Dee Forbes banging the RTE TV licence drum again 60m uncollected fee *poll not working - pl ignore*

kneemos

Zaph wrote: »

What they need to do is farm out the collection of the unpaid licence fees to a proper business that deals with that sort of thing and not rely on An Post to send out vaguely threatening letters every now and then. If they managed to get the rate of non-compliance under 5% then they'd have all the money they could ever dream of and you never know, it might mean an overall reduction in the one tax that I despise paying more than any other.

I suspect they'd spend whatever they get and be in debt again shortly afterwards.

dxhound2005

Zaph wrote: »

What they need to do is farm out the collection of the unpaid licence fees to a proper business that deals with that sort of thing and not rely on An Post to send out vaguely threatening letters every now and then. If they managed to get the rate of non-compliance under 5% then they'd have all the money they could ever dream of and you never know, it might mean an overall reduction in the one tax that I despise paying more than any other.

What agency would you like to see doing the job and how would they operate? The only system available to An Post is the courts, and they initiate thousands of prosecutions every year.

Any new system would need new legislation. But the politicians are too afraid to bring in a scheme which would take money from every household automatically e.g through the Property Tax. And fear is also the reason that they would not allow any increase in the licence fee for the last ten years.

briany

Atoms for Peace wrote: »

If the "stars" won't take a reasonable wage let them feck off, geriatric job blockers and pretensuous creeps for the most part anyway.

Wages should be pegged against those of tv3 and TG4. TG4 is a great example of what a public service broadcaster should be.

In my opinion, it's difficult for any station to truly be a truly public broadcaster if they're reliant on advertising revenue. Reason being that some of their output could be influenced by a pressure to not upset those advertisers, even when that output is for the public good.

But having said that, TG4 do manage to balance this quite well. TV3, on the other hand.....Ugh.

That's why if RTE want to bang the drum about upping the license fee, I'd say on the condition that they stop showing any and all advertisements. If that means they have to do any and all of the following, A) Buy less foreign shows, Lose certain presenters, C) Only be able to broadcast so many hours a day, then so be it.

diomed

SEPT 23 1989 wrote: »

Sell off the rest of the Montrose holiday camp and move the inmates to a purpose built studio in an industrial estate in west dublin

But it is close to where they live, and close to the N11.

SEPT 23 1989

diomed wrote: »

But it is close to where they live, and close to the N11.

Pampered shower of [email protected] they wouldn't know real life if it smacked them in the face

ebbsy

Whopping pay packages good afternoon to you.

Always number 1

They need to be cleverer about collecting the license fee. If you 'only' use Netflix or Chrome cast or whatever then you've nothing to worry about but if you want to sign up to the likes of Sky/Virgin Media/Eir you either need to prove you have a tv license or else pay a certain amount per month on top of your providers bill for the license.
Maybe if they trimmed back the extortionate salaries, get rid of the dead wood, ditch 2fm, stop commissioning Vogue fronted sh1te or wedding related reality tv drivel, only have 1 chat show per week - Late Late through the winter then Saturday night show during the summer, shorten both these programmes so they're not wheeling the same faces out of the RTE canteen and they might have a chance of being a decent broadcaster.
As for the Eurovision, unless I'm proven wrong this week, we're not going to win it so why are we forking out for a singer and their entourage to go over to the host city for over a week along with Marty Whelan and his entourage not to mention forking out for the viewing rights.. we had our fun now we need to move on..

Trasna1

lawred2 wrote: »

Being honest I think that the orchestras are far more worthy public services than 2FM or RTE2

It would be great if RTE actually used them. Whatever about seeing the concert orchestra on a special once a year, I don't think I've ever seen a performance of the symphony orchestra on RTE.

lawred2

Trasna1 wrote: »

lawred2 wrote: »

Being honest I think that the orchestras are far more worthy public services than 2FM or RTE2

It would be great if RTE actually used them. Whatever about seeing the concert orchestra on a special once a year, I don't think I've ever seen a performance of the symphony orchestra on RTE.

Good point.

But they prefer to spend money importing US and UK tripe

backspin.

I don't agree with privatizing rte. We'd end up with some crook like redacted buying it and feeding us his propaganda. That being said RTE is far to right on and liberal for my liking. Dropping Network 2 is a good idea and reduce the number of radio stations. Lower their salaries.

No way in hell should the license fee increase though. They should count themselves lucky to be getting it as is.

Ulysses Gaze

Of course the majority of any license fee increase will to be pay for the monstrous pensions that RTE have to dish out.

backspin.

I find RTE radio 1 to be morbid as hell. From their ultra serious grilling of politicians on the morning show to the constant misery on sean o rourke, ray darcy and joe duffy. Every day they end up talking about death and disease. Or else money issues.

Maewyn Succat

Gannicus wrote: »

I'd have:

1 or 2 radio stations

RTE 1 & TG4

1 Orchestra

Huge paycuts and reshuffling of the "stars".

Maybe they could go backwards completely and record everything in black and white.
Do you really think everyone in the country really wants to pay for a sky package or similar option?

weldoninhio

Maewyn Succat wrote: »

Maybe they could go backwards completely and record everything in black and white.
Do you really think everyone in the country really wants to pay for a sky package or similar option?

No one has to pay for Sky or similar if they done want it. What’s your point caller?

lawred2

Maewyn Succat wrote: »

Gannicus wrote: »

I'd have:

1 or 2 radio stations

RTE 1 & TG4

1 Orchestra

Huge paycuts and reshuffling of the "stars".

Maybe they could go backwards completely and record everything in black and white.
Do you really think everyone in the country really wants to pay for a sky package or similar option?

Freesat requires no package

Harry Palmr

Maewyn Succat wrote: »

Do you really think everyone in the country really wants to pay for a sky package or similar option?

Have you heard of Freesat? Google it if not.

gctest50

Always number 1 wrote: »

They need to be cleverer about collecting the license fee. If you 'only' use Netflix or Chrome cast or whatever then you've nothing to worry about but if you want to sign up to the likes of Sky/Virgin Media/Eir you either need to prove you have a tv license or else pay a certain amount per month on top of your providers bill for the license.
.......

What would be do-able if you want your place to be an RTE-free-zone is

your ISP block RTE

get SKY to scramble RTE

remove your Saorview antenna

AlmightyCushion

Grayson wrote: »

As for the TV license, I was one of the dodgers. I bought one a few weeks ago because of all the annoying letters they sent me.

I don't own a radio and only use my TV for my chromecast and xbox. I don't use a single service that they provide.

If that's all you use it for then get rid of the TV and buy a large screen monitor. It's like a TV but without the tuner which means it doesn't require a TV license.

For Forks Sake

briany wrote: »

In my opinion, it's difficult for any station to truly be a truly public broadcaster if they're reliant on advertising revenue. Reason being that some of their output could be influenced by a pressure to not upset those advertisers, even when that output is for the public good.

But having said that, TG4 do manage to balance this quite well. TV3, on the other hand.....Ugh.

That's why if RTE want to bang the drum about upping the license fee, I'd say on the condition that they stop showing any and all advertisements. If that means they have to do any and all of the following, A) Buy less foreign shows, Lose certain presenters, C) Only be able to broadcast so many hours a day, then so be it.

ligerdub

I'm not sure if the licence fee has any contribution towards the general upkeep of general signals required to provide TV services of any kind to the people of Ireland. If it does then it has a material impact on the the value of the licence fee. For the purposes of what I'll post in the next few paragraphs I'm going to assume that non-RTE channels receive no benefit from the licence fee, including any costs required to maintain their service to customers here.

There are a few different problems I have with the licence fee in general. First off there is the threatening advertisement that the requirement of a tv licence "is the law, and one of the terms and conditions of living in the Republic of Ireland". Well that's not true for starters.

The quality of programming has taken a marked decline since Forbes took over. I've also seen her own blog style posts appear on the main page of the RTE website. This isn't a personal website, it's the website of the national broadcaster. Their website is quite fond of certain narratives being shared in their "Lifestyle" or "Opinion" piece. These are generally on the same slants, and notably never allow for any comments at the bottom. They also conveniently state that the views don't represent the views of RTE..........why put it on your site then??! By way of a quick scan through of recent examples:

- Karl Marx, a gushing tribute to the man.

- "Can't Cope, Won't Cope hails all female-driven team" - self-explanatory

- "Comic on the genius and absurdity of being a woman" - some female stand-up comedian, that's noteworthy apparently.

- "Why Beyonce Matters" - a dreadful piece

- A few articles on the disparity in pay between the 2 main actors in "The Crown", as well as a few around the Navratilova/BBC non-issue.

- "Lottie will be running amok on Can't Stop Dancing" - Gerry Ryan will never depart RTE, and for some reason they want us to believe that we want all of their kids to be successful in the entertainment industry. We've seen 2 of his daughters and 1 of his sons promoted on their site for some reason. It's not like Ryan was particularly talented or ubiquitously popular. He was at best a reasonably popular guy, in the mould of an Ian Dempsey or Dave Fanning. Nice guys and all, but not remarkable. As mentioned elsewhere in this thread, the level of nepotism is unbelievable in Montrose.

Forbes has also strongly pursued a feminist agenda, with gender quotas for programming, salary and positions front and centre. We've seen all sorts of crap promoted as elite level stuff and presented people as national treasures, Huberman, "Can't Cope, Won't Cope", Alison Spittle. We've seen plenty of rubbish from guys too, but they rarely get the same level of faux fanfare.

If RTE was truly this impartial organisation then we wouldn't have seen the endless unnecessary anti-Trump, anti-Brexit stuff from them. When it comes to stuff from home then it has largely done well to remain apolitical, but even that is under threat I feel.

I consider it anti-competitive to demand a payment for a service, and only then can people use the services of their competitor. What if I want to sign-up to Sky Sports or the like but I have absolutely zero interest in anything RTE produce, to the point where I'd be happy to limit any signal into the house? Why should I have to pay for something I want, and then something I don't want because of that?

If there was no such thing as RTE up until now and we had the option of watching the likes of Sky, then there would be absolutely no way that people would put up with a situation where we'd suddenly have to fork out dosh for this brand new state broadcaster with Tubs et al on show....and the best part being you have to pay for it if you want to keep watching the other stuff. The licence fee is from an era when the only option was RTE, and then at a later point the option of BBC and a small number of UK channels. In 2018 there is an absolutely huge amount of choice for the viewer.

There's very little that RTE shows which of sufficient quality, and that can't be found through other means. It is kept going simply on the basis that people haven't dissented enough to move to a better model.

Atoms for Peace

backspin. wrote: »

I find RTE radio 1 to be morbid as hell. From their ultra serious grilling of politicians on the morning show to the constant misery on sean o rourke, ray darcy and joe duffy. Every day they end up talking about death and disease. Or else money issues.

Their late night and early morning music shows are decent.

Maewyn Succat

Harry Palmr wrote: »

Have you heard of Freesat? Google it if not.

To be honest I don't live in Ireland so I haven't. I was only aware of Saorview which is owned by RTE.

TallGlass

We have the banker tax called the USC, we can have the RTE tax added called the RTC, sure fúck it, lets add any company that seemingly can't fund themselves or balance there books to my payslip at the end of the month.

Shall we start a tally?

We have the government for starters, don't know there arses from the next day off, summer break coming up.

We have the banker tax on me payslip.

Bit indirect but any insurance policy has a Mr Quinn direct tax added on there.

Sugar there now, cause I am such a fat bastard. Gwan Leo good man, you manage me diet.

Sure fúck it gwan Leo, add on the RTE tax there.

Anyone else need a bailout, sure add them on there Leo, good man.

Even after that Leo, good man add another there sure fúck it, what would I be doing with money anyway. Sort it out after your summer break Leo good man. Don't want you working to hard.

Dee your doing such a good job in RTE, it will be a positive reaction when you get it, sure give everyone a pay-rise and start complaining again in a few months.

Netflix have a billionaire backer like RTE, yet charge less and provide content I want to watch, without adds. Amazing.

trixiebust

backspin. wrote: »

I find RTE radio 1 to be morbid as hell. From their ultra serious grilling of politicians on the morning show to the constant misery on sean o rourke, ray darcy and joe duffy. Every day they end up talking about death and disease. Or else money issues.

Money issues - which most of the staff in RTE don't have to worry about.

jk23

Can someone tell me what companies are after Nicky Byrne or Ray D’arcy? To justify their salaries??

traveller0101

I've never attended a protest but if there was a protest against RTE I would join it

backspin.

ligerdub wrote: »

If RTE was truly this impartial organisation then we wouldn't have seen the endless unnecessary anti-Trump, anti-Brexit stuff from them.

Thats a good point, whats the use of RTE if they can't remain objective. I don't want some money hungry billionaire buying them and feeding us his view of the world. But i also don't want a neo-Marxist SJW worldview rammed down my throat by our state broadcaster either.

NinetyTwoTeam

what concerns me now is them trying to widen the tv license net to include PCs laptops and smartphones and I think any moves to do this should face stern resistance like with the water charge (thankfully the success of the water protests made the government second guess this plan)

there needs to be a way for people to opt out of the rte fee, especially if they can't afford it. i got rid of my TV because i cant afford it and anything i want to watch I get online from non-rte sources.

smartphones and laptops have been sold for years, to sudd impose a tax on things people already bought seems incredibly unfair. they justify it by saying that rte has stuff online, so what? you can't just start charging people a separate fee because you decided to make a website.

Hitman3000

I think we are inundated with such amazing talent we should be grateful an organisation such as the BBC has not felt brave enough to attempt to poach them.

Venom

NinetyTwoTeam wrote: »

what concerns me now is them trying to widen the tv license net to include PCs laptops and smartphones and I think any moves to do this should face stern resistance like with the water charge (thankfully the success of the water protests made the government second guess this plan)

there needs to be a way for people to opt out of the rte fee, especially if they can't afford it. i got rid of my TV because i cant afford it and anything i want to watch I get online from non-rte sources.

smartphones and laptops have been sold for years, to sudd impose a tax on things people already bought seems incredibly unfair. they justify it by saying that rte has stuff online, so what? you can't just start charging people a separate fee because you decided to make a website.

The reason they want to add PC's, tablet's and phones onto the licence is partly due to the latest generation of computer monitors which are coming in bigger and bigger sizes and have streaming apps like Netflix and Amazon built in so you could legally watch all your favorite shows without needing the likes of a cable box and most importantly RTE.

It really must terrify the likes of RTE, just how quickly and widespread the "watch what you want, when you want" model of consuming content from the likes of Netflix and Amazon, has worked its way through society without the need for a TV and more importantly a licence fee and and and at such a low price point.