BBC to force more to pay licence fee with ‘YouTube tax’

Submitted ⁨⁨2⁩ ⁨days⁩ ago⁩ by ⁨Armand1@lemmy.world⁩ to ⁨unitedkingdom@feddit.uk⁩

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/bbc-licence-fee-charter-youtube-tax-netflix-disney-b3067500.html

Currently, anyone who uses a television to watch content must pay the licence fee even if they do not watch the BBC. Under the proposed changes it would be expanded to cover all other online providers, such as Netflix, Amazon, Disney+, YouTube, which are currently exempt.

The Whitehall source explained that the move was “because people are able to use them to avoid paying currently”. They added: “It’s not fair that people are essentially able to watch television content but avoid the licence fee.”

Why would the BBC be allowed to collect money on services it does not provide? This is basically saying “everyone must pay this fee, or unplug their internet”.

At that point, you might as well just take it from the government budget.

source

Comments

Sort:hotnew top

wesker@lemmy.sdf.org ⁨2⁩ ⁨days⁩ ago
Hear me out: an eye license. If a person has eyes, there’s a chance that they might be using them to consume some sort of video entertainment. And in that case, they clearly owe the BBC some money.

source
- mlcgdrhu@sopuli.xyz ⁨2⁩ ⁨days⁩ ago
  You’ll need to include functioning hearing in that list, or just ears. The licencing fee covers radio too.
  
  source
- UiUiUiUiUi@piefed.nl ⁨1⁩ ⁨day⁩ ago
  https://business.gov.nl/regulations/paying-home-copying/
  
  The Netherlands has a Tax on any storage device that can hold mp3s.
  
  source
- Egonallanon@feddit.uk ⁨2⁩ ⁨days⁩ ago
  Looking forward to people going all Event Horizon on themselves to foil the TV licence folks.
  
  source
Denjin@feddit.uk ⁨2⁩ ⁨days⁩ ago
As a vocal supporter of the BBC (yes even with all it’s many, many flaws) and am in favour in principal of the license fee, I don’t think this is an appropriate way to fill the black hole in their finances.

It should in fact just become part of general taxation as that’s the only way to make it fair. Even if you don’t consume their content, it provides a national service, it projects soft power abroad, it’s a primary news source for more than half a billion people and if that’s worth anything (in my view it is) then it should come out of the central budget.

source
- TRAHR@quokk.au ⁨2⁩ ⁨days⁩ ago
  As a vocal critic of the BBC, it should be defunded. It projects transphobic and zionist propaganda internationally, through heavily biased and manipulative reporting.
  
  source
  - crapwittyname@feddit.uk ⁨2⁩ ⁨days⁩ ago
    That’s mostly BBC news to be fair. Wouldn’t a change in management be just as effective at tackling those problems? Genuine question. The BBC used to be a left wing bastion.
    
    source
    -> View More Comments
  - cornishon@lemmygrad.ml ⁨1⁩ ⁨day⁩ ago
    Don’t forget their Yellow Middle East (or Latin America) Filter, or Gray Communism Filter they always make sure to use when reporting on the rest of the world outside the European Garden.
    
    source
- Armand1@lemmy.world ⁨2⁩ ⁨days⁩ ago
  Personally I actually think this is more reasonable. If you’re going to go as far as to charge everyone for it, you might as well do it means-based and have to compete with other funding.
  
  The only problem with this is it potentially gives less independence from the government, which means that they will become even less critical of their agenda, and may lose more credibility.
  
  source
  - thanksforallthefish@literature.cafe ⁨1⁩ ⁨day⁩ ago
    The top two layers are literally stacked with Tories, it’s already biased as hell (I’ve posted peer reviewed papers on here previously that’s fact not opinion).
    
    Changing the funding model doesn’t affect that.
    
    Changes to remove overt bias can be done regardless of funding.
    
    source
    -> View More Comments
davetortoise@reddthat.com ⁨2⁩ ⁨days⁩ ago
Its such a fundamentally stupid funding model. They really just need to get serious about how they plan to fund a national broadcaster in the 21st century - in the meantime I don’t see how they have any credibity to pressure people into paying it

source
Adonis1172@feddit.uk ⁨1⁩ ⁨day⁩ ago
If thats the case then, those streaming platforms should be free for the UK. They can use the TV licence to fund those subscriptions.

I thankfully use none of those services anyway.

source
SpatchyIsOnline@lemmy.world ⁨2⁩ ⁨days⁩ ago
At what point does the definition of “television content” stop? If independently produced and self-published video on YouTube counts, then what about videos on other social platforms? What about video on other sites? Does any HTML/webdav video stream count as “television content” now?

I’m not trying to invoke the “slippery slope” fallacy, but this stuff needs to be defined well in any applicable law, and if past and recent laws made about the internet in the UK are anything to go by, it absolutely won’t be…

So, here’s a better idea: how about instead of trying to charge people for watching YouTube, we tax the multi-trillion usd global mega corporation that owns it

source
Flamekebab@piefed.social ⁨2⁩ ⁨days⁩ ago
But I don’t want to watch their content, regardless of whether I’m able to or not.

source
- northernscrub@lemmy.world ⁨2⁩ ⁨days⁩ ago
  then you’re funding a valuable public service to others, that provides not only the news, weather, and eastenders, but also a host of revision tooling for students of all ages, language services, a public information broadcast point in case of national disaster, and so on. It’s not just about you and what you do or do not wish to watch. If you drive a car, a portion of the tax you pay still goes towards public transport services.
  
  source
  - Flamekebab@piefed.social ⁨1⁩ ⁨day⁩ ago
    Then make it a tax.
    
    source
    -> View More Comments
  - Senal@programming.dev ⁨2⁩ ⁨days⁩ ago
    It’s very specifically about what an individual does and does not wish to watch, because it only applies in certain circumstances. If it wasn’t about that, everyone would have to pay it regardless of usage.
    
    Much like car tax is about whether or not a person drives a car.
    
    source
    -> View More Comments
Mrkawfee@lemmy.world ⁨1⁩ ⁨day⁩ ago
Im not paying for Zionist propaganda

source
MonsterMonster@lemmy.world ⁨2⁩ ⁨days⁩ ago
This’ll go down like a paper bag of vomit in a sauna.

source
tal@lemmy.today ⁨2⁩ ⁨days⁩ ago

Why would the BBC be allowed to collect money on services it does not provide? This is basically saying “everyone must pay this fee, or unplug their internet”.

I think that it’s because the BBC puts content on YouTube (and I assume either doesn’t have ads enabled or wants more money than they generate).

I guess I could understand someone saying "well, with TV, I have to watch British brosdcast stations, and with YouTube, I don’t, but I’d think that the same would apply to TVs using satellite receivers, and I assume—though I don’t know, don’t live in the UK—that satellite TV users are also subject to the license fee.

source
- MrNesser@lemmy.world ⁨2⁩ ⁨days⁩ ago
  More fool them if they don’t have ads on their own content
  
  source
  - ohulancutash@feddit.uk ⁨2⁩ ⁨days⁩ ago
    They are prohibited from running advertising on any BBC-branded service within the UK.
    
    source
    -> View More Comments
sirico@feddit.uk ⁨18⁩ ⁨hours⁩ ago
At that point fold it as you’ve lost the point of it existing. I was lucky enough to grow up in Prime BBC times when they worked with industry to help education thrive. Where is the BBC micro movement for this generation and the shows to match oh no they’d rather try to be Netflix.

You’re a public service first and foremost then a world service, then you can start thinking like a traditional corpo.

source
Junkers_Klunker@feddit.dk ⁨2⁩ ⁨days⁩ ago
We used to have that in Denmark too, even if you only had a mobile phone you’d have to pay, bEcAuSe InTeRnEt AcCeSs. but now “Danmarks Radio” is funded over the income tax.

source
- ohulancutash@feddit.uk ⁨2⁩ ⁨days⁩ ago
  DR is also a fraction of the size and scope of the BBC.
  
  source
  - rollerbang@lemmy.world ⁨1⁩ ⁨day⁩ ago
    Also a fraction of the population. At the end what matters is funding per capita.
    
    source
blimthepixie@lemmy.dbzer0.com ⁨2⁩ ⁨days⁩ ago
Remember the scare stories of the TV licence vans

source
- towerful@programming.dev ⁨2⁩ ⁨days⁩ ago
  Except they did actually exist and did actually work.
  youtu.be/U8mSHKsyWDw
  
  Well, for analog CRTs
  
  source
  - SpatchyIsOnline@lemmy.world ⁨2⁩ ⁨days⁩ ago
    Yeah, all the info in that video is super sketchy, the em interference signal it refers to would be detectable within a few inches at most with today’s technology
    
    source
    -> View More Comments
  - blimthepixie@lemmy.dbzer0.com ⁨1⁩ ⁨day⁩ ago
    Hmmm nah, they have a database of everyone with a licence plus the guy even said they can see the light of the TV through the windows.
    
    Still think it’s scaremongering
    
    source