Dumping the BBC?

[Badgers]

God bless Auntie eh?

The British Broadcasting Corporation has always been a 'national treasure' through the good times and the bad. Nobody wants to see trashy adverts for products and shit holidays so the good old Beeb are a safe pair of hands and great with a nature documentary.

Some level of propaganda in wartime 75-100 years ago is one thing but what is happening now? It is so obvious and self serving that massive reform or just shutting down is the best outcome.

Step 1: How does one cancel the TV Licence without postal 'threats' about non-existent vans?
Step 2: After cancelling how do you keep the TV Licence Wolves People from your door?

EDIT UPDATE:

If you use a TV licence payment card you should call the payment card inquiries line at 0300 555 0286 between 08:30 and 6:30 Monday to Friday or 08:30 and 13:00 on Saturday.

If you pay all in one go you should call the inquiries line for all in one customers at 0300 790 0368 between 08:30 and 6:30 Monday to Friday or 08:30 and 13:00 on Saturday.

I called and spoke to someone who said if there is a complaint with the BBC political lies coverage then call 0370 010 0222 to log this. If you just want to cancel then call either of the numbers above.

I know there are some lovely posters that work for the BBC here but surely you can see this shit for what it is? Surely it makes you wonder what other global horrors are repressed, invented or doctored for the party line?

For the record I accidentally/shortened/bloopered/fell over this thread while typing so it may not be factual and if that is the case I halfheartedly apologise (on page 16 of the thread) and hope you don't cancel your direct debits.

Any good examples of shocking BBC bias we can put in a nice chronological order?

 

[Badgers]

Election 2019: stage set for Nigel Farage in BBC Question Time specials

Nigel Farage is to be included in two prime-time TV programmes under plans for the BBC’s election coverage.

The broadcaster’s proposals also include a second head-to-head clash between Boris Johnson and Jeremy Corbyn, while Mr Farage will be one of seven party leaders or senior figures in a debate programme. The Brexit party leader will also take part in a special edition of Question Time before polling day on December 12.

Good content

 

[Badgers]

Tory activist who slammed Jeremy Corbyn on BBC Question Time speaks out

A man who confronted Jeremy Corbyn over abuse and anti-Semitism has spoken out after it emerged he is a Tory activist who's been on Question Time four times.

Ryan Jacobsz, 36, is a father-of-two who lives in Hessle, East Yorkshire and has canvassed for the Conservative Party after moving to the UK from South Africa.

 

[editor]

I used to defend the BBC's new coverage and strangely feel a bit proud of it. But recently it really seems to be turning into a mouthpiece of the government, with all sorts of dodgy 'mistakes' appearing in Boris Cuntface's favour. And Question Time has turned into a joke.

BBC apologises for wrong Remembrance Sunday clip

BBC admits 'mistake' in editing out laughter at Johnson in TV debate

*name corrected

 

[mauvais]

I work for the BBC; obligatory 'views are my own' disclaimer required.

News is high profile but only one part of a large organisation. At work I see nothing at all about it, DG email handwaving about scandals aside.

Whatever you imagine the culture to be like inside the BBC is probably wrong. That's not to say it's better or worse, just not what you expected unless you have worked there. Amongst other things I suspect you severely underestimate just how under siege it is from all quarters, and what difficulties that produces.

It would no doubt be unwise to share my political views on the specifics of editorial but I think the organisation is overall a force for good. A perhaps overly-benevolent way of looking at it is don't think 'what would the world be like if the BBC was more faithful to my view?' but instead 'what would the world be like if the BBC was removed completely and other dominant influences filled the void?'

 

[Pickman's model]

I used to defend the BBC's new coverage and strangely feel a bit proud of it. But recently it really seems to be turning into a mouthpiece of the government, with all sorts of dodgy 'mistakes' appearing in Boris Cutface's favour. And Question Time has turned into a joke.

BBC apologises for wrong Remembrance Sunday clip

BBC admits 'mistake' in editing out laughter at Johnson in TV debate

you've missed out an 'n'

 

[Fez909]

It’s not just Boris Johnson’s lying. It’s that the media let him get away with it | Peter Oborne

A big reason for Johnson’s easy ride is partisanship from the parts of the media determined to get him elected. I have talked to senior BBC executives, and they tell me they personally think it’s wrong to expose lies told by a British prime minister because it undermines trust in British politics.

 

[Pickman's model]

It’s not just Boris Johnson’s lying. It’s that the media let him get away with it | Peter Oborne

what undermines trust in british politics is seeing a lying cunt lie and get away with it.

 

[existentialist]

I am currently in this process myself. Having told the licensing bastards I don't need a TV licence, the cookies on my PC from before I moved (where there was a TV licence) got picked up here, and I got a couple of snotty emails saying that I'd been naughtily watching iPlayer, and to expect UTTER DAMNATION.

Keeping the twunts from your door is a fairly straightforward process, and the thing to remember here is that the game, from their point of view, is to get you either to admit that you've been a naughty citizen (I believe that over 90% of TV licence prosecutions are based on admissions), or just to buy the fucking licence to get them off your backs. As a stroppy kind of person, in some circumstances, the latter dog ain't going to hunt round here. And I'm not admitting to anything, either.

Before all this, though, do remember that the BBC and the organisation that enforces the licence fee are two completely different groups. FWIW, the licensing bit is run by Crapita, if I remember correctly. They employ "enforcement officials" on piece rates - ie., they're paid by results. A nice way of ensuring a quality, ethical service, ahem.

So, this seems to be the strategy:

• Admit nothing. Don't respond to their letters, even just to deny something. Just ignore them.
• If someone comes to the door, they will try to sneakily pretend that they have some kind of right of admission. THEY DO NOT. Unless they have a warrant, in which case they may well be accompanied by a police officer, who is there only to "keep the peace" - he or she will not be involved in the TV licence bullshit. So you can refuse them admission.
• If they DO have a warrant, or you allow them in anyway, they will try to get you to incriminate yourself, both by statements, and/or by getting you to demonstrate the equipment to them. Don't. If they want the TV turning on, tell them to turn it on. If they want you to switch to TV reception, tell them to do it. If they want you to turn your computer on and fire up iPlayer, tell them. And, obviously, don't tell them the password. They will be pushy, rude, and threatening. They may try to provoke you to anger, so that they can complain to the police officer.
• Something they seem to really, really hate - from the various Youtube videos I've seen - is being filmed. So don't do that . On the other hand - and this is what I plan to do if one does turn up - you could say "I am concerned by the misleading and deliberately confusing claims made in your correspondence, and want to ensure that I have a record of what has gone on here today, so I shall be filming this for evidentiary purposes. If you don't like it, you are free to leave."

This is a good website. TV LICENCE RESISTANCE - Index

 

[killer b]

A perhaps overly-benevolent way of looking at it is don't think 'what would the world be like if the BBC was more faithful to my view?' but instead 'what would the world be like if the BBC was removed completely and other dominant influences filled the void?'

I guess commercial news broadcasters would fill the void - I've not seen half as many complaints of bias, or half as many mistakes from them, mind.

 

[Pickman's model]

I am currently in this process myself. Having told the licensing bastards I don't need a TV licence, the cookies on my PC from before I moved (where there was a TV licence) got picked up here, and I got a couple of snotty emails saying that I'd been naughtily watching iPlayer, and to expect UTTER DAMNATION.

Keeping the twunts from your door is a fairly straightforward process, and the thing to remember here is that the game, from their point of view, is to get you either to admit that you've been a naughty citizen (I believe that over 90% of TV licence prosecutions are based on admissions), or just to buy the fucking licence to get them off your backs. As a stroppy kind of person, in some circumstances, the latter dog ain't going to hunt round here. And I'm not admitting to anything, either.

Before all this, though, do remember that the BBC and the organisation that enforces the licence fee are two completely different groups. FWIW, the licensing bit is run by Crapita, if I remember correctly. They employ "enforcement officials" on piece rates - ie., they're paid by results. A nice way of ensuring a quality, ethical service, ahem.

So, this seems to be the strategy:

• Admit nothing. Don't respond to their letters, even just to deny something. Just ignore them.
• If someone comes to the door, they will try to sneakily pretend that they have some kind of right of admission. THEY DO NOT. Unless they have a warrant, in which case they may well be accompanied by a police officer, who is there only to "keep the peace" - he or she will not be involved in the TV licence bullshit. So you can refuse them admission.
• If they DO have a warrant, or you allow them in anyway, they will try to get you to incriminate yourself, both by statements, and/or by getting you to demonstrate the equipment to them. Don't. If they want the TV turning on, tell them to turn it on. If they want you to switch to TV reception, tell them to do it. If they want you to turn your computer on and fire up iPlayer, tell them. And, obviously, don't tell them the password. They will be pushy, rude, and threatening. They may try to provoke you to anger, so that they can complain to the police officer.
• Something they seem to really, really hate - from the various Youtube videos I've seen - is being filmed. So don't do that . On the other hand - and this is what I plan to do if one does turn up - you could say "I am concerned by the misleading and deliberately confusing claims made in your correspondence, and want to ensure that I have a record of what has gone on here today, so I shall be filming this for evidentiary purposes. If you don't like it, you are free to leave."

This is a good website. TV LICENCE RESISTANCE - Index

the problem i face is the tv can be seen from outside the flat

 

[mauvais]

I guess commercial news broadcasters would fill the void - I've not seen half as many complaints of bias, or half as many mistakes from them, mind.

The current landscape is held in place by the BBC. In (inter)national news but especially elsewhere: radio, local news, anything public service oriented, availability of content. A lot of stuff happens directly relative to its presence, not despite it.

Also: who would complain about, say, Sky News bias? Complaints are in relation to expectation.

 

[Fez909]

the problem i face is the tv can be seen from outside the flat

You don't need a TV license to watch a TV. Only to watch terrestrial TV or iPlayer. Anything seen from the outside of your flat was obviously only YouTube or similar, as you don't have a license because you don't watch live terrestrial TV or iPlayer.

 

[danny la rouge]

Whatever you imagine the culture to be like inside the BBC

I imagine it to be exactly like that comedy programme, W1A. Exactly. Whatever you tell us otherwise. Because frankly I don’t believe you.

 

[gosub]

Dina Asher Smith winning silver at 100 meters at 2019 World Championships a full 5 minutes before mentioning at the end that a Jamaican won

 

[existentialist]

the problem i face is the tv can be seen from outside the flat

I do at least have the advantage of: a first floor flat, and curtains. Also, the lack of a TV, which helps somewhat

 

[existentialist]

You don't need a TV license to watch a TV. Only to watch terrestrial TV or iPlayer. Anything seen from the outside of your flat was obviously only YouTube or similar, as you don't have a license because you don't watch live terrestrial TV or iPlayer.

And you're never going to give them access without a warrant to prove otherwise. And they hardly ever bother to go for a warrant. Not low-enough-hanging fruit.

 

[existentialist]

Longdog had some legendary threads on here about TV licence stuff...

 

[elbows]

Its the state broadcaster, and some of its alleged fairness is a side effect of that state not being a one party state.

As part of the establishment, it has the attitude we would expect when it comes to the status quo, rocking the boat, going blind inside a bubble, and being slow to adjust to changes in the dominant ideologies and what counts as mainstream. The likes of Tony Benn came to see the BBC as being deliberate crushers of hope on a variety of political fronts.

Traditionally issues relating to the class of its management and employees, and paternalism were major complaints. Different complaints regarding partial commercialisation and management culture emerged and grew in stature during changes the Tories imposed on it, and the top level management appointments they oversaw, in the 1980's.

The class, educational establishments frequented, economic circumstances and peers of management and employees of factual and news departments is part of the problem. So too the bloated self-importance, mission, history and status of the BBC, which in many ways resembles the deliberate effects of powerful architecture used in important state institutional buildings. Powerful ideas about the BBC bravely shouldering burdens and carrying the weight responsibly, rub off on employees and the output, and siege mentality feelings end up being a part of that, onward noble journalists, unfairly maligned, blah blah.

 

[killer b]

The current landscape is held in place by the BBC. In (inter)national news but especially elsewhere: radio, local news, anything public service oriented, availability of content. A lot of stuff happens directly relative to its presence, not despite it.

Also: who would complain about, say, Sky News bias? Complaints are in relation to expectation.

I regularly see people praising Sky's news coverage - maybe it's because there's an expectation they'll be biased and it's a surprise that they aren't: I don't think so though - the people on the left who complain about media bias complain about The Times and The Guardian - they don't reserve their ire for outlets who're supposed to be neutral or on our side. So of course people would complain about Sky news bias.

 

[mauvais]

I imagine it to be exactly like that comedy programme, W1A. Exactly. Whatever you tell us otherwise. Because frankly I don’t believe you.

I haven't actually seen it, but I don't understand why or how they made W1A. For an organisation that's often afraid of itself, it seems nuts that they made a satire of themselves. I once wrote a blog post explaining to the world that our particular project was really good, despite public opinion, and I said that, "a very new formative product like ours is largely whatever you perceive it to be. That could be anywhere from giving you a sparkling new way to access something you love, to having wheeled out an accidental tribute to W1A". They asked me to remove the reference. I binned the whole thing instead.

Everyone rides Bromptons.

 

[killer b]

I haven't actually seen it, but I don't understand why or how they made W1A.

I tried watching it and it was excruciatingly bad.

 

[Proper Tidy]

I've never paid telly licence. Sometimes I dress this up as a moral position, because it's a flat tax, but mostly it's just habit now. I get letters but have never had somebody knock on, or at least not when anybody is in. Used to think it was cos I moved quite frequently but I own this house and have been here coming up to five years. Come to think of it, it's been a while since I've had any letters

 

[mauvais]

I regularly see people praising Sky's news coverage - maybe it's because there's an expectation they'll be biased and it's a surprise that they aren't: I don't think so though - the people on the left who complain about media bias complain about The Times and The Guardian - they don't reserve their ire for outlets who're supposed to be neutral or on our side. So of course people would complain about Sky news bias.

I see plenty of people criticising or praising each player in this space, but the sheer volume of ire pointed at the BBC - not just in news - is a whole different class. If anyone else got this much grief in their everyday endeavours they'd pack it in and do something with higher reward.

 

[killer b]

I've never paid telly licence. Sometimes I dress this up as a moral position, because it's a flat tax, but mostly it's just habit now. I get letters but have never had somebody knock on, or at least not when anybody is in. Used to think it was cos I moved quite frequently but I own this house and have been here coming up to five years. Come to think of it, it's been a while since I've had any letters

Most likely it's cause you aren't at home during the day. There's a reason it's mostly single mums and the unemployed who get caught.

 

[elbows]

Worth a few minutes, especially since Marr brings up crusading journalism and Chomsky destroys this stuff. (clip is only about 3 minutes long)

 

[killer b]

I see plenty of people criticising or praising each player in this space, but the sheer volume of ire pointed at the BBC - not just in news - is a whole different class. If anyone else got this much grief in their everyday endeavours they'd pack it in and do something with higher reward.

Are you saying that Sky, ITN etc are making the same kind of and volume of questionable decisions people are regularly criticising in the BBC news and it's just not picked up on as much?

 

[Badgers]

Has anyone here actually phoned the BBC and asked to cancel their license due to their political coverage? I am tempted to just for the response

 

[mauvais]

Are you saying that Sky, ITN etc are making the same kind of and volume of questionable decisions people are regularly criticising in the BBC news and it's just not picked up on as much?

It's impossible to compare across a broad enough set, if at all, because the standards and remits aren't the same, but if they were, then probably yes. Invert the question and try running an example through it: if you're going to complain about, say, QT audience or panel selection, how would the others compare? Is anyone keeping score? Do they even have such a thing?

Or if you take, say, Peston, who recently attracts similar criticism (justified or not) to certain BBC people, is the same really made of it? Are we on a thread called 'Dumping ITV'?

In other words, a questionable decision is often only questionable because it's made by the the BBC. Now, that's potentially legitimate, because it's not some case of unfairly high accountability being applied to the BBC. Expectations are rightly different because it's a whole different model. But it makes it near impossible to make judgements in comparison to other broadcasters.

 

[SpookyFrank]

The BBC at this point is mistakenly advertising itself as an independent broadcaster. They've effectively confessed to this with that sickening shit about not calling out Johnson's outright lies for fear of undermining faith in the establishment.