Scrap the TV licence fee says Dyke

You can tell the arrogant and selfish BBC fans here by the way they expect an entire country to subsidise what they like watching on TV. Another big give away if their hatred to-wards Murdoch even though Murdoch doesn't send people to my house threatening to fine me or locked me up unlike the mighty BBC!

Am I the only one who is unfamiliar with the term couch potato? I found British TV to be soooooo damn boring that I spend less than 0.00000000000145 hours a day on TV on average? Internet is all you need.

The TV license man found me funny that I don't watch TV, thinking I would contract terminal illness not doing so.

Com'on I meant, a drama called Eastenders that's older than myself, why aren't people even bored of it? Some programme called cash in attic showing how people earn £30 for looking for old stuff in their house for a whole hour?)

Interesting but not surprising. The Tories having done a deal with Murdoch to nerf Ofcom and let Murdoch media reach ever deeper into our living rooms and pockets. Having Murdochs daughter on the panel might seem like nepotistic corruption at its worst to you and me but what do we know?

By making the BBC government funded, the Tories could gain control and stomp on any independant thinking or reporting and make it serve as their mouthpiece once Murdoch's press shoo them into power. We'd see no dodgy dossier scandals under the Tories, just sacked BBC employees turned whistleblower to the free press, whats left of it.

Of course it wouldn't save money would it? It would cost money, unless you cut the BBC drastically, leaving more scope for honest hard-working and tax-paying Murdoch enterprises to rummage in our pockets again. Its all so neat.

But there is no need to tell people like you and me all that is there? We only care about tits and bums after all. Question is, do we care enough to elect them?

doesnt affect me 1 bit - i kicked my tv out for being full of sh*t and i dont miss it 1 bit

i cant wait for the compulsory harassment that they farm out to people in this situation 'cos i'll give them it right back and enjoy doing so

"why dont you bring your detector van round? you mean its a myth? and they dont actually work? hahahaaaa.."

enjoy your biased media manipulation, advertising (jonny ross' guests all ahve books, CDs or movies to peddle) and workshy soap stars who are paid obscenely for pretending to be someone theyre not.

First:
Some word is missing in this sentence of the article: "In a panel review of Conservative media policy, panel head Dyke will recommend that the money currently spent on admin and enforcement of the £142.50 fee pay for public service broadcasting on commercial channels."
He recommends what?

Second:
We've had a similar discussion in Sweden for ages. The alternatives being; 1) "receiver fee", which is the current system, 2) government tax funded or 3) purely commercial.

The main argument for the current fee is that it doesn't harm the few that doesn't watch TV in at all while supporting a public service (virtually) free from political and commercial influence. While the income doesn't come directly from the government treasure it's still the government that regulates the size of the fee, so the argument of free from political influence isn't all true.

The main argument for commercial funding is in the line of "I don't watch public service TV anyway, so why should I pay for it?".

Personally I wouldn't mind having the public service funded by public means (that's government tax), provided that the media is still not controlled by the government or persons appointed by the government.

nice one "john". so then it becomes an ad infested product placed wasteland that just about sums up Sky TV?
honestly. some of the advert breaks on sky are so long, i channel hop for something else that isn't an advert, and end up forgetting what i was watching anyway.
the only way my missus can watch sky is to record it, and to skip the ads.
and look at ITV and C4. not exactly quality broadcasting is it? and thats what you want? have a dog biscuit.

maybe its some guvmit idea to stop people spending so long rotting in front of the idiot lantern and finding something else to do with their lives?

This government "grant" idea sounds exactly like how the CBC gets its funding in Canada. While I think the CBC does a great job for the money that they're given, they are a pale imitation of the BBC. Being dependent on government "grants" will then subject the BBC to constant political pressures and budget cuts -- just like the CBC. As a result, the CBC does not have anywhere near the resources of the BBC nor the independence that the BBC enjoys.

Neo-con zealots will rail at the thought of having a public broadcaster at all, but that's a different debate. All I will say is that the alternative to good public broadcasting is the American model where you get trash like Fox and CNN, which have essentially become puppets of the American Republican party.

As much as Brits might hate the TV tax, it's enabling the BBC to produce content that is far better than anything that we have access to on this side of the world. Shows like Top Gear would never make it to the air anywhere else.

Which translates to, add it to general taxation so every man, women and child in the country pays for it indirectly.

If this government listened to the public the BBC would fund itself. Lets not forget these idiots keep telling everyone how great it is!