A compulsory 'Broadcast tax' next on the list for homes in Ireland

hotbabe1992

Teenagers,adults and kids of all ages need the libarary services throughout ireland.

For study,research,for access to the internet,to assist in their education,after school study in a quiet/silent supportive enviornment they may not get at home.

It is vital to have the young and old of this country upskilled and educated.

However it is not vital to watch 1. prime time towing the government line. 2. CSI miami 3. Reeling in the years.


F*ck RTE - Its a channel that should have died a death long ago!

TireeTerror

If a business is not viable because it cannot earn enough money to support itself, it has no place. If a business in this situation exists solely by forcing citizens to pay for it or face jail, it really is time that we, the citizens, took torches and raised the stations buildings to the ground.

I find it difficult to accept that we would face a prison term for not paying for a licence for something even if we do not use such a service. The laws of the land are supposed to protect us, in this instance I feel we are being persecuted. The lawmen should be sent to jail for criminalising people for not paying a TV licence.

Phoebas

hotbabe1992 wrote: »

Teenagers,adults and kids of all ages need the libarary services throughout ireland.

For study,research,for access to the internet,to assist in their education,after school study in a quiet/silent supportive enviornment they may not get at home.

It is vital to have the young and old of this country upskilled and educated.

However it is not vital to watch 1. prime time towing the government line. 2. CSI miami 3. Reeling in the years.


F*ck RTE - Its a channel that should have died a death long ago!

The public sector broadcasting services attract much more viewers than the library service attracts visitors and all of the services that a library provides are available elsewhere, so I don't think you've made the case that the library service is any more 'vital' than public sector broadcasting.
Nor is the library service 'vital' for the upskilling of the people.

It seems you don't want to pay for public sector broadcasting because you don't like it. Your lazy dismissal of public service investigative reporting as 'towing the government line' undermines your argument. As does bringing up CSI and Reeling In The Years - both of which are net earners for RTE.

Phoebas

TireeTerror wrote: »

If a business is not viable because it cannot earn enough money to support itself, it has no place.

That's CIE closed down I suppose.

wandatowell

What I find hilarious is that the government charges me €160 a year for my telly yet my house only cost me €90.

Owning your own home is €70 cheaper per year than to own your own telly!


I can not wait till Labour come a knocking on my door.

hotbabe1992

and all of the services that a library provides are available elsewhere,

Really?Like where am i going to get a quiet supportive enviornment for my study???

Nor is the library service 'vital' for the upskilling of the people.

It is a vital tool in upskilling people,it can be instrumental in whether someone passes their exams,where are they going to get a supportive enviornment if they cannot get it at home with all hustle and bustle.

Tell me where else they can go?


Net earners for RTE my arse,show me credible evidence of this,or are you just picking sh1t out of your backside.


I know nobody who watches reeling in the years or CSI i know a lot of people tuned into love/hate which was an earner but other than that,go and shoite.

My point is there are very few decent programmes,what like fair city?You got to me mad to watch that absolute sub standard rubbish.

Most of RTE - consists of repeats so does TV3 for that matter. Maybe people don't realise they have a bad thing,you know after a while things can smell good in the sh1t house if youv'e been in it for too long,you wont know the difference.

Phoebas

hotbabe1992 wrote: »

I know nobody who watches reeling in the years or CSI i know a lot of people tuned into love/hate which was an earner but other than that,go and shoite.

Your problem is that you are paying too much attention to your own opinion/prejudice. The viewing figures for Reeling In The Years, CSI et al are all published, so you don't need to rely on what you like to watch or the what the people you know watch - you could look them up.

I get your point - you don't like the service that public sector broadcasters provide, so you don't want to pay for it.
But plenty of people do value it - evidenced by the big viewing figures for much of the public service output. So, like any publicly funded services, what you lose on the swings, you gain on the roundabout.

hotbabe1992

You are convieniently bypassing a point i have made,that why is it people should be bullied and brow beaten into paying for a non essential service that does not contribute to the betterment of society.

I can pick up a newspaper and get all my news from there.I dont need RTE.


And people who do not avail of this service are still obliged by law to pay for this tv scam.


If we let it out on a subscription service,it would have been a better idea,simply block access to those who dont want to pay - a simple solution.

Phoebas

hotbabe1992 wrote: »

You are convieniently bypassing a point i have made,that why is it people should be bullied and brow beaten into paying for a non essential service that does not contribute to the betterment of society.

I can pick up a newspaper and get all my news from there.I dont need RTE.


And people who do not avail of this service are still obliged by law to pay for this tv scam.


If we let it out on a subscription service,it would have been a better idea,simply block access to those who dont want to pay - a simple solution.

Again, this is just your opinion.
We fund public service broadcasting from the public purse because it is deemed to contribute to the betterment of society.
You clearly disagree with this and that's fair enough, but the viewing (and listening) public don't appear to agree with you as they tune in daily in their hundreds of thousands.

Hate to be the one to break the news, but it's not all about you.

TireeTerror

Phoebas wrote: »

Hate to be the one to break the news, but it's not all about you.

It should be about personal choice, not forced upon anyone.

Phoebas

TireeTerror wrote: »

It should be about personal choice, not forced upon anyone.

All kinds of taxation should be a personal choice?
Or are you going to make the case that taxation to fund public service broadcasting should be optional while taxation to fund, say, the library service, should be compulsory?

Banjo String

Phoebas wrote: »

Again, this is just your opinion.
We fund public service broadcasting from the public purse because it is deemed to contribute to the betterment of society.
You clearly disagree with this and that's fair enough, but the viewing (and listening) public don't appear to agree with you as they tune in daily in their hundreds of thousands.

Well then there's hundreds of thousands of subscribers ready and willing for an encrypted, scrambled service right there so.

Obviously these hundreds of thousands would remain loyal viewers of the 'nations favourite broadcaster' when given an option to subscribe or switch over.

Of course that would take effort and thought from both an incompetent RTE and an even more incompetent Govt. Much easier to impose a sweeping compulsory charge, for everyone, owning a TV or any other device capable of picking up the Angelus is irrelevant mind you.

It's always the same defenders of the Govt daft ideas and levies in every thread. Awful bloody predictable at this stage tbh.

Phoebas

Banjo String wrote: »

It's always the same defenders of the Govt daft ideas and levies in every thread. Awful bloody predictable at this stage tbh.

Pot. Meet kettle.

alastair

Banjo String wrote: »

Well then there's hundreds of thousands of subscribers ready and willing for an encrypted, scrambled service right there so.

Obviously these hundreds of thousands would remain loyal viewers of the 'nations favourite broadcaster' when given an option to subscribe or switch over.

Of course that would take effort and thought from both an incompetent RTE and an even more incompetent Govt. Much easier to impose a sweeping compulsory charge, for everyone, owning a TV or any other device capable of picking up the Angelus is irrelevant mind you.

It's always the same defenders of the Govt daft ideas and levies in every thread. Awful bloody predictable at this stage tbh.

It's not a TV licence - it's a broadcast charge. The telly is one component of public broadcasting - which could be scrambled and transmitted on a pay-to-view basis, but that would involve everyone having to get subscription-controlled boxes into their homes - not a particularly inviting prospect from either side. And how would you propose an encrypted radio broadcast service would work? The web?

You are already compelled to pay a tax for viewing television, so there's nothing new in that regard.

hotbabe1992

Again, this is just your opinion.
We fund public service broadcasting from the public purse because it is deemed to contribute to the betterment of society.
You clearly disagree with this and that's fair enough, but the viewing (and listening) public don't appear to agree with you as they tune in daily in their hundreds of thousands.

Who deems it to be for the betterment of society,articulate this point as to how it better society when i can get the same news off of a daily newspaper..

They are not providing a needed service,there are various news services out there ,we dont need RTE tv for that.

You say its my opinion how is it an opinion when i say for example you can get news off of a newspaper and not nessecarily a television.. How exactly is that an opinion tell me?


I have given reasons as to WHY we dont need RTE - How is that just an opinion?


With regard to listenership and the numbers of views of RTE - you have to take into account a lot of irish people dont have any other good alternative out there,a lot of irish people only have the irish channels - with very limited choice.

Tell me if you were forced to pay a broadcasting charge,wouldnt your mindset be well i might as well watch it.


You see if there were other better alternatives out there on the market,and there was a subscription service and a service where those who dont pay are blocked,you would soon find people would vote with their feet,and move away from RTE.

Which would give a true measurement of the support RTE really has in Ireland.

For Reals

As mentioned, treat RTE like a digital subscription. If people want it, they can order it and then be charged. The whole reasoning is 'we get it, we should pay for it', which is bull in my view. Aside from the reasons mentioned, what if RTE open up several more channels, raise presenters fees and say higher the next wave of their nieces and nephews as they graduate, (to be fair I'm sure Gerry Ryan's daughter had to interview like everybody else who applied to those broadcast vacancies as they appeared on the jobs pages of various national publications. LOL). We should pay for these things with an increase in the fee? Where is the accountability? When I pay for a service I know what I'm buying. In the case of RTE I'm paying and the parameters of a service that are not of my choosing.
You don't go into a contract by paying for it and then saying, 'Do what you like'.
Call their bluff. Make RTE a subscription service and have no licence or the like.

Phoebas

hotbabe1992 wrote: »

Who deems it to be for the betterment of society,articulate this point as to how it better society when i can get the same news off of a daily newspaper..

You can't get the same content from a daily newspaper. RTE are the biggest single primary producer of news and current affairs content in the country.

hotbabe1992 wrote: »

They are not providing a needed service,there are various news services out there ,we dont need RTE tv for that.

You mean, you don't need it.

hotbabe1992 wrote: »

You say its my opinion how is it an opinion when i say for example you can get news off of a newspaper and not nessecarily a television.. How exactly is that an opinion tell me?

You simply can't get all of the original content produced by RTE in a newspaper.

hotbabe1992 wrote: »

I have given reasons as to WHY we dont need RTE - How is that just an opinion?

You've attempted to give reason why you don't need RTE. That is just your opinion. But the overwhelming viewer figures and the fact that there has never been any serious political campaign to get rid of RTE point to the fact that Irish people do value RTE and are willing to see it funded form the public purse.

hotbabe1992 wrote: »

With regard to listenership and the numbers of views of RTE - you have to take into account a lot of irish people dont have any other good alternative out there,a lot of irish people only have the irish channels - with very limited choice.

You are undermining your earlier point that RTE isn't needed and that there are alternatives.
But its good that you are at last recognising that public service broadcasting is providing a service that otherwise wouldn't be available.

hotbabe1992 wrote: »

Tell me if you were forced to pay a broadcasting charge,wouldnt your mindset be well i might as well watch it.

That doesn't make any sense at all - why would anyone watch RTE if there was a better alternative on the other side? That'd just be stupid.

hotbabe1992 wrote: »

You see if there were other better alternatives out there on the market,and there was a subscription service and a service where those who dont pay are blocked,you would soon find people would vote with their feet,and move away from RTE.

Well, if there were better alternatives then you might have a point, but the figures show that the people think RTE is the best available on a wide range of measures.

hotbabe1992 wrote: »

Which would give a true measurement of the support RTE really has in Ireland.

We already have a true measure for the support for RTE. Take a look at the viewer and listener figures - RTE is valued head and shoulders above the competition.

hotbabe1992

As mentioned, treat RTE like a digital subscription. If people want it, they can order it and then be charged. The whole reasoning is 'we get it, we should pay for it', which is bull in my view. Aside from the reasons mentioned, what if RTE open up several more channels, raise presenters fees and say higher the next wave of their nieces and nephews as they graduate, (to be fair I'm sure Gerry Ryan's daughter had to interview like everybody else who applied to those broadcast vacancies as they appeared on the jobs pages of various national publications. LOL). We should pay for these things with an increase in the fee? Where is the accountability? When I pay for a service I know what I'm buying. In the case of RTE I'm paying and the parameters of a service that are not of my choosing.
You don't go into a contract by paying for it and then saying, 'Do what you like'.
Call their bluff. Make RTE a subscription service and have no licence or the like.

ForReals What you have said so far has summed up what i think of the whole fiasco thus far..

What are they so afraid of,why don't they have it on subscription??

There is a lot more to it than meets the eye.

alastair

hotbabe1992 wrote: »

ForReals What you have said so far has summed up what i think of the whole fiasco thus far..

What are they so afraid of,why don't they have it on subscription??

There is a lot more to it than meets the eye.

Again - how do you believe a subscription model would work for radio? And who is going to pay for subscription boxes and associated landlines for every telly in the country? Doesn't seem like a better scenario to ongoing licence/broadcast flat charges.

hotbabe1992

You simply can't get all of the original content produced by RTE in a newspaper.

You can get great content from anywhere but RTE - Like for example newspapers.


My point and you seem to be missing it again and again and again is that RTE is not needed,you can get your news from other sources,but you refuse to take this on board.

I wonder why you are so thick headed?

But its good that you are at last recognising that public service broadcasting is providing a service that otherwise wouldn't be available.

It is not a service that is the sole provider of news,that is my point and i have been making it for quite some time,you on the other hand trample out the same old tripe.Get a new line.

I know there are plenty of newspapers such as the irish independant,and the irish times,also some of the daily newspapers come up with very relevant local and national news,the local news which is important and some times the big over-fed RTE station misses.

We already have a true measure for the support for RTE. Take a look at the viewer and listener figures - RTE is valued head and shoulders above the competition.

Listen to yourself,if it wasn't for the government BULLYING people into paying for this license it wouldn't have survived without a helping hand from the government.

Furthermore it's a state-funded televison station all the more reason not to trust RTE they are not impartial like they make themselves out to me.

RTE is a government mouthpiece,its a talking shop that pays lipservice but does **** all in its position of opposition to the government,in fact RTE and the governemt are on the same side.

All the more worrying how we are forced into paying for this state telelvision..

Banjo String

alastair wrote: »

Again - how do you believe a subscription model would work for radio? And who is going to pay for subscription boxes and associated landlines for every telly in the country? Doesn't seem like a better scenario to ongoing licence/broadcast flat charges.

Ignore saorview campaign.....

Technology already in homes. If you can receive RTE, you're getting it via a digitally provided broadcast.

Could be encrypted at the flick of a switch.

As for the radio broadcasts.......They should advertise to raise Revenue. Oh wait.

Phoebas

hotbabe1992 wrote: »

You can get great content from anywhere but RTE - Like for example newspapers.

Yeah - I wasn't arguing that RTE were the sole provider of news and current affairs content, but they are the largest provider.

hotbabe1992 wrote: »

My point and you seem to be missing it again and again and again is that RTE is not needed,you can get your news from other sources,but you refuse to take this on board.

I wonder why you are so thick headed?

I get your point that you think that RTE isn't needed i.e. it isn't needed by you.
Earlier you conceded that "a lot of irish people dont have any other good alternative out there". Did you change your mind again so soon?

hotbabe1992 wrote: »

It is not a service that is the sole provider of news,that is my point and i have been making it for quite some time,you on the other hand trample out the same old tripe.Get a new line.

Its a pretty weak point tbh.

hotbabe1992 wrote: »

I know there are plenty of newspapers such as the irish independant,and the irish times,also some of the daily newspapers come up with very relevant local and national news,the local news which is important and some times the big over-fed RTE station misses.

Both fine services at times - but they're not in the broadcasting business. When the Times and Indo start their TV and Radio services, come back and make that point.

hotbabe1992 wrote: »

Listen to yourself,if it wasn't for the government BULLYING people into paying for this license it wouldn't have survived without a helping hand from the government.

Oh for God's sake - the inevitiable cry that we're being bullied.!!
The licence fee has been passed by the Dail every year for donkey's years and there has never been any credible opposition to it ever. Public funding for public service broadcasting has been the settled will of the people - there is no bullying.

hotbabe1992 wrote: »

Furthermore it's a state-funded televison station all the more reason not to trust RTE they are not impartial like they make themselves out to me.

Are we to take your biased word for this or can you point to some independent studies that show RTE's partiality.

hotbabe1992 wrote: »

RTE is a government mouthpiece,its a talking shop that pays lipservice but does **** all in its position of opposition to the government,in fact RTE and the governemt are on the same side.

Well, we know you don't like RTE, but this is just spewing now.

hotbabe1992

Yeah - I wasn't arguing that RTE were the sole provider of news and current affairs content, but they are the largest provider.

They are the largest provider because the government has decided RTE will be the largest provider,like i stated in my last point..RTE wouldnt have survived as a competitive hard working station(because it isnt) if it wasnt for the governments helping hand in bullying people into paying for it.

Well, we know you don't like RTE, but this is just spewing now.

You seem to be missing a valuable point that i was making about RTE and the government being on the same side,its a case of you scratch my back,i'll scratch yours..Government bullies people into paying,RTE doesnt cut too close to the bone on government issues..

RTE haven't really stepped on the toes of the government much,remember the run up to the fake celtic tiger boom crash,well RTE were all in agreement that there would be a soft pillowed up landing and other such fairytales being told by the star political party of the time..

They didn't challengle it just lazily took it in,hook line and sinker,they didn't do the hard work,by asking the hard questions.

Notice even in prime time shows focusing in on political partys they make sure they dont really step on anybodys toes.

alastair

Banjo String wrote: »

Ignore saorview campaign.....

Technology already in homes. If you can receive RTE, you're getting it via a digitally provided broadcast.

Could be encrypted at the flick of a switch.

As for the radio broadcasts.......They should advertise to raise Revenue. Oh wait.

Saorview boxes are not subscription boxes. It's cheap and easy to roll out digital receivers, not so much with subscription boxes. The technology is not in people's homes.

And no sensible answer on radio subscription then?

RTE requires both the licence fee and advertising revenue to sustain it's current services.

alastair

hotbabe1992 wrote: »

RTE haven't really stepped on the toes of the government much,remember the run up to the fake celtic tiger boom crash,well RTE were all in agreement that there would be a soft pillowed up landing and other such fairytales being told by the star political party of the time..

Eh, this is a product of your imagination. It's simply not true.

Phoebas

hotbabe1992 wrote: »

They are the largest provider because the government has decided RTE will be the largest provider,like i stated in my last point..RTE wouldnt have survived as a competitive hard working station(because it isnt) if it wasnt for the governments helping hand in bullying people into paying for it.

Whatever about your explanation for it, they are the largest producer. So, without public funding much of this content simply wouldn't exist. That is a strong argument for public funding.

As for the bullying claim - don't be so childish. It doesn't add anything.

hotbabe1992 wrote: »

You seem to be missing a valuable point that i was making about RTE and the government being on the same side,its a case of you scratch my back,i'll scratch yours..Government bullies people into paying,RTE doesnt cut too close to the bone on government issues..

Its not a valuable point - it's just your own biased opinion. Can you provide some impartial evidence of this collusion?

hotbabe1992 wrote: »

RTE haven't really stepped on the toes of the government much,remember the run up to the fake celtic tiger boom crash,well RTE were all in agreement that there would be a soft pillowed up landing and other such fairytales being told by the star political party of the time..

They didn't challengle it just lazily took it in,hook line and sinker,they didn't do the hard work,by asking the hard questions.

You remember it differently.

hotbabe1992 wrote: »

Notice even in prime time shows focusing in on political partys they make sure they dont really step on anybodys toes.

So now you're arguing that they don't step on anyone's toes, not just the Governments'. That's evidence of impartiality surely, not evidence of "RTE and the government being on the same side" as you just said?
You're all over the shop on this one.

For Reals

There's two worlds meeting here:
State sponsored heritage, be it in Museum or park form is a great way of maintaining a sense of nation. These are subsidised or funded by the state, as is only right.
Then we have private business, which endeavours to make revenue by providing a service people want and therefore pay for. Such businesses thrive or flounder, (with the exception of connected banks and their competent/inept chums in government) depending on if there is a market for their particular wares.

Now it's great that I can watch 'Ear to the ground' and 'Fair City' but taste aside, programming aside, in every aspect of life we are told if its not profitable it should fall to the wayside, that's the nature of the market place. And so it goes with Toll roads, Rubbish collection and water, (watch this space) etc.
I believe having an Irish national broadcaster is a great thing, but here we have a nepotistic perpetual motion business...in other words they need not make a profit, they need not be answerable to standard recruitment practices. They supposedly represent Irish programming as is part of their remit, but will out bid TV3 for 'Desperate Housewives' in an effort to drive up advertising revenue, which they say is needed to fund/keep afloat in tandem with the licence fee....so they can continue to provide Irish orientated programming in their role as the state broadcaster....It's like the National Front selling pictures of Bob Marley to buy more Swastikas.

To carry out their role and justify their tax money they should be possibly one station, only showing Irish programming and no advertising. Then they can try argue and I may take it on board.

alastair

For Reals wrote: »

in every aspect of life we are told if its not profitable it should fall to the wayside, that's the nature of the market place.

We are? Why is all broadcasting destined to be commercial?

Recruitment practise at RTE is bog standard btw. Not sure what devious ideas you reckon are being plotted out in Montrose.

And part of their public broadcast requirement is entertainment, so sustaining popular programming - even rubbish like Desperate Housewives is part and parcel of their operation. Even if it means competing with other broadcasters in buying it.

For Reals

alastair wrote: »

We are? Why is all broadcasting destined to be commercial?

It currently is.
If RTE are to be paid for with TAX to represent Ireland in broadcasting why are they competing with the likes of TV3? Should the National Gallery start showing Thor 2 just to bump up revenue?

For Reals

alastair wrote: »

.............
Recruitment practise at RTE is bog standard btw. Not sure what devious ideas you reckon are being plotted out in Montrose.

No it is not.
How it works is a relative gets you in to the post room. You do a tour of duty there and as posts, (pun intended) become available little Ronan, son of such and such gets into production.
Then you have the glaringly obvious like Gerry Ryan's kid and Ryan Tubridy. Couple that with the myriad of sons and daughters picking up were pops left off behind the lens and you have a far from bog standard recruitment practice.
Also take in to account that when RTE was made use independent production companies in an effort to combat this, the families simple set up independent production companies and it was business as usual.
A simple litmus test...check the About RTE, Vacancies page....*tumble weed* unless advertising the Head of a department post or some other noticeable position within the public eye.

alastair wrote: »

And part of their public broadcast requirement is entertainment, so sustaining popular programming - even rubbish like Desperate Housewives is part and parcel of their operation. Even if it means competing with other broadcasters in buying it.

I believe RTE was supposed to counter the BBC, that being, having an Irish representative for the Irish viewing public, not fund a commercial endeavour showing everything and anything to keep bums in seats as it were.