Absolute drivel paid for by your TV Licence

Loadza threads

SLOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOW day

the dark phantom wrote: »

Never paid for it

you will pay soon. like it or not.

biko wrote: »

Indeed, Sweden is replacing the licence with a new tax.

About time, to many spongers in this country. The anti-water brigade will finally have to stump up too. :pac:

the dark phantom wrote: »

Whatever new plans come to fruition, they will still be done the Irish Way, So there will be a way somehow to avoid paying it.

I sincerely would like to think so, but I fear it will be hard to avoid.
This is different to water charges, RTE is not a necessity.

MilesMorales1 wrote: »

I mean the fact my TV licence pays for Fair ****ing City makes me sick to my stomach. Or that it paid for that ****ing **** Daniel O'Donnell to go prancing round B&B's for however long those series were over.

Unfortunately they can't make programmes just for you.

There's other people in the country too.

Rologyro wrote: »

There's been a lot of talk about RTE and the TV licence fee the last few days. Apparently we should pay a TV licence fee because RTE produce quality content in the national interest. Then today I come across an article courtesy of RTE.... I can't post a link because I'm new but just google "Digital Dad 12 Things Women Do That Men Dislike"

Here are some of the gems in the article:

The words make-up and chisel should never appear in the same sentence so ladies remember this when you are applying your new face.

Whether it’s clothes strewn across the floor, coffee cups on the bathroom sink or wet towels on the now wet carpet, messy women you are the worst.

You wouldn't get this on bbc.co.uk. Obviously if the genders were reversed I would say the same thing. My point is why are we paying for a service that produces such narrow minded content in the "national interest".

The tv licence would be worth it if
No one @rte was paid more than €100,000 ( & you would really have to be worth it)
Programs were made in Ireland rather than buying off the UK. We have the talent here to do more series like Love/Hate why not invest money into the industry to employ more people?

NIMAN wrote: »

The stupid thing is, they pay for these programmes when there is no need, since Irish residents can usually pick them up from Freesat channels.

Irish people watch Irish TV, that's why they get them. Money on ads.

Are Am Eye wrote: »

On this small, little island of ours we don't pass the threshold population making it feasible to produce an entire television service locally. Economies of Scale dictate that this will be much better provided for at an international level. What we would need from a local broadcaster would just be local i.e Irish news, current affairs and sport. A small cheap provision of the likes of Primetime, League of Ireland and the Rose of Tralee. In terms of mainstream television package then let consumers here pay for sky, netflix etc.

That's not true at all. You don't need a huge country to create a TV show. This "country isn't big enough" is just a defeatist excuse to take the lazy way out with so many things.

The difference between Ireland and any other random country with less than a few million people is that as soon as you try to get anything done here a bunch of well-pampered D4 lads on several 100k a year show up first impeding your progress until you give them a massive wad of cash.

It's just impossible to get anything done here without paying huge money to "the system" for very little in return

Ubbquittious wrote: »

...

a bunch of well-pampered D4 lads on several 100k a year show up first impeding your progress until you give them a massive wad of cash.

...

Are these the heavies from Irishtown you are on about, the ones you see hanging outside the chipper?

Permabear wrote: »

This post had been deleted.

Netflix - 100m subscribers paying €95.88 a year = €9588000000 a year.

Economy of scale, blah, blah, blah.

We don't have a tv license because we don't have a tv, but I can see they're trying to bring in the charge for laptops too... imagine if other places did that! Imagine paying for Netflix even if you don't use it, or Amazon Prime but never have used Amazon before in your life. There would be uproar.

If RTE want people to pay for their service (or quality public service broadcasting as they put it) they should just put everything behind a paywall and let the people who want it pay for it. But of course they won't do that because they know RTE put out zero worthwhile content, apart from the odd primetime program. I use Netflix and Amazon Prime both of which I pay for. I already paid VAT on my TV and I also pay for internet and VAT on that too so why the fcuk should I pay a "broadcasting charge" for a service I never use and have no need for? Just so RTE presenters who present absolute horse sh!te like the late late show and joe duffy's bullsh!t radio can be paid six figure salaries?

Permabear wrote: »

This post had been deleted.

not financially viable. the property rte has will be used for the producing of programing where required. selling it would only bring in short term cash but would leave the operator unable to be flexible long term. public services have to be paid for and decentralisation of public services hasn't worked.
the vast majority of rte's radio stations fulfil a public service obligation. what they provide will never be provided commercially. even 2fm can have a place. follow the model of bbc radio 1 which is 10 times the commercial stations, or target an older audience and be a bbc radio 2 type format (the most listened to radio station in the uk)
there are lots of issues with rte but the digital radio stations are decent and radio 1 was a fcuking god send during storm athilia when the power was out as it had something to pass most of the day. rte 2 television might be no loss granted. those are separate to the issue of a tv licence however.
the tv licence is to have a tv, it just so happens to go to rte . even if rte was abolished, the likely reality is that you would still have to pay a tv licence.
i hate having to pay it myself and the broadcasting charge i'm absolutely pissed over and i will be protesting it, but i'm also aware of the fact that the licence isn't a rte charge but a charge for having a tv, which so happens to go to rte.
rte will not be made a subscription service, it's a public service and it's programming has to be accessible to all.

The BBC is entirely funded by taxpayers, they don't run ads. There are plenty of people in the BBC on 7 figure salaries. I think thats insanity but unlike RTE the BBC actually produce stuff that is worth watching / listening too.

MadYaker wrote: »

The BBC is entirely funded by taxpayers, they don't run ads. There are plenty of people in the BBC on 7 figure salaries. I think thats insanity but unlike RTE the BBC actually produce stuff that is worth watching / listening too.

agreed. but the state broadcasters will always pay a high salary to those who bring in the most ratings, the same with major commercial broadcasters.
i think the likes of tuberty and darcy are not to a standard that would require the salary they do, but the broadcasting market seems to disagree with me unfortunately. poach back pat kenny and get rid of tuberty or darcy would be my suggestion.

Are Am Eye wrote: »

I don't know what you mean by 'defeatist' because you're going to get a television service anyway. There is no defeat. You just won't be paying extra money for RTE to duplicate what you're already getting. RTE collect money off us. They then spend that money on Eastenders, Coronation Street, Emerdale, Hawaii Five O, Neighbours, Home and Away, Bella and the Bulldogs, Every Witch Way, Jessie, Deadly 60, The Simpsons, Judge Judy, Doctor Phil, Ellen, Oprah, Line of Duty, Fear Thy Neighbour, The Good Karma Hospital, Bad Education, Gotham Wrath of the Villains, Shortland Street, Doctors, A Place To Call Home, Euronews, Sabrina the Teenage Witch (I'm ambivalent on this one), Horrible Histories, Me Too, Mr Mender and the Chummyjiggers, Charlie and Lola, Pablo, Peppa Pig, Brainfreeze, Swashbuckle, The Tom and Jerry Show, Shaun The Sheep, The Big Bang Theory, Champions League Live, Champions League Magazine, Rick Steins Long Weekends etc. etc. RTE also buys and shows a rake of films every week.

Now I don't watch the above crap. If I did watch it then I already have it and have paid for it on my Sky subscription. If I want to watch movies then I'll download them or watch them on netflix or sky. I don't want to pay RTE for duplicating this. Yet I'm legally obliged to. All the above listed programs (just a small sample) are foreign tv available more efficiently and cheaply else where.

RTE should exist only to provide irish news, irish current affairs and irish sport.

how are those programs availible more efficiently elsewhere? showing a tv program is showing a tv program regardless of the channel it's on.

Are Am Eye wrote: »

I don't know what you mean by 'defeatist' because you're going to get a television service anyway. There is no defeat. You just won't be paying extra money for RTE to duplicate what you're already getting. RTE collect money off us. They then spend that money on Eastenders, Coronation Street, Emerdale, Hawaii Five O, Neighbours, Home and Away, Bella and the Bulldogs, Every Witch Way, Jessie, Deadly 60, The Simpsons, Judge Judy, Doctor Phil, Ellen, Oprah, Line of Duty, Fear Thy Neighbour, The Good Karma Hospital, Bad Education, Gotham Wrath of the Villains, Shortland Street, Doctors, A Place To Call Home, Euronews, Sabrina the Teenage Witch (I'm ambivalent on this one), Horrible Histories, Me Too, Mr Mender and the Chummyjiggers, Charlie and Lola, Pablo, Peppa Pig, Brainfreeze, Swashbuckle, The Tom and Jerry Show, Shaun The Sheep, The Big Bang Theory, Champions League Live, Champions League Magazine, Rick Steins Long Weekends etc. etc. RTE also buys and shows a rake of films every week.

Now I don't watch the above crap. If I did watch it then I already have it and have paid for it on my Sky subscription. If I want to watch movies then I'll download them or watch them on netflix or sky. I don't want to pay RTE for duplicating this. Yet I'm legally obliged to. All the above listed programs (just a small sample) are foreign tv available more efficiently and cheaply else where.

RTE should exist only to provide irish news, irish current affairs and irish sport.

There is indeed no need for them to broadcast that imported sh1te but I'd have nothing against them trying to make their own TV shows and documentaries once they don't blow too much money on it.

They're gone so fecking lazy now they have to import nearly everything. They won't even go through the trouble of making something like the Morbegs or the Den anymore. Hardly high budget stuff but they won't bother - they're gone too grande for that kind of thing.

ZeroThreat wrote: »

About time, to many spongers in this country.

The problem when you change a fee into a tax is that
1 you assume everyone should be paying the fee but many don't even watch RTE or even TV. With a tax they are forced to pay for something they don't consume.
2 you can stop paying a fee but you can never stop paying a tax.
3 your favourite RTE star will now be paid by the government using your taxes. This may be ok with you, but it certainly is not ok with me.

Permabear wrote: »

This post had been deleted.

i will defend and criticise what i like. if you don't like it, tough. and for what it's worth i have criticised route plenty of times over the years.

Permabear wrote: »

This post had been deleted.

a proper pop music station with a wide playlist, which introduces people to new music and new genres of music, will never be ran commercially. the pop music stations that are ran commercially are heavily formatted and repetitive. granted 2fm is similar, but it has a chance not to be. listen to bbc radio 1 or 2 as a good example of popular music radio done right with some non-commercially viable genres of music thrown in . then listen to some of the commercial stations both here and in the uk for example. the bbc is in a whole different league. 2fm needs serious reform but there is a place for it if it takes a leaf out of the BBC'S book.

Permabear wrote: »

This post had been deleted.

i won't be as it clearly isn't. in fact, i stated in one of my posts that rte 2 television would likely be no loss.

Permabear wrote: »

This post had been deleted.

in the real world, 2fm is a necessary radio station which at the moment competes with other pop music stations, which aren't anything to shout about themselves. however it can be so much more, but it's going to take some will on the part of rte to change it.
to privatize it would not be viable and is no solution, as it would lead to dominance of the national market by the private sector, which cannot be allowed. there are already 2 national private radio stations, which is enough to meet the demand for private national radio stations. both of those national radio stations are ran by 1 company. 2fm has no unfair advantage over the others.

ancapailldorcha wrote: »

You genuinely believe this? You know that things like Spotify exist right which do this in a much more personalised way, right?



RTE evolve? C'mon, what are the chances of this happening exactly? Zero would be my guess. 2FM isn't remotely necessary. RTE News & Weather, probably. 2FM is just superfluous.

What sort of horrors would a completely private pop music industry wreak on the poor Irish public exactly?

there are already enough private pop music stations for the demand for private pop music stations. just because 2fm is currently more of the same it does not mean it has to remain that way, but it is going to have to move toards a more non-commercially viable format if it is going to be distinct and have a good chance of fulfiling a public service. lets look at bbc radios 1 and 2. both stations which do pop music but have minority programing and minority genres of music which you will not get on commercial privately run radio stations because it's not commercially viable.
as to an answer to the question, a fully private radio market would be the same as having a state only radio market. it would not be in the public interest as dominance of 1 sector where both can exist will eventually lead to only the lowest common denominator being targeted at the expence of everyone else.