Martyn Drake's Blog

Could the TV license fee form part of council tax or income tax bill? NO! NO! NO!

According to the Daily Mail, the BBC Director General Mark Thomspon has suggested that the TV license fee could be scrapped and instead funded through council or income tax.

No, no, no, no, NO.

TV is, and always will be, a luxury item.  It is not essential in the daily lives of millions of people.  It is entertainment.  It should not, and must not be made compulsory for those that choose not to watch TV.  Taxation is there to pay for the essentials of running the community and country.  Watching TV must be about choice.

The problem is that the BBC, who has produced a wonderful video on demand system through their iPlayer system, doesn't seem to know how to best get money from those of us that have done away with TV (and therefore the TV license) and have gone online to watch shows through video-on-demand systems such as the iPlayer, 4oD, ITV Catch-up, etc.  Fox's Hulu is set to join the UK VoD revolution later this year too.

The BBC could (and I've said this before) restrict iPlayer to those holding a TV license - in that you have to authenticate yourself as a license player before watching programs whether it be live or not.  Or perhaps they could have a separate iPlayer license.  No full TV license would be required, but you'd have pay a small monthly or annual fee to gain access to watch programs (live or otherwise) through the iPlayer service only. 

Either way, the BBC has got to find a better solution to the TV license system as it currently stands.  But it must not involve being made compulsory through taxation.  No way.  And neither must the TV license be shared by commercial broadcasters such as ITV or Channel 4.  If they can't raise their funding through advertising, then that's their problem.  Not ours.

Heute Cuisine

Today I shall be mostly trying Strawberry Jaffa Cakes and Guinness Chocolate.

Why I dislike free email services..

I've just come across a situation which highlights the problems of using free non-domain email services such as Gmail, Hotmail, AOL or similar (including your broadband ISP's email service). 

There is a finite number of account names one can pick when setting up a new email account on these services.  As such, the uniqueness of your email address may come down to having to pick out a certain letter-number combination, such as:

mbdrake1976
mdrake76
martyndrake1976
etc.

because martyndrake@isp.com has been taken by somebody else.

What do you think would happen if I were to mistype, perhaps leaving out the 'b' in mbdrake, into a form which would send back important account information?  They may well be a mdrake76 already existing on the same service I'm using.  I could be unwittingly giving them confidential account details for an online service if I mistype one single letter.

I've just seen something like this happen, and it's reinforced my belief that spending a few pounds for one's own domain name and a hosting (or email hosting) service is a good thing to do.  It doesn't get rid of the problem completely, because there could well be martyn@drake.* mailboxes other than at .org.uk or .me.uk.  But at least it's a bit more unique than wibbly8234@someisp.com.

I also find that having an email address which uses a domain name to be much more professional looking, and also a lot easier to remember.  Especially when it comes to businesses.  I'm still confused about businesses that use Hotmail, Gmail or similar free services when providing email contacts.  I can't for the life of me remember any of those kind of addresses.  You'll also find there are some online retailers who refuse to take Hotmail, AOL or similar free accounts due to their reputation.

So go on - do yourself a favour - buy a domain name and use a decent email hosting service (and Memset can help you with that).

Journalists and the BBC

Full credit to my wife for spotting that the Daily Mail made the mistake of referring to the BBC as being funded by taxpayers.  Of course, this is not so (although one could argue that any MP who is claiming their TV license fee on expenses IS making us fund the BBC through tax!).  The BBC is funded entirely by the optional TV license fee.  Having a TV is a personal choice and is not something that is being forced upon you, quite unlike paying tax.

It’s somewhat ironic, therefore, that commercial broadcasters want a slice of the TV license fee for themselves.  Particularly when you consider that the big commercial broadcasters such as ITV, Channel 4 and the rest actually cost the TV license payer even MORE money than the BBC, since commercial broadcasters are funded from advertising.  Who pays the advertisers?  We do.  We buy their products.  We use their services.  Well, those that pay the TV license fee and have televisions, anyway.

If there is anything or anyone that’s failing commercial broadcasters is the ad agencies themselves.  Have you seen any REALLY good TV commercials recently?  Something actually SELLs you the product that you go out and buy it just as soon as you can?  No, neither have I.  Ad agencies are running out of ideas and have been producing lame and uninteresting adverts for quite some time now.  The recession may play one part in nobody spending money, but I can assure you that while agencies continue to pump out over the top and ridiculous adverts – nobody is going want to buy whatever the heck it is they’re trying to sell you.  A gorilla playing the drums?  Do be brief.  Those people that are already eating Cadbury’s chocolate are going to be doing so anyway.  They don’t need a man in a monkey suit to convince them it’s still okay.

Going back to the TV license; while I have no real strong opinions on how the TV license is spent (other than it must NOT go to commercial broadcasters for the reason I’ve specified above), TV license payers are not shareholders.  And yet we have the BBC Trust to ensure that certain standards are met and that the TV license represents value for money.  And TV license payers have no say in who gets to decide all this.

What a thoroughly strange way to organise and watch news and entertainment.  I am still very glad not to own a TV.

Wibble.

Wibble, wibble.  Wibble wibble wibble.  Pong!  And further more the tap dancing chickens of the dead mongoose king performed the dance of magic against the BBC's 10 O'Clock News.

(Yes, proper content will appear here soon)