Current Events > Christ, I used to think the BBC was credible

(+) Yeah! (+)

Nonstop coverage of every time one of the royals sneeze, but Boris Johnson has an affair and misplaces funds and it's nowhere because Stories are Chosen due to Editorial Merit.

As if I needed another reason to never get a TV License again

---

TV licence still bewilders me after all this time.

---

pinky0926 posted...

As if I needed another reason to never get a TV License again

I hope you weren't planning on CE taking this thread seriously hahaha

---

They're usually the most credible. But yeah the "royal" family needs to fucking go.

---

marthsheretoo posted...

I hope you weren't planning on CE taking this thread seriously hahaha

I just hoped they would take the context cue to start roasting the UK on the whole

---

FabIe posted...

TV licence still bewilders me after all this time.

The premise is simple enough. The name is misleading: it's not really a "license", it's more like a special opt-in tax for TV services, if you like. If you pay it, you get to use BBC channels on various mediums.

The problem is in the enforcement though. Total fucking scam of an industry around it.

---

The BBC has had a policy for at least a year now where in the interest of fairness, they always include at least 2 TERFs in any discussion on transgender people or issues. They have yet to include any transgender people or advocates, though.

They also have scolded teens who worked through some youth program for speaking up in defense of transgender people for not presenting a balanced view.

So basically, fuck the BBC.

---

gunplagirl posted...

The BBC has had a policy for at least a year now where in the interest of fairness, they always include at least 2 TERFs in any discussion on transgender people or issues. They have yet to include any transgender people or advocates, though.

They also have scolded teens who worked through some youth program for speaking up in defense of transgender people for not presenting a balanced view.

So basically, fuck the BBC.

That's pretty awful. In general, the talk show idea that we need to have some kind of like 1v1 talking heads format for any particular view is broken to start with. Like when Bill O'reilly invites one vaguely scientific person on to talk about climate change and then like, Rush Limbaugh or something on the opposite side.

---

Citizens should not be pressured to pay for content they no longer have interest in watching. If they do not see value in the content or keeping the service, scamming them into paying a bill for it is a stone throw away from tyranny. They should have the freedom to completely opt out and it should not be a trial to do that.

If voters decide to do away with the TV licensing because of how it has been handled, I'm supportive of the notion. If that means the BBC would have trouble doling out overinflated salaries, that's solely the network's responsibility...

---

pinky0926 posted...

That's pretty awful. In general, the talk show idea that we need to have some kind of like 1v1 talking heads format for any particular view is broken to start with. Like when Bill O'reilly invites one vaguely scientific person on to talk about climate change and then like, Rush Limbaugh or something on the opposite side.

Yep.

"On one side of the discussion we have the second highest authority figure in the world in the field of x, they wrote this book and created a theory that ended up making such and such possible, Dr. Awesome.

On the other side, we have some old hag who thinks that we should ban science because it gives our children the ability to think and that in turn will result in the devil filling us with homosexual urges, Old Tart!"

And they let Old Tart lead the conversation when they're not guiding it along to get to a new subject.

---

ClockworkHare posted...

Citizens should not be pressured to pay for content they no longer have interest in watching. If they do not see value in the content or keeping the service, scamming them into paying a bill for it is a stone throw away from tyranny. They should have the freedom to completely opt out and it should not be a trial to do that.

If voters decide to do away with the TV licensing because of how it has been handled, I'm supportive of the notion. If that means the BBC would have trouble doling out overinflated salaries, that's solely the network's responsibility...

Erm

You don't have to pay for a TV licence dude.

I dont

it just means you dont get watch BBC or Iplayer

In the age of Video games and netflix , who cares?

---

The BBC sometimes publishes credible articles but its mostly a rag.

---

Referring to it as the "Biased Broadcasting Corporation" is certainly nothing new lmao.

The "fair and unpartisan" news programs have been a treasure trove of memes for the rest of the world.

---

They also participated quite actively in the smearing of Corbyn as an antisemite, didn't they

---

Kick the royal family out and just use the old buildings as tourist destination like any other place that had a ruling monarch or emperor. They don't provide more value than they cost.

That, and you know - one less organization funding child trafficking.

despicable toilet paper

---

The BBC is pretty good, so long as it's not reporting on anything involving the sitting government. They're utterly terrified of biting the hand that feeds them.

Unfortunately, the most important UK news for the past five years has involved the sitting government, so it's all gone a bit downhill.

---

UnfairRepresent posted...

it just means you dont get watch BBC or Iplayer

You also can't watch or record any live television, except for those rare occasions they have an exception.

Protip:
Get US news from BBC.
Get UK news from NPR.

Questionmarktarius posted...

Protip:
Get US news from BBC.
Get UK news from NPR.

And then get missing details from AP where available.

---

OI YEW LADS lN HERE GOT YER MAKIN FUNNAH THE BBC TELLY LOICENCE????!!

---

s0nicfan posted...

And then get missing details from AP where available.

Yes. That, too.

pinky0926 posted...

Nonstop coverage of every time one of the royals sneeze, but Boris Johnson has an affair and misplaces funds and it's nowhere because Stories are Chosen due to Editorial Merit.

I mean this level of bad is almost expected from the so-called prime minister at this point.

Funny today on BBC news they've got that government report concluding the UK is not systemically racist. The same government whose leader refers to black people as "picaninnies" with "watermelon smiles". The bar is so low.