And one huge reason to back the BBC - no adverts! 
In the US, you have around 15 minutes of advertising per hour, correct? :eek:
Cable subscription only makes a difference in the sense that, if you have a cable subscription, you can’t reasonably claim that you don’t watch live TV. Well, you can, but you’d be lying, and if it ever went to court - which it hardly ever does but theoretically could - then you’d get caught out in a lie.
They won’t just take your word for it, though. You’re supposed to be able to prove that your TV is not connected to the aerial or satellite dish. It was about fifteen years ago that I actually let a TV license guy into my house to prove it. If the rules have changed, they’ve become more lax, not more stringent.
The operative word here is “let”. You don’t have to let the TV licence folk into your house unless they have a warrant issued by a magistrate. And they’re not going to go to the trouble of getting a warrant without first having positive evidence that you’re watching TV without a licence. If they were to go to a magistrate with nothing more than, “This guy isn’t registered in our database, so pretty please let us force our way into his home to see if he has a TV that is plugged into the aerial,” they’d get laughed out of court.
As I said, even receivers put out electromagnetic radiation. Esp. old time tube sets. Furthermore, the IF of sets lie in a narrow range, typically 450kHz or so for an AM radio. So there wasn’t a lot of hunting around the dial.
A U-boat typically rides on the surface unless it is attacking, or being attacked. A directional antenna can be well out of the water.
Proper security measures would prevent anyone on a convoy ship from doing this. The problem is that humans all too often don’t follow the rules.
I can sort of forgive this since the BBC doesn’t advertise. Still, it seems a bit much, and really should be per household, imo.
It is per household.
I wish. More like 24.
This is the most important element of the license fee - it does allow the BBC to be genuinely independent of government and from advertising revenue. The Australian Broadcasting Commission, otherwise very closely modelled on the BBC, is directly funded through government budgets and struggles with threats to lop its budget or to amend its charter every time it gets into a stoush with government.
The license fee funds lots of entertainment but ultimately its the provision of a well-resourced non-partisan investigative news source that is where you get your money’s worth.
Wait, the BBC doesn’t advertise?
The Australian Broadcasting Commission, originally based on the BBC model, certainly does advertise. All the time, over and over. Self promotion of all kinds – what’s on next, what’s on next week, coming soon, broadcaster identification… it can get very f-ng irritating.
The BBC does all that stuff. What it doesn’t do is run commercial advertisements for other companies.
The BBC does that too for a couple of minutes between programmes.
My emphasis. That gets tricky, as I still own crystal sets, passive AM receivers. And my aunt picked up signals from a nearby 50kw AM broadcaster on her dental fillings. Any simple metallic strand or long wire* can “capture broadcast waves”; simple rectification demodulates a signal. The first receiver I built sported a cat’s whisker detector, a slim copper wire touching a galena crystal. No electric power, no oscillations, no way to know it exists without actually seeing it. No fee!
- An antenna wire needn’t be long. Some mini receivers use earbud wires to grab broadcast-band signals.
Agreed, but the technicality was and always had been that you don’t have the capability to receive TV programmes. So, for example, if you claimed you couldn’t, and didn’t let anyone in, but had a Sky subscription, even if it’s lapsed, then you’re out of luck. That’s one of the pieces of “positive evidence that you’re watching TV” you mean, but it’s not the only one.
People have been prosecuted. Quite a few people. In 2012-2013, 50 people were sent to prison for it. They don’t get laughed out of court when asking for a warrant - it actually happens.
I appreciate what you’re saying - people should know their rights about who they let into their house trying to enforce a debt - but you have to bear in mind that not everyone is as aware of the nuances of the law, or as confident of their ability to argue for their rights. And technically TV licensing authorities could actually get a warrant and force their way into your home, accompanied by the police. That’s different to private companies and their bailiffs, more akin to something like council tax.
That’s one of the reasons people dislike the TV licence. I like the BBC, and like the licence the way it is (sort of) except for it being an actual criminal offence not to have one if you watch TV. Judges seem to agree, but at the moment, it causes more problems than a normal debt would.
Yeah, and it’s far less annoying than general ads. No ads in the middle of shows or movies. It’s basically going to the loo time. Iplayer is also much, much better than any of the other UK TV stations’ players, partly due to the lack of ads, and possibly better than Netflix too.
I confess I used to schedule those promos on the BBC. They serve an important marketing purpose but they are also necessary to make the schedule run to time.
Heh. I doubt any two episodes of any BBC series ever have ran to exactly the same time.
There was/is a recommended longest and shortest time between which a programme should deliver to (it’s about a 60 second window). I used to keep lists of the best and worst at doing it.
But the BBC’s promo airtime would be worth hundreds of millions a year if sold at commercial rates. An amazing marketing resource. My job was to get the most out of it, not just fill the gaps. It’s a bit of a dark art.
I should clarify. The fee is levied if your device can receive signals from a tv tuner, whether digital or analog. NHK won’t be targeting your aunt with the dental fillings:)
She will be so relieved! If she left the US to visit Japan, would she and any other tourists carrying pocket TV devices be assessed fees, or are those only for residents?
It seems we have no disagreement, then. I was not arguing that TV Licensing would never be able to get a warrant; I said only that they could do so only by substantiating reasonable suspicion to a magistrate, and that mere lack of registration does not pass that bar. I agree that if they somehow became aware that you had taken out a subscription to a cable service, that would probably be enough for a warrant.
If you don’t have a TV (and don’t watch BBC on iPlayer), or if you have a TV but don’t use it to watch live television, then you don’t need to register, you don’t even need to tell them that you’re not required to register and why (since doing so generally has no effect anyway), you don’t need to let any TV Licensing staff into your house on their request, and you certainly don’t need to worry about them getting a warrant to search your home because they won’t be able to gather any evidence to obtain one. In my experience the best thing to do in this situation is to withdraw their implied right of access to your property, as these folks don’t take no for an answer and will perpetually pester you with nastygrams and unannounced visits.
Incidentally, there was an article in the Belfast Telegraph a while back about the fight between TV Licensing and those who did not pay. It accurately and succinctly covers the legal tools available to both parties, including fines, warrants, prosecutions, and withdrawal of the implied right of access. Though the article’s headline implies that people who are otherwise required to pay the licence fee are the only ones evading it, the article text gives a fairly balanced description of the situation, including how TV Licensing harasses people who do not actually own TVs.
Just to piggyback off this topic, who funds BBC America? And is it as mitigated from bias as the BBC?