in this day and age? Everyone has a TV, so everyone pays the license fee. Wouldn't it be simpler to just use a part of the taxes already collected to go to BBC. My problem with this type of license fee collection is that it bring forward a number of costs associated with it that could be removed if it went directly from taxes and that today everyone has TV so it doesn't really "t…

> Wouldn't it be simpler to just use a part of the taxes already collected to go to BBC.

That would make the BBC dependent on the government for its revenue, which definitely isn't desirable. The current system, where the BBC collects its own revenue under the authority of a royal charter, is intended to help insulate it from political interference.

Post reply on HN