« Topics
12
Ne1L C547 posts since 11 Sep 2011
Watching a documentary by Applemask last night about ITV London, there was a bit about the BBC narrowly avoiding losing its licence to broadcast.

If that happened then what would/could replace it?
tightrope781,000 posts since 29 Dec 2005
UTV Newsline
If the BBC was abolished, I imagine it would either be replaced by a subscription-based model, or advertising.

Personally, I would prefer a halfway-house solution like SVT in Sweden have. They air adverts between programmes, but not during.

SVT is barred from showing advertisements. What they can do, and which they do, is accept programme sponsorships that help finance big ticket programmes such as Melodifestivalen and sporting events.

Regulations around the commercial activities of the BBC should be relaxed as this would provide a stronger additional revenue stream whilst not polluting it with on air advertising.
Last edited by tightrope78 on 21 November 2018 12:50am
Ne1L C547 posts since 11 Sep 2011
It's not irrelevant at all. I said it was a theoretical question and I wanted to know what people thought. Or are questions that aren't based in reality forbidden?
Last edited by Ne1L C on 20 November 2018 5:30pm
Neil Jones4,597 posts since 23 Dec 2001
Central (West) Midlands Today
Or are questions that aren't based in reality forbidden?


Depends how plausible and realistic they are or could be and whether it could generate a good discussion. If I posted a thread saying how long before the BBC launched a channel for people who live on the Moon, that would be totally unrealistic and the thread would die.

But to answer the question you posed, you might want to post a link to the appropriate Appleman episode (I haven't seen any of them and i probably should) so we can all get up to speed first. But generally speaking its most plausible if the BBC lost its licence its replacement may have just been something similar (ie structure or something) without a need to go down the American route.
Newsroom24222 posts since 28 Jan 2017
Westcountry Points West
If the BBC was abolished, I imagine it would either be replaced by a subscription-based model, or advertising.

Personally, I would prefer a halfway-house solution like SVT in Sweden have. They air adverts between programmes, but not during.


I wouldn't want a subscription-based model but I'm quite against the licence fee, particularly that people have to pay it to own a TV, even to watch non-BBC programmes. I would prefer the BBC to use advertising in order to fund their programming, or as is suggested by James this 'halfway-house solution' that SVT use. I didn't even know they did this - you learn something new everyday Very Happy
p_c_u_k2,069 posts since 27 Mar 2004
I don't think we know how good we've got it.

In most countries you pay a licence fee and you get adverts as well. I greatly admire what RTE achieves with a small population base and, thus, a much smaller amount of cash coming in to pay the bills. But through sheer necessity, they have to take adverts, and the product placement is painful at times. Their equivalent of BBC Radio 1, RTE 2FM, is a good little station but has the amount of commercial sells you'd expect from a commercial station over here.

The BBC is far from perfect and making some really odd choices at the moment, but we really don't get a bad deal from it.
6
mat76, Spencer For Hire and 4 others
  • neonemesis
  • nwtv2003
  • Jay Lee
  • tightrope78
gave kudos
tightrope781,000 posts since 29 Dec 2005
UTV Newsline
If the BBC was abolished, I imagine it would either be replaced by a subscription-based model, or advertising.

Personally, I would prefer a halfway-house solution like SVT in Sweden have. They air adverts between programmes, but not during.


I wouldn't want a subscription-based model but I'm quite against the licence fee, particularly that people have to pay it to own a TV, even to watch non-BBC programmes. I would prefer the BBC to use advertising in order to fund their programming, or as is suggested by James this 'halfway-house solution' that SVT use. I didn't even know they did this - you learn something new everyday Very Happy

Read my comment above. SVT do not show advertising, they have limited programme sponsorships in place to fund big events.
Newsroom24222 posts since 28 Jan 2017
Westcountry Points West
I don't think we know how good we've got it.

In most countries you pay a licence fee and you get adverts as well. I greatly admire what RTE achieves with a small population base and, thus, a much smaller amount of cash coming in to pay the bills. But through sheer necessity, they have to take adverts, and the product placement is painful at times. Their equivalent of BBC Radio 1, RTE 2FM, is a good little station but has the amount of commercial sells you'd expect from a commercial station over here.

The BBC is far from perfect and making some really odd choices at the moment, but we really don't get a bad deal from it.


Perhaps we don't know how good we've got it, but I would support the licence fee more if it contributed to all channels. I feel that it basically being there to fund the BBC isn't really fair on commercial rivals. I think what I should have said is that "I'm against the licence fee in its current form". The exact split between channels would have to be figured out and also which other channels would receive funding from it and how much each.