why never a movement against the Television Licence ? (READ POST #2 BEFORE POSTING)

The Parish Priest.

Following the very successful campaign against water charges, why not a similar campaign against the tv licence ? which btw costs the exact same amount as the Alan Kelly water charges . Funnily enough the only two parties who ever wanted to abolish the tv licence were the Pds and Renua

icdg

A few points before his thread proceeds:

- No further mentions of water charges.
- This isn't the place to go actually organising campaigns, discussion must be in the abstract.
- No TV licensing queries - they go in the sticky.
- The purpose of the forum is to discuss Broadcasting. There is a Politics forum elsewhere on Boards. If at any time I feel this thread has become more about Politics than Broadcasting it gets closed.

lertsnim

There must be a lot of people who value what they get for their €160.

doolox

Ireland has what is called a semi public Broadcasting organisation. Unlike the BBC which is totally 100% funded by the UK TV licence and has no ads, RTE is only partially funded by the TV licence and also has ads, the worst of both worlds.

When people enquire into the inflated salaries of some of the TV and Radio stars they are fobbed off with justifications that the advertising revenue covers their inflated salaries , not the TV licence. It galls me that a person on minimum wage must give approximately 20 hrs worth of work per annum to pay the salary of such stars on €500,000 per annum and who are patently not worth that sum.

If they don't cough up they are jailed for non payment.

While the govt are wise enough not to impose licences on pensioners and other groups of low paid there are many low paid workers who can ill afford the €160.00 per annum charge.

Many people use Laptops and Ipads to access bespoke programming on the sly and this will continue to grow as TV's disappear from peoples houses or become more portable and difficult to detect in use by the inspectors.

The increased mobility and rental status of a larger proportion of our population will make this outdated imposition harder to implement.

A compromise would be to get rid of all the so called overpaid "stars" and let them sink or swim in the private TV channels and stick with the likes of TG4 and a reduced set of eclectic programming with a reduced TV licence at least under €100 euro and capped at that. RTE should stick with uniquely Irish programming and let the commercials carry the overseas and populist programming.

Johnboy1951

lertsnim wrote: »

There must be a lot of people who value what they get for their €160.

Yes.

I also feel sure that all those people would like to see discussion around employee salaries, and some limit placed on those salaries, with a threat of reduction of licence fee payments for breach of the limits.

IMO, there are very few overpaid persons in RTÉ.

Victor

When the licence was introduced, TVs were very much a luxury, available to few. As usage grew, people knew they were buying into a luxury. It is also avoidable - just don't get a TV.

hungry hypno toad

Maybe most of the protestors don't have a TV licence or get a free one?

http://www.welfare.ie/en/Pages/How-do-I-get-a-Free-Television-Licence.aspx

The Parish Priest.

The Parish Priest. wrote: »

Funnily enough the only two parties who ever wanted to abolish the tv licence were the Pds and Renua

Two right-wing parties who would probably have privatised RTE, given the chance. Not surprising that they were against the TV licence.

Jimmy Garlic

RTE could never survive without huge injections of public money, life support that keeps their dim ''stars'' living in the lap of luxury. Ray Darcy is on half a million quid a year for gods sake, a guy that outshone by the average DJ on local radio. He is just one of example of the many absolutely talentless amoebas that get obscene amounts of our money stuffed into their pockets by RTE.

Journalism is stone dead and buried in donnybrook, basically what RTE passes off as journalism is damage control or propaganda that they have been instructed to push. There is no public service of any value whatsoever provided by RTE. A stagnant, nepotistic club that doesn't value merit, talent or integrity.

Chancer3001

There's no need for a movement. If you don't agree with paying it, just don't pay.

It's not strict enough or monitored enough for you to be caught

m5ex9oqjawdg2i

Chancer3001 wrote: »

There's no need for a movement. If you don't agree with paying it, just don't pay.

It's not strict enough or monitored enough for you to be caught

Apt name

icdg

Take a warning Chancer3001, there is no advocating anything illegal in this forum

.......

This post has been deleted.

Jayop

It's 160 quid down the toilet every single year and I hate paying it. I don't listen to RTE radio, I don't watch any of their programming, bar maybe a handful of things in the year. The sports is the only thing worthwhile on there and in pretty much every sport it's already being covered much better elsewhere. I literally only pay the license to be allowed to legally watch non RTE programs the vast vast majority of the time.

Personally I think they should either scrap it or else scrap the ads. Let RTE try to survive on one or the other and then they'd maybe trim some of the fat. 2 Orchestras and a mass of overpaid useless "Irish celebrities" getting the same jobs for the boys every single year. Get yourself on the RTE treadmill, maybe a job on children's TV or 2fm and it's a one way road to being in front of our faces for the next 50 years.

How much of their programming is already on other channels first? I'd probably guess if you take news and current affairs out about 80%. It's pathetic and a complete black hole for the taxpayer.

seamus

....... wrote: »

This post has been deleted.

No, the much-mooted broadcasting charge hasn't come in yet.

As Victor says, the licence originally came in when TVs were a luxury and the licence seen as a consequential expense of choosing to have a TV, like car tax. So it persists because it's always been there.

It's a silly system anyway because it relies on the honour system, and no doubt costs a relatively significant amount to enforce. We did it because the UK did it and nobody has really given it any serious thought since.

Remove the licence fee altogether, tack a nominal "arts and culture levy" onto all sorts of services - TV services, broadband, cinema tickets, theatre tickets, etc - and then use that money to fund the Irish-grown arts. The days of having a state broadcaster are over.

Johnboy1951

....... wrote: »

This post has been deleted.

Careful reading of the act would seem to indicate yes.

But that part of the law has never been attempted to be enforced.

elperello

Probably the main reason why there is no campaign against the TV licence is that it is an established charge and it's always easier to work up a head of steam against a new charge.

Having said that I believe that a well funded public broadcasting service is essential but as Seamus says the licence is not the way to do it.

Cynortas

Here's an idea everyone should stop moaning about different bills and charges and just pay their bloody bills

Jayop

Cynortas wrote: »

Here's an idea everyone should stop moaning about different bills and charges and just pay their bloody bills

Pay blindly and trust the government not to waste our money.

great idea. :rolleyes:

Victor

seamus wrote: »

It's a silly system anyway because it relies on the honour system

Not really. Eircode, while only public since last year has existed as a database for a long time. They know who has a licence or not.

Jayop wrote: »

Pay blindly and trust the government not to waste our money.

Let's face it, lots of people don't want to pay for anything.

icdg

A more general warning - anyone from this point on who advocates non payment gets a 48 hour ban with no further warning. Not having seen this post is not an excuse.

A reminder - not paying a TV licence isn't just a civil debt. It is a criminal offence.

ED E

Victor wrote: »

Not really. Eircode, while only public since last year has existed as a database for a long time. They know who has a licence or not.

They know. But the TV Licence inspectors are a colossal waste of money.


Annual "arts tax" of €200 for anyone earning over €20k. Stop this micky mouse enforcement game, all the admin costs that go with it. Cost Revenue zero to tack it on to ROS/MyAccount.

Jayop

Victor wrote: »

Not really. Eircode, while only public since last year has existed as a database for a long time. They know who has a licence or not.


Let's face it, lots of people don't want to pay for anything.

Let's face it, that's as BSy a soundbite as most of those who you think don't want to pay for anything.

I work in a good job, pay a lot of income tax, pay my car tax, pay my TV license pay every other bill I bloody get. It's a little sickening to have my opinion thrown in with nonsense generalizations like that.

Jayop

ED E wrote: »

They know. But the TV Licence inspectors are a colossal waste of money.


Annual "arts tax" of €200 for anyone earning over €20k. Stop this micky mouse enforcement game, all the admin costs that go with it. Cost Revenue zero to tack it on to ROS/MyAccount.

Add it to the household tax. It shouldn't be paid per income, it should be paid per household.

It also shouldn't go to the RTE. It should go towards arts and cultural projects nationwide.

benjilxp

Victor wrote: »

Not really. Eircode, while only public since last year has existed as a database for a long time. They know who has a licence or not.



Then why don't they put the homeowners name on a TV licence inspectors letter if they have this information?

Victor

benjilxp wrote: »

Victor wrote: »

Not really. Eircode, while only public since last year has existed as a database for a long time. They know who has a licence or not.

Then why don't they put the homeowners name on a TV licence inspectors letter if they have this information?

I'm saying they know the properties and the residents, not the TV owners. And while they don't ask for it, they have the power to get the Sky / Virgin Media data.

newacc2015

Firstly it was introduced before everyone expected everything for free. Unlike now where people expect everything for free without paying taxes.

Secondly I think most people appreciate the service it provides. Do we really wanted biased media like America? Do we really want media companies who rely entirely on advertising? If RTE received 100% funding from advertising, they would comprise on their reporting. Look at HBO which is violent, sex filled, etc as it is not reliant on pleasing vanilla advertisers (HBO is a premium service like Sky Sports).

Imagine RTE being owned a by a certain non-resident billionaire who has a fond interest in owning papers and radio stations. He maybe not explicitly put pressure on what is reported, but you can be sure that reporters will change their style of reporting and content.

Water is essential for life. Without it, you can't live. The last time I checked, you can live without Fair City. If you don't want to pay for RTE, don't watch it

Jayop

newacc2015 wrote: »

Firstly it was introduced before everyone expected everything for free. Unlike now where people expect everything for free without paying taxes.

Secondly I think most people appreciate the service it provides. Do we really wanted biased media like America? Do we really want media companies who rely entirely on advertising? If RTE received 100% funding from advertising, they would comprise on their reporting. Look at HBO which is violent, sex filled, etc as it is not reliant on pleasing vanilla advertisers (HBO is a premium service like Sky Sports).

Imagine RTE being owned a by a certain non-resident billionaire who has a fond interest in owning papers and radio stations. He maybe not explicitly put pressure on what is reported, but you can be sure that reporters will change their style of reporting and content.

Water is essential for life. Without it, you can't live. The last time I checked, you can live without Fair City. If you don't want to pay for RTE, don't watch it

1) I don't watch RTE but I still pay for the services.

2) It's still working at the behest of certain powerful interests and has served as a government mouthpiece a'la Pravda.

Elmo

In relation to the OPs question the Radio licence was in place for a number of decades before TV and unlike rates there was never a break in the licence fee. Another thing to remember is that official 15% of people do not pay their licence, not to mention those who are exempt.

Jimmy Garlic

Secondly I think most people appreciate the service it provides. Do we really wanted biased media like America?

RTE isn't biased?? I suppose the Pope isn't a Catholic either.

Do we really want media companies who rely entirely on advertising? If RTE received 100% funding from advertising, they would comprise on their reporting.

Assuming their reporting isn't compromised as things stand. Are you seriously trying to suggest that RTE is a bastion of good, non-biased principled journalism?

Imagine RTE being owned a by a certain non-resident billionaire who has a fond interest in owning papers and radio stations. He maybe not explicitly put pressure on what is reported, but you can be sure that reporters will change their style of reporting and content.

Shur he might as well own it. Wouldn't make any difference.

.......

This post has been deleted.