Quote from 5haz :

I don't care if the BBC gets a guarenteed large supply of funding, all I care about is wether the Beeb shows me good Television on a Saturday night, and I think it's worth some of my (actually long suffering, tax paying parent's) money At least it goes into some good entertainment. They also say 'You only get what you pay for', and they're right again, you have to pay up for anything that is good quality, and that includes TV, free TV will always be inferior. If the Beeb was forced to gain its funds the same way as ITV, it would be crap too.

I do not pay to watch the BBC, I pay for a TV licence that enables me access to TV channels.

And you don't care that an organisation says

"Right you can't watch any TV including Subscription TV or Commercial Channels without purchasing a licence... which happens to pay for my wages"

I might just try and get a job at the BBC see if I can get a decent wage coz they got money sloshing about

The reason you think ITV is so crap is because it can't compete against a company that has a budget of £1.9 Billion over 5 years taken from it's very own potential viewers.

I would also argue most of the BBC's output is pretty crap. BBC Three's best program - Family Guy - is an AMERICAN import. The rest of the channel is complete nonsense. Radio 1, another example. The numerous other channels it has that are rubbishhshshhshs.

If I wanted to start my own radio station that was a bit different and innovative I wouldn't stand a freakin' chance!

The amount of waste the BBC get away because of the 'unique way it's funded' is mind blowing at times.


/rant over

Quote from Intrepid :

/rant over

We wish!

Quote from 5haz :

Mock The Week, Live At The Apollo... so on so forth.

And certain people were claiming the BBC only screens a tiny amount of good TV

deep breath. Throw enough shit and some will stick, but you'll still end up with a ton of it on the floor

|
|
\ /

Escape to the Country
Homes Under the Hammer
Trash To Cash
Bargain Hunt
Doctors
Eastenders
Put Your Money Where Your Mouth Is
Cash In The Celebrity Attic
Animal Park
Castle In The Country
Casualty
Holby City
Open Gardens
Knowitalls
Flog It
The One Show
Gavin and Stacy
2 Pints Of Lager...
Radio 1
Underage and Pregnant
Young, Dumb, and Living Of Mum
Doctor Who Confidential
Put Your Money Where Your Mouth Is
Heir Hunters
Sun, Sea, and Bargain Spotting
Seaside Rescue
Little Britian
Bizarre ER
Pregancy: My Big Decision
My Penis and I ???? WTF

etc...
etc...
etc...
etc...
etc...

And to then come back with "well we get ''Mock The Week" (which without Frankie Boyle would be average at best) and 'Life on Mars" is naive. We may have had them anyway if we didn't have the BBC. maybe even better. Just look at some of the quality of yank TV - Curb Your Enthusiasm, 24 (i don't like personally but for comparison sake), etc... Those programmes existed through commercial entities.

People complain about ITV's f1 coverage, but they were up against it. Their website wasn't too bad. James Allen was a much better writer than commentator. They also showed Free Practise as well. The BBC's coverage is good no doubt but Legard??? COME ON... how's he still got a job?

Quote from Intrepid :

whole rant

Do you know how much guff is on over the states? Seriously the few good shows we get over here (The Wire, Dexter etc) there are roughly 40/50 shows which are equally crap (see living TV for all the home makeover shows you critices the BBC for showing, MTV cribs and all other shows and that the ones that make the transition)

I would like to know if you have had any experience of TV outside the UK?

So, your opinion on TV isn't necessarily representative of those of us who live on planet Earth.

Quote from Mackie The Staggie :

Do you know how much guff is on over the states? Seriously the few good shows we get over here (The Wire, Dexter etc) there are roughly 40/50 shows which are equally crap (see living TV for all the home makeover shows you critices the BBC for showing, MTV cribs and all other shows and that the ones that make the transition)

I would like to know if you have had any experience of TV outside the UK?

Crucial difference though. I don't have to pay for them! I know full well there is a lot of gash on States TV but also some golden stuff too. This accusation that somehow if the BBC didn't exist we wouldn't have all these so called great shows is just rubbish. What you don't see opn the BBC is the amount of wastage. Just coz u don't see it doesn't mean it isn't there. Look at their over zealous Glasto coverage hiring something stupid like 500 people!

There's a lot of gash on the Internet too but some QUALITY shit! I don't hear you shouting for that to be state owned!

Quote from Intrepid :

Crucial difference though. I don't have to pay for them! I know full well there is a lot of gash on States TV but also some golden stuff too. This accusation that somehow if the BBC didn't exist we wouldn't have all these so called great shows is just rubbish.

There's a lot of gash on the Internet too but some QUALITY shit! I don't hear you shouting for that to be state owned!

So body swerving the question then? I'll repeat have you watched any tv outside the UK.

Quote from Mackie The Staggie :

So body swerving the question then? I'll repeat have you watched any tv outside the UK.

Yes and a lot of it's gash. Especially Italy and Brazil I can't wait for the day we have an Internet Licence Fee. Make you happy i bet

Quote from Intrepid :

Yes and a lot of it's gash. Especially Italy and Brazil I can't wait for the day we have an Internet Licence Fee. Make you happy i bet

I think it's hilarious that you guys even haffto pay a TV Licence. Nothing as absurd as that exists in a normal society.

Lets see..... Pay a license fee and get a shedload of quality programs (and some chaff) or pay no license fee and get nothing but chaff. (apart from sport i cant think of anything i would ever turn on ITV for)

FFS Intrepid, you dont like radio 1? Whats the problem? The Beeb provide more radio stations than you can shake a stick at. There is something for everyone with the beeb, and it's commercial free.

Of course the BBC have a load of stuff you consider to be shite. Until you decide to fund the whole BBC yourself they are going to provide programmes for everyone, unlike ITV who just provide programmes for morons.

I do believe that people should have a choice about whether to pay for a TV license or not mind you. No license fee, no access to anything BBC would be a lot fairer than the current system. I still think 99.9% of the country would buy it though. Its the only place to get quality programmes. (actually not strictly true...channel 4 has some good stuff now and again, but i still maintain that the beeb has a consistently higher quality output than any other station)

@dawedust. Perhaps if the Canadians paid a license fee Canada would produce something worth watching one in a while.....

Quote from The Moose :

Lets see..... Pay a license fee and get a shedload of quality programs (and some chaff) or pay no license fee and get nothing but chaff. (apart from sport i cant think of anything i would ever turn on ITV for)

FFS Intrepid, you dont like radio 1? Whats the problem? The Beeb provide more radio stations than you can shake a stick at. There is something for everyone with the beeb, and it's commercial free.

Of course the BBC have a load of stuff you consider to be shite. Until you decide to fund the whole BBC yourself they are going to provide programmes for everyone, unlike ITV who just provide programmes for morons.

It's mostly chaff when you actually look into. Most of the good stuff is American anyway. Family Guy and Murder She Wrote for example!

The Moose you are a smart man but haven't seen the bigger picture. Let's talk purely about terrestrial TV for a moment. You accuse ITV of providing programmes for morons yet fail to actually recognise the BBC's role in this.

It's quite typical of modern day society to do this. Because the BBC is there and can do what it wants the market is distorted. ITV can't invest any money because it's crippled by the BBC's domination. It was outbid for the F1 by the BBC as an example. ITV as to provide low cost programming because its competing against an organisation that literally gets free money.

Had the BBC not existed you simply don't know how good or bad ITV would have been or be.

It's similar to teis car scrappage scheme. While every loves 2k of a new car they don't see the effect this has on the second hand market. Suddenly second hand cars have become more valuable and could potentially price out less wealthy people who want to get to work in the dry.

'Oppurtunity cost' people. look it up!

Budget usually increases in proportion with quality of programs, why do people not seem to understand that?

This is one of those arguments where you have no clue what the other person is actually arguing for, perhaps I'm just tired.

I don't think he understands that without the license fee we would only ever have shit TV, just look at the rest of the world and you can see that. There is some rubbish on the BBC, but because they are forced to provide a service that everyone will enjoy we also get some great programs too.

If you don't want to pay the license fee because you think you don't watch half of the stuff you're paying for, then you also have to accept you won't ever have had Top Gear, it wouldn't exist...can you really live with that?!

EDIT:

Quote from Intrepid :

It's similar to teis car scrappage scheme. While every loves 2k of a new car they don't see the effect this has on the second hand market. Suddenly second hand cars have become more valuable and could potentially price out less wealthy people who want to get to work in the dry.

That's also a load of bullshit, want to know why second hand cars are still dirt cheap? Nobody wants £2000 off a shitty Fiat!

Quote from 5haz :

Budget usually increases in proportion with quality of programs, why do people not seem to understand that?

This is one of those arguments where you have no clue what the other person is actually arguing for, perhaps I'm just tired.

Are you saying the more money the better quality programming? Well it depends where that money is coming from firstly. Secondly it depends if the money is spent or invested. For example the BBC spends money on programmes because they don't need to see a financial return. In that sense quality control doesn't have to be implemented whereas commercial channels invest money into programming because they want to see a return.

And the BBC is very good at spending (or wasting) money. I like Johnnie Ross but his wage packet?? come on seriously??? And then sending 400 people to cover Glastonbury. I could do the same job with a quarter of the people.

Meh, We'd always have American Top Gear ...

I'm content with not really watching much TV. Futurama & Simpsons are enough for me. Everything else is just shit.

I'd agree with everyone else though, in thinking Intrepid doesn't know what he's talking about. No commercials is a good perk if I had to choose one, hence why I like pirating shows... commercials are all cut out.

Quote from ATC Quicksilver :

If you don't want to pay the license fee because you think you don't watch half of the stuff you're paying for, then you also have to accept you won't ever have had Top Gear, it wouldn't exist...can you really live with that?!

Prove it? Also with the birth of the Internet we have some fantastic websites and magazines providing a similar level of professionalism, and arguably more informative. Even though Top Gear is a guily... well not so guilty pleasure of mine

Some say we wouldn't have had 'The Office' without the BBC and of the unique way it's funded (many ignore the fact the BBC tried to change it heavily. Luckily Gervais and Merchant held strong). However, in fact it's pretty much a straight rip off of 'Curb Your Enthusiasm' an AMERICAN SHHHHOOOWWWW

Why do you people argue with me... I am just gonna win every single time

Quote from Intrepid :

Are you saying the more money the better quality programming?

That's not what he is saying, when you want to create ground breaking documentaries, practically inventing new technology to do so, you're going to spend more money than an ITV presenter in their back garden using their mobile phone to film a documentary about worms.

Quote from ATC Quicksilver :

That's not what he is saying, when you want to create ground breaking documentaries, practically inventing new technology to do so, you're going to spend more money than an ITV presenter in their back garden using their mobile phone to film a documentary about worms.

Oh yes sorry the BBC and ground breaking documentaries - http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8Ci6sL4jp0Q - wow women like big c0cks but not too big! Ground breaking stuff!!

This is a program you lot actually WANT to fund? Yes or No?

/argument Intrepid WINS!

Quote from Intrepid :

Why do you people argue with me... I am just gonna win every single time

With that attitude, you should be a politician. You can make more stuff up as "fact" and pull so much out of your ass, that it's a small wonder you don't weigh 4 tonnes.

Absolutely perfect 'qualities' for a politician.



P.S. If you're going to win every single time, why aren't you in F1 by going through the "ELITE PATH OF KARTING!!!1111oneone111"?

Also, maybe that is perfect documentary material. Brits (such as you) do tend to be quite thick. (No offence intended to the smarter Brits )

Quote from Intrepid :

stuff

I'm no expert, but i don't believe you are right.

If there were better quality programmes on ITV they would attract more viewers. More viewers=bigger advertising revenues. Bigger advertising revenues=more money to invest in programmes... and round the circle goes.

If the BBC didn't exist it doesnt automaticaly mean ITV would suddenly have a magic revenue stream appear and buy up all the quality stuff the beeb gets now. They would just get outbid for all the best programmes by someone like Sky instead.

Faced with a choice of handing over money to the Beeb or Mr Murdoch... well, it's no contest.


Edit: lol @ you could cover Glastonbury with 100 people. I'd love to see that. (EDIt: actually, I wouldn't love to see that..it would be a mess) You've just proven that you haven't got a clue what you're on about.

lolling even more at the "Why do you people bother arguing with me" comment.
Us plebs just ain't worthy of your presence.

Quote from dawesdust_12 :

With that attitude, you should be a politician. You can make more stuff up as "fact" and pull so much out of your ass, that it's a small wonder you don't weigh 4 tonnes.

Absolutely perfect 'qualities' for a politician.

eer.. no. Actually considering the consequences of actions outside of that what is front of my eyes. A politician that is not.

Quote from Intrepid :

eer.. no. Actually considering the consequences of actions outside of that what is front of my eyes. A politician that is not.

That doesn't change the fact that you're thick as shit, and your logic is about as straightforward as a car in reverse doing a slalom course.

Quote from Intrepid :

Oh yes sorry the BBC and ground breaking documentaries - http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8Ci6sL4jp0Q - wow women like big c0cks but not too big! Ground breaking stuff!!

This is a program you lot actually WANT to fund?

The problem is you're confusing entertainment programs with serious documentaries. Shows like that are purely for entertainment, it's not an in depth medical study, it's a freak show. While it's not my personal taste I understand that I am not the only person who pays for this service, it's not all my own money paying for the entire BBC. Everyone who owns a TV pays for the service, so if that's someones favourite show then I have no complaints about it being broadcast.

I think you're problem is that you resent doing something that benefits people other than yourself, you might not like some of those shows but as I said, other people could like them as much as we like Top Gear. So the BBC can show all the penises they want for all I care, I won't be watching them because I don't like shows about cock. I just like to think the small amount of money I spend on the service is paying for cups of tea for the Top Gear production team.

The BBC dosen't have an infinite budget, so they still have to take spending into consideration.

Neither of us know how many people it takes to produce quality TV, but I'd hazard a guess; a lot.

Again, why does it matter? Why not just watch TV? Do you even pay the license fee in your household?

Quote from Intrepid :

Why do you people argue with me... I am just gonna win every single time

You sir, are deluded

Without the Beeb we would have Fifth Gear instead of Top Gear, the thought of that is chilling.

Quote from dawesdust_12 :

With that attitude, you should be a politician. You can make more stuff up as "fact" and pull so much out of your ass, that it's a small wonder you don't weigh 4 tonnes.

Absolutely perfect 'qualities' for a politician.

I'm thinking more 'Al Qaeda member' claiming victory regardless of reality, and perhaps being nonexistant.

You made a pretty good effort at this kind of thing when it comes to Apple.

Quote from dawesdust_12 :

Also, maybe that is perfect documentary material. Brits (such as you) do tend to be quite thick. (No offence intended to the smarter Brits )

Everyone knows Canadians are just closet Brits (pretending to be French dosen't work either, we can see through that).

Quote from dawesdust_12 :

You can make more stuff up as "fact" and pull so much out of your ass, that it's a small wonder you don't weigh 4 tonnes.

Normaly I'd shout "Irony" at a comment like that coming from you

...in this case though Intepid makes some of your arguments seem perfectly rational.