The article says youtube is the BBC’s biggest rival. Youtube’s biggest strength is the infinite programming it can facilitate via user uploaded content.
Why doesn’t the BBC create a user uploadable section of iplayer and essentially create a UK copy of youtube?
muppetmat13 on
IMO they need to axe the license fee and overhaul channels.
Fatkante on
Stopped caring about BBC after the Toryfication over 14 years . Laura Kuenssberg and Fiona Bruce are GB news level journalists but are the face of BBC !
SC_W33DKILL3R on
Making people who only watch Youtube or streaming platforms require a TV licence with kill the BBC in the long run and generate so much bad will.
If they want to attract younger viewers they need to actually make shows that those viewers want to watch, not force them to pay for something they don’t. Repeats of shows decades old, shows aimed at older generations etc… are not what they want.
ImFamousYoghurt on
So if I want to learn how to change a tyre from YouTube I’d have to fund the BBC? How does that make any sense? The BBC has nothing to do with that video whatsoever. This country is an absolute joke when it comes to laws around the internet
Old_Housing3989 on
The BBC used to do lots of grassroots local journalism and programming. They could fund co tent studios in every city and county town where people could come to learn how to make content and engage with local issues. As a public service broadcaster might feel they have a responsibility to do. But instead we get Mrs Browns Boys.
samsaBEAR on
There is no way on this planet they will be able to police people watching streaming platforms without a licence, why even mention it as a possibility
Uatuwatchesmyscreen on
I promise them, that if they begin to charge me a tax for streaming services to fund the BBC, I will pirate every piece of entertainment I consume but do not have physical media for.
Technical-Process222 on
If these imbeciles try and force me to pay the BBC to watch Netflix or Prime I won’t pay it, I’ll just cancel those services and pirate anything I want to watch instead, saving £30 a month in the process.
Butterbracket on
In a world where billionaires increasingly own and control more and more of society to make the world function entirely for their benefit it should be a good thing to have a service that functions for the good of the people and cannot be bought by the rich. I can’t fathom people who are itching to see yet another public service carved up and sold off to wealthy parasites to be another cog in their global propaganda machine.
The BBC has problems but the solution isn’t some petulant ‘burn it to the ground’ tantrum it’s to fix the problems and make it work for the country.
open-perception4 on
It’s going to fail as it is now so why not adapt to the formats we have now and save itself a whole lot of misery? 🤷
joidea on
We need to overhaul the TV licence by either making it a charge for consuming BBC content, or funding it from general taxation.
This in-between state where it’s funded by people who watch TV from other providers is completely unjustifiable in a world where the line between “TV” and “other visual media” becomes increasingly blurred.
If it’s a charge for BBC content then charge users of it as such. If it’s a public good then the whole country should pay for it.
Apprehensive_Bus_543 on
Government needs to get a grip and just decide if they want to keep a national broadcaster or not. If they want a national broadcaster then define what they want from it and fund it from general taxation.
Constant-Estate3065 on
Here comes the next threat to Six Music by someone who completely misses the point of Six Music.
andrew0256 on
I’m minded to think the BBC should forget about teenagers and those in their twenties. They have so much choice about what they consume and where from there is no way a publicly funded service could keep up.
Free of pandering to youthful demands it can concentrate on children with a specific brief to reduce Ametican influence. It should focus on educational output, news and current affairs. Sport also, where it can be afforded including renationalising football cups, cricket tests and anything with national standing.
As now it should focus on documentaries of world class standing, devoid of drama and strong on facts and challenge.
Finally the government should seek to restore and fund the World Service back to what it used to be, i.e. trusted by the oppressed and despised by dictators and autocrats.
Martinonfire on
If anyone thinks the answer from politicians and civil servants is anything other than MORE TAX! then I have a bridge for sale
ProduceEmbarrassed97 on
Who could have foreseen that an ex Google exec would come in to ‘shake things up’. That was an entirely unforeseeable thing.
I give it 18months before he decides on a radical new idea he’ll call ‘BBC Consumer Product Synergy’ and start running simple ‘Consumer Synergy Clips’ about products between shows.
He won’t call them ‘adverts’, obviously, because adverts play in the middle of shows. No, these will only play in between shows to create a sense of synergy between BBC viewers and products that they might want to consume.
He’ll liken it to streaming services. He’ll say that even titans of the industry like Netflix need to run ads, so the BBC needs to ‘move with the times’. He won’t scrap the licence fee, that would be silly. But he will add in licence fee ‘tiers’ so that if you have a top tier licence you only need to watch a couple of ‘Synergy Clips’ a day, but basic licence holders will need to watch all of them.
Once the BBC has been homogenised, stripped, and turned into just another streaming service, he’ll be hailed as a success and will be golden parachuted away to ruin something else.
TTNNBB2023 on
>We should ask ourselves, honestly: if we were inventing the BBC today, what would we do?” the former team GB Olympic rower asked. “Then respond with clarity, pace and purpose.”
Pretty sensible approach, lets see how its executed.
n0p_sled on
While lots of people are keen to scrap the licence fee because they personally don’t watch Strickly, or feel that the news doesn’t align with the political outlook, it’s important to realise that the BBC also funds investigations and serious journalism that goes towards making positive changes that benefit everyone.
A recent example would be the investigation into the high street shops run by gangs that has resulted in a new police unit and additional funding being formed.
I appreciate people will argue that this should have been done before and it didn’t need the BBC to point out the obvious, but nevertheless, the investigation has had a positive effect.
Saliiim on
Really not beating the allegations that they are state funded. If the licence fee is payable by essentially everyone regardless of whether they use the service then it’s a tax.
Impossible-Chair2195 on
Also important to remember things like the BBC world service are still actively used globally by those in dictatorships and similar environments to get truth out about their situation and to hear about what is going on elsewhere.
The BBC isn’t just what we see on TV and it’s really easy to forget that.
jajay119 on
Can someone give an overview given this is paywalled?
I don’t know how much I’m inclined to believe an article that isn’t out out by the BBC themselves.
RoryLuukas on
Haven’t paid a TV licence in over a decade and will do whatever it takes to not do so. The predatory nature of how far they will go to try force you into it is encouragement enough to me that I never want to support them again.
Haven’t watched any live TV or used i-player in all that time to avoid it…
Now they are attempting to expand that to using on-demand like Netflix or Disney!!
How the heck can that even be legal?
Even worse, I’ve seen ministers talk about a broadband connection tax to pay for it. Disgusting and predatory to basically move all services and important things online then tax people for it even though they already pay for it.
I’m not opposed to the BBC being a thing. But I refuse to pay because I don’t use it. Why would I pay £180 for something I dont use???
qwerty_1965 on
The BBC’s primary problem is it’s sheer scale. It’s got too many outlets none of them is actually funded well enough because of this.
The Foreign Office needs to get back funding the World Service. Soft power is hard to measure but in a world where the USA, Russia and China are using propaganda globally it’s vital.
BBC four should go to iPlayer and YouTube for overseas audiences to subscribe to. It’s essential an archive channel. BBC Three likewise. The best of that can continue on BBC One. BBC Two needs a tear down and rebuilding as a proper arts and science channel like it was once. Ditch all TV before lunchtime.
BBC News needs to be reduced in hours. Focus on greater depth, it’s become an airport lounge channel like CNN, mindless browsing essentially.
KoffieCreamer on
Sometimes I get a free week of Amazon Prime which I then use to order a few bits. Would I then need to subscribe to a months long TV Licence for that period because I would ‘technically’ have access to live TV in my house. Genuine question here.
26 Comments
The BBC wants to extend the base of people required to pay the [licence fee](https://archive.is/o/YmtFd/https://inews.co.uk/topic/licence-fee?ico=in-line_link), possibly including those who watch streaming platforms.
still not paying 👀
The article says youtube is the BBC’s biggest rival. Youtube’s biggest strength is the infinite programming it can facilitate via user uploaded content.
Why doesn’t the BBC create a user uploadable section of iplayer and essentially create a UK copy of youtube?
IMO they need to axe the license fee and overhaul channels.
Stopped caring about BBC after the Toryfication over 14 years . Laura Kuenssberg and Fiona Bruce are GB news level journalists but are the face of BBC !
Making people who only watch Youtube or streaming platforms require a TV licence with kill the BBC in the long run and generate so much bad will.
If they want to attract younger viewers they need to actually make shows that those viewers want to watch, not force them to pay for something they don’t. Repeats of shows decades old, shows aimed at older generations etc… are not what they want.
So if I want to learn how to change a tyre from YouTube I’d have to fund the BBC? How does that make any sense? The BBC has nothing to do with that video whatsoever. This country is an absolute joke when it comes to laws around the internet
The BBC used to do lots of grassroots local journalism and programming. They could fund co tent studios in every city and county town where people could come to learn how to make content and engage with local issues. As a public service broadcaster might feel they have a responsibility to do. But instead we get Mrs Browns Boys.
There is no way on this planet they will be able to police people watching streaming platforms without a licence, why even mention it as a possibility
I promise them, that if they begin to charge me a tax for streaming services to fund the BBC, I will pirate every piece of entertainment I consume but do not have physical media for.
If these imbeciles try and force me to pay the BBC to watch Netflix or Prime I won’t pay it, I’ll just cancel those services and pirate anything I want to watch instead, saving £30 a month in the process.
In a world where billionaires increasingly own and control more and more of society to make the world function entirely for their benefit it should be a good thing to have a service that functions for the good of the people and cannot be bought by the rich. I can’t fathom people who are itching to see yet another public service carved up and sold off to wealthy parasites to be another cog in their global propaganda machine.
The BBC has problems but the solution isn’t some petulant ‘burn it to the ground’ tantrum it’s to fix the problems and make it work for the country.
It’s going to fail as it is now so why not adapt to the formats we have now and save itself a whole lot of misery? 🤷
We need to overhaul the TV licence by either making it a charge for consuming BBC content, or funding it from general taxation.
This in-between state where it’s funded by people who watch TV from other providers is completely unjustifiable in a world where the line between “TV” and “other visual media” becomes increasingly blurred.
If it’s a charge for BBC content then charge users of it as such. If it’s a public good then the whole country should pay for it.
Government needs to get a grip and just decide if they want to keep a national broadcaster or not. If they want a national broadcaster then define what they want from it and fund it from general taxation.
Here comes the next threat to Six Music by someone who completely misses the point of Six Music.
I’m minded to think the BBC should forget about teenagers and those in their twenties. They have so much choice about what they consume and where from there is no way a publicly funded service could keep up.
Free of pandering to youthful demands it can concentrate on children with a specific brief to reduce Ametican influence. It should focus on educational output, news and current affairs. Sport also, where it can be afforded including renationalising football cups, cricket tests and anything with national standing.
As now it should focus on documentaries of world class standing, devoid of drama and strong on facts and challenge.
Finally the government should seek to restore and fund the World Service back to what it used to be, i.e. trusted by the oppressed and despised by dictators and autocrats.
If anyone thinks the answer from politicians and civil servants is anything other than MORE TAX! then I have a bridge for sale
Who could have foreseen that an ex Google exec would come in to ‘shake things up’. That was an entirely unforeseeable thing.
I give it 18months before he decides on a radical new idea he’ll call ‘BBC Consumer Product Synergy’ and start running simple ‘Consumer Synergy Clips’ about products between shows.
He won’t call them ‘adverts’, obviously, because adverts play in the middle of shows. No, these will only play in between shows to create a sense of synergy between BBC viewers and products that they might want to consume.
He’ll liken it to streaming services. He’ll say that even titans of the industry like Netflix need to run ads, so the BBC needs to ‘move with the times’. He won’t scrap the licence fee, that would be silly. But he will add in licence fee ‘tiers’ so that if you have a top tier licence you only need to watch a couple of ‘Synergy Clips’ a day, but basic licence holders will need to watch all of them.
Once the BBC has been homogenised, stripped, and turned into just another streaming service, he’ll be hailed as a success and will be golden parachuted away to ruin something else.
>We should ask ourselves, honestly: if we were inventing the BBC today, what would we do?” the former team GB Olympic rower asked. “Then respond with clarity, pace and purpose.”
Pretty sensible approach, lets see how its executed.
While lots of people are keen to scrap the licence fee because they personally don’t watch Strickly, or feel that the news doesn’t align with the political outlook, it’s important to realise that the BBC also funds investigations and serious journalism that goes towards making positive changes that benefit everyone.
A recent example would be the investigation into the high street shops run by gangs that has resulted in a new police unit and additional funding being formed.
[https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/ce3pzwx449no](https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/ce3pzwx449no)
I appreciate people will argue that this should have been done before and it didn’t need the BBC to point out the obvious, but nevertheless, the investigation has had a positive effect.
Really not beating the allegations that they are state funded. If the licence fee is payable by essentially everyone regardless of whether they use the service then it’s a tax.
Also important to remember things like the BBC world service are still actively used globally by those in dictatorships and similar environments to get truth out about their situation and to hear about what is going on elsewhere.
The BBC isn’t just what we see on TV and it’s really easy to forget that.
Can someone give an overview given this is paywalled?
I don’t know how much I’m inclined to believe an article that isn’t out out by the BBC themselves.
Haven’t paid a TV licence in over a decade and will do whatever it takes to not do so. The predatory nature of how far they will go to try force you into it is encouragement enough to me that I never want to support them again.
Haven’t watched any live TV or used i-player in all that time to avoid it…
Now they are attempting to expand that to using on-demand like Netflix or Disney!!
How the heck can that even be legal?
Even worse, I’ve seen ministers talk about a broadband connection tax to pay for it. Disgusting and predatory to basically move all services and important things online then tax people for it even though they already pay for it.
I’m not opposed to the BBC being a thing. But I refuse to pay because I don’t use it. Why would I pay £180 for something I dont use???
The BBC’s primary problem is it’s sheer scale. It’s got too many outlets none of them is actually funded well enough because of this.
The Foreign Office needs to get back funding the World Service. Soft power is hard to measure but in a world where the USA, Russia and China are using propaganda globally it’s vital.
BBC four should go to iPlayer and YouTube for overseas audiences to subscribe to. It’s essential an archive channel. BBC Three likewise. The best of that can continue on BBC One. BBC Two needs a tear down and rebuilding as a proper arts and science channel like it was once. Ditch all TV before lunchtime.
BBC News needs to be reduced in hours. Focus on greater depth, it’s become an airport lounge channel like CNN, mindless browsing essentially.
Sometimes I get a free week of Amazon Prime which I then use to order a few bits. Would I then need to subscribe to a months long TV Licence for that period because I would ‘technically’ have access to live TV in my house. Genuine question here.