TV licence collection privatised and replaced with device licence fee in 5 years

Inviere

Boggles wrote: »

Your wish is granted.

https://www.britbox.com/home

"Unfortunately, BritBox is exclusively available in the United States and Canada."

It's very easy to do anyway.

gozunda

gozunda wrote: »

Tbh there is no eartly reason in this day and age that anyone should be obliged to pay for media they do not consume.

Considering the rubbish produced by our 'national' broadcaster and the current direction of their tabloid presentations - I reckon it's simply another excuse for another bloated tax take from the cent collectors.

RTÉ, for all its failings, is still far better than Virgin or SKY for their news and current affairs offerings.

I actually believe in a public service broadcaster but they are fvcking with us all, with the salaries they pay the "talent"
Pat Kenny showed that he was not worth that much, with his failed UTV show and not paid the same at Newstalk.
Tubbs was supposed to show how good he was, with the BBC, and came home with tail between the legs.

They are not the BBC which makes offerings for global commercial consumption also.

whisky_galore

NIMAN wrote: »

Its not only Rte this could be directed at.

Take a look at the BBC, ITV, Sky etc on freesat. There is loads of dross and repeats on there too. And 80% of programming on Netflix is rubbish too.

It's a worldwide issue, unfair to pick on Rte on their own.

When you have 24/7 TV to fill and hundreds of channels, most of its going to be cheap muck.

I can choose to subscribe to Netflix, choose what I want to watch and choose to end my subscription.

Just make RTE player subscription only, it's that easy.

InTheShadows

Just make it subs. Think i pay 8-9 a month for Netflix that would be a fair price for RTE. If you don't want to watch it you don't have to. It's very simple.

OldGoat

Kivaro wrote: »

Wonder if hobnail boots will be required for the staff of the new company that will be peering through windows and banging on doors and caravans all around the country?

In the (mythquoted) words of the Rev. Ian Paisley "PPE will be provided!" Just factor it into your cost analysis for the tender.

Wanderer78

GarIT wrote:

Between this, the go-ahead/DB privatisation and the Maria Bailey case I will find it very hard to vote for FG within the next ten years.

Neoliberalism rocks

Idbatterim

I supposed it’s payback time from the politicians to the states propaganda broadcaster! Do one! They could alternatively keep the current system and raise more by building more homes! My opinion is, nobody should be forced to pay a red cent for that farce! Make it subscription based or Let them survive on the advertising revenue etc alone!

bobbyss

How is this thing going to be implemented? Are mobiles included?

odyssey06

Wanderer78 wrote: »

Neoliberalism rocks

I think Neo-liberalism would demand no TV licence fee.
What you are seeing here is state corporatism.

odyssey06

bobbyss wrote: »

How is this thing going to be implemented? Are mobiles included?

In theory yes for a smartphone, no for an old style Nokia.

squawker

The party of shopkeepers strike again

Idbatterim

NIMAN wrote: »

Rte often question the government decisions.

You must never listen to news on TV and radio. Or debates.

The housing crisis has been used a stick to beat the government for years now, as has the health crisis. And Rte make plenty use of it.

But if you want to believe that all the issues are hidden and never questioned, then you'll not be swayed.

Right. Why don’t they get the councils and councilors in then and grill them on their large roll in the housing crisis? If the media and rte in particular, held the morons to better account here , there would be far more pressure on them to solve the problems !

Inviere

whisky_galore wrote: »

I can choose to subscribe to Netflix, choose what I want to watch and choose to end my subscription.

Just make RTE player subscription only, it's that easy.

Agreed. In reality though, they may as will give D'Arcy & co their P45's if going down that road, because RTE (in its current guise) wouldn't survive on the income of optional subscriptions. Not that that'd be a bad thing mind...

Idbatterim

Interesting to see the broke young will have to lay for it, while the comfortable elderly get another free pass!

odyssey06

Idbatterim wrote: »

Interesting to see the broke young will have to lay for it, while the comfortable elderly get another free pass!

And which is probably also the inverse of their usage of RTE...

InTheShadows

NIMAN wrote: »

Rte often question the government decisions.

You must never listen to news on TV and radio. Or debates.

The housing crisis has been used a stick to beat the government for years now, as has the health crisis. And Rte make plenty use of it.

But if you want to believe that all the issues are hidden and never questioned, then you'll not be swayed.

Ah come on throwing a load of soft ball pre screened questions at ministers isn't good enough. Name one single RTE presenter who has torn into a minister for the shambles of a job they are doing at present?

SafeSurfer

munchkin_utd wrote: »

+1
sure remember the RTE Futureshock property crash programme which investigated the oversupply of houses and impending crash, which Bertie then called scare mongering and unpatriotic...... and then what happened ?

Was the RTE programme correct, or the government ?

If you see the lack of impartial reporting in Turkey or Russia or Hungary then you would realise what a service RTE (news) does for ireland in keeping the government in check.

Still and all, one of the biggest costs in RTE has is the 13million a year in orchestras, funded by the TV licence and THAT is out of order.
Just like other orchestras across europe, they should be funded from the public purse but not from the TV licence.

RTE keeps the government in check? Are you serious? What major political scandals have RTE uncovered in the last 30 years?
The privately funded news media has been a much more effective and efficient public watchdog of political excess and corruption.

This government campaigned recently on a “freedom of choice” platform. Where is my freedom to chose to pay for those services I wish to consume and not pay for those services which I do not want to consume.

The whole concept of charging people to consume content they already pay for on devices they already own is outdated and unfair.

K.Flyer

Charles Babbage wrote: »

This is blx.They should simply add the licence fee to the property tax, collection costs zero.

No, then you are imposing the tax on what is essentially a life choice option.

francie81

Like the water charges this also should be quashed/resisted, it kills me paying for the so called TV License just to foot overpaid RTÉ salaries now we are expected to now pay for the use of a phone, laptop, tablet in your own home no chance Bruton.

Cookie_Monster

NIMAN wrote: »

Most other countries do something similar, be it a TV licence or a digital tax, but if you listen to some moaners in Ireland, we are the only ones doing it

Of course their argument is that Swedish or Dutch TV is great compared to Irish TV.

Ok, NZ don't do a.licence fee and have 2, maybe 3 excellent private channels. The news is far more impartial and the current affairs or investigation type programmes are top notch. It can be done easily

turbot

The costs of producing content, and distributing content, have dropped dramatically.
Meanwhile, access to global content has increased dramatically, allowing different models of payment.

For example:
- Decent videos can be made using a recent smartphone and amazing ones using cameras worth 3000 euros
- Instead of expensive transmitters, most broadband connections, even mobile, support a single or multiple streams of HD video
- I can subscribe to Netflix and Youtube Premium, which covers a lot of content consumed

So I wouldn't mind contributing to an Irish media community fund - i.e. that sponsored various Irish productions / TV series.
Maybe a voluntary Irish content fund could be used to illegitimise forced TV licences?

Odyssey 2005

Sean o Rourke show now..

scoobydude

malinheader wrote: »

I would nearly put money on it being a friend of a friend in dail eireann who owns the company.

His name is Dennis O'Brien

Sir Oxman

whippet wrote: »

This should be a fun debate .. listening to Brid Smith on newstalk earlier ... no broadcasting charge .. google and Facebook should be levied as they are making the money from people watching RTE online !!! I kid you not ... she will be the one banging the drum about this and hasn’t even a clue what google does

I’d also love to know how many people watched the recent RTE Investigates programmes and saw what they uncovered and then would whinge about paying s public service broadcast charge

There should be a national tv/radio broadcast service and I'd have no problem paying something like 50 quid a year to sustain it.
News, documentaries, heritage, investigation.
No Eastenders or Fair City or How to Banjax your life with a massive mortgage sh1te.
No 101 'chat' shows and most importantly no huge salaries - those that are on them can go to commercial tv and see what they are worth.

Boggles

Boggles wrote: »

I've studied this for years in the hope of coming up with an alternative.

And I think I have cracked it. Oddly my findings are quite concise.

"Stick a password on the player"

What have I saved 50-60m?

Who do I bill?

The player on Android simply doesn't work. So in a way they've already done that.

The Maurice McCabe exposé was worth the licence fee. The endless Tubridy, Ray D'Arcy etc crap ( actually Brendan O'Connor was and is far far better ) is not worth it.

Having said that I suspect Fair City and these shows pay for themselves in advertising revenue.

I welcome the fact everyone has to pay for a public service broadcaster. About time. I think 160 is too high though.

KaneToad

I've just had a quick look at the posting history of people on this thread who "never use RTE" and are vehemently opposed to paying a licence fee.

Several posts showing their use of RTE services.

Not surprised. People often boast about how they NEVER use RTE but then wax lyrical about the great GAA match, the Olympics, episodes of Love Hate, how the kids loved the Toy Show, the breaking news on the website about the nurses strike or the shocking Primetime investigation documentary...

A bit Monty Pythonesque - apart from all that, what have the Romans ever done for us.

Dammer

One thing that always bothered me about the TV licence is that a certain section of society get it for free.

How is that allowed under our Constitution, where it says all citizens be treated equally before the law.

If you are under 70 you have to pay, over 70 the state pays for it.

odyssey06

Deleted User wrote: »

The Maurice McCabe exposé was worth the licence fee. The endless Tubridy, Ray D'Arcy etc crap ( actually Brendan O'Connor was and is far far better ) is not worth it.
Having said that I suspect Fair City and these shows pay for themselves in advertising revenue.
I welcome the fact everyone has to pay for a public service broadcaster. About time. I think 160 is too high though.

Everyone won't though even under new system. There will still be lots of exempted households AND the can't pay won't pay brigade.

corny

odyssey06 wrote: »

I think Neo-liberalism would demand no TV licence fee.
What you are seeing here is state corporatism.

Not really. Do we think the government will exercise great control over the new collection agent or let them do their thing in gouging the consumer? Do they have control over the clamping agents, the toll takers, for example?

I reckon they'll take their cut for RTE and leave everything else to business interests. Thats not state corporatism.