Hacker News new | ask | show | jobs
by nvm0n2 935 days ago
License fee evasion is one of the top traffic sources in the British court system, the idea that it's done "on the honour system" is mendacious. There are people in prison right now for not paying it. The BBC is at its most foundational level a state-backed company built on state power.

Doctor Who is a children's show and dates from the 50s. There have been reports for years that BBC executives hate it and would love to kill it, prevented only by its popularity [2]. Red Dwarf is a comedy and hasn't been made for decades. It was greenlit only because the BBC had spare budget left over from some other show, not because they actually wanted to do it. As I said: the BBC thinks sci-fi is for children or to laugh at, and barely even that.

> it may be the most popular in your circle, or your mind, but this is demonstrably, obviously untrue

It's a few years ago now but e.g.

https://tbivision.com/2018/04/25/netflix-ordered-more-sci-fi...

"following the success of flagship series like Stranger Things, sci-fi and fantasy was the most popular genre on Netflix"

If you look at the list of the top shows on Netflix then sci-fi, fantasy and horror are consistently amongst the most popular shows:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_most-watched_Netflix_o...

The BBC just doesn't do these, at all.

> what ideology is against sci-fi?

The BBC was fundamentally founded on a deeply classist Reithian ideology and it has never fully discarded this culture. It thinks its primary role is to improve the public and TV/radio production is just a means to that end. Given a choice of making an expensive period drama (what it calls "culture"), an expensive lecture on climate change or an expensive sci-fi/fantasy show they will never pick the latter, it just culturally displeases their executives at a very fundamental level to do so. Netflix also has problems with ideology [1] but it doesn't hold them back to the extent of neglecting whole genres of TV/movie output (with the possible exception of news, but you could argue that combining entertainment and news isn't natural and only an artifact of bandwidth constraints in earlier eras). Netflix's primary mission is just to give people what they want to watch.

[1] https://knowyourmeme.com/memes/netflix-blackwashing-parodies

[2] https://www.sfcrowsnest.info/bbc-hates-sci-fi-a-little-less-...

1 comments

https://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/genres/drama/scifiandfantas...

it’s not communism if you don’t have to pay for it. it makes me so angry that politically compromised right-wingers choose to misunderstand this. if I go to the supermarket and just walk out with my shopping, that’s a crime in the same way that it’s a crime if I get on the train without paying or turn on the BBC and watch without paying, this isn’t some authoritarian communistic impingement upon your rights, it’s just goods and services. and before you repeat that “state-owned, state-backed” nonsense, publically-owned bodies are not communism. the military is not communism. the NHS is not communism. the BBC is so far from communism it’s a joke.

you would think that right-wing people would love the BBC’s model. the BBC isn’t funded through taxes, the consumer has choice, it’s constantly being restricted in order to maintain private competition, but no. why no? because “BBC bad” is constantly pushed through the right-wing media because they have a literal direct profit motive for you to see it as bad.

if the BBC doesn’t fit your incredibly specific ideas for what content it should pursue, how about this? just don’t pay for it. watch something else. vote with your feet like you can do with any other streaming service. send them a letter telling them why. you can be damn sure they’ll pay more attention to it than Netflix would.

finally, “mendacious” means lying, I’d make sure to understand my words before I use them, if I were you

> if you don’t have to pay for it ... the BBC isn’t funded through taxes, the consumer has choice ... just don’t pay for it. watch something else ... vote with your feet like you can do with any other streaming service

You keep talking as if the license fee is a normal TV subscription. Are you British because there seems to be a really deep misunderstanding here?

The license fee is a tax. You have to pay it if you watch or record any TV broadcast and that includes streaming, any live TV at all in the UK, and that applies even if you never watch the BBC and don't want to. Got a Sky TV or cable subscription? Doesn't matter, you still gotta pay the BBC. There is no just watch something else and don't pay. There is no vote with your feet. That's why it's called a TV license and not a BBC license.

what I don’t understand is why people say things that they don’t know are true. you can’t know this is true, because it isn’t. next time the tv license people send you a letter, actually read it
From the UK government website:

https://www.gov.uk/find-licences/tv-licence

"You need a TV Licence to watch or record programmes on a TV, computer or other device as they're broadcast, and to watch on-demand BBC programmes on iPlayer"

In this thread you keep insisting I'm lying and I keep showing you, with evidence, that you're wrong, but you just keep doubling down and ranting about right wing people. What specifically do you object to in my description?

at what point did I accuse you of lying?

I pointed out that you (probably accidentally) accused me of lying, if that’s what you’re confused by? or do you mean that I accused you of being confidently wrong? being wrong isn’t lying

does the fact that you were completely misinformed about the main substance of the previous comment not make you question the grounding of your opinions on this? where did you get the idea that you needed a TV license to stream, or do anything other than watch live TV?

> where did you get the idea that you needed a TV license to stream, or do anything other than watch live TV?

You're arguing with a straw man. I've never said you need to pay the license if you only watch Netflix. I've said that the tax structure protects the BBC and allows it to ignore popular types of programming. You've been unable to refute this point and so have segued into trying to argue that the license fee isn't really a tax, which is (a) not a point I made and (b) wrong.

You can avoid the license fee by watching only US based streamers on a laptop as long as you don't care about news, sport or any of the other categories of TV that Netflix doesn't provide, just like you could always avoid it by not having a TV or radio. That doesn't mean it's not a tax. Other taxes you can avoid by choice include: income tax, auto taxes, taxes on flights and so on.

I suspect you're being confused by the definition of "streaming". Most streamed TV is still considered to be TV because it's a live broadcast (a channel, that you could tune into). iPlayer is the closest to a UK Netflix and that is also covered. It's only non-BBC "video on demand" that isn't taxed (yet!)

As for lying, you have constantly made statements like that I "choose to misunderstand" or that I'm saying things that are "obviously untrue". I know in your mind technicalities are everything and you think you've never accused anyone of being dishonest, but by the rules of normal conversation you have, repeatedly. And you never apologized when I showed you hard data disproving these "obviously untrue" things.

>> as they're broadcast

That’s the key. Don’t watch live TV, no license fee required.

This part from you:

> You have to pay it if you watch or record any TV broadcast and that includes streaming

Total bollocks.

"Live TV" includes streamed live TV and "broadcast TV" is always considered to be licensable.

You can avoid the license fee only if you watch exclusively internet streamers like Netflix which aren't TV channels. Which means: no TV news or sport. Pretty major components of why people watch TV to begin with.

But this is well into straw men territory. This thread started with me saying that the tax-based structure of the BBC lets it ignore sci-fi. Now you're arguing that you don't have to pay the tax if you are willing to forego the benefits of live TV, which is a point I readily concede because it's irrelevant to the one I made.