|
13,000 UK households still using black and white TVs
|
|
The following comments relate to this news article:
article published on 12 January, 2013
In the age of 4K resolution and OLED super displays, some people seem to just not care.
The UK's television licensing authority has announced that just over 13,000 households in the region are still using black and white TVs, even though color broadcasts began on BBC in 1967.
While the display is certainly not current, users may have other motives for keeping them. A b&w TV license ... [ read the full article ]
Please read the original article before posting your comments.
|
Member
|
12. January 2013 @ 19:35 |
Link to this message
|
I always forget that in the UK you need a license to watch TV
|
|
Advertisement
|
 |
|
|
|
JST1946
Senior Member
|
12. January 2013 @ 19:42 |
Link to this message
|
|
Sounds like a great place to live.
20 Year U.S.Army Veteran.Vietnam 1969-1972 101st Abn.Div.
|
|
Bozobub
Senior Member
|
12. January 2013 @ 20:15 |
Link to this message
|
Well, remember, their OTA television and radio channels are mostly public-funded. They do get some money from commercials, but nowhere near enough to offset costs. These fees offset that.
This message has been edited since posting. Last time this message was edited on 12. January 2013 @ 20:16
|
|
Justoneguy
Member
|
12. January 2013 @ 21:53 |
Link to this message
|
If television is anything like it is here, nothing but ridiculous reality tv garbage and commercials, it doesn't surprise me.
This message has been edited since posting. Last time this message was edited on 12. January 2013 @ 21:54
|
|
Bozobub
Senior Member
|
12. January 2013 @ 22:56 |
Link to this message
|
|
Compared to what they spend, the BBC gets 5-10x the effect out of the same (rather, usually far less) amount of money as the equivalent US production.
|
|
Justoneguy
Member
|
12. January 2013 @ 23:38 |
Link to this message
|
Originally posted by Bozobub:
Compared to what they spend, the BBC gets 5-10x the effect out of the same (rather, usually far less) amount of money as the equivalent US production.
I'm a little confused by your comment, the bbc gets 5-10x the equivalent, usually far less. I know it probably wasn't directed at myself, but could you elaborate?
|
AfterDawn Addict
1 product review
|
13. January 2013 @ 00:46 |
Link to this message
|
Here in the us every taxpayer pays for public TV even if they have no TV at all...and we don't even get top gear...
|
|
Bigwillyz
Member
|
13. January 2013 @ 01:16 |
Link to this message
|
|
We do have top gear. . . . . . the US version is way more interesting and fun to watch, the latter is stale with dry humor
|
|
Bozobub
Senior Member
|
13. January 2013 @ 01:16 |
Link to this message
|
|
Public television gets very little, relatively, from the US government. If you charged a license fee on TVs to cover it, it'd work out to $1-3 per "license". Furthermore, more than half their funding is from private donations.
The US spends over twice the annual federal funding of PBS, which is about $445 million, per day on servicing the interest on the national debt, to the tune of $1 billion each day. Similarly, at the height of the 2nd Iraq war, the US was spending $1.5-$2.5 billion per day on that conflict alone.
This message has been edited since posting. Last time this message was edited on 13. January 2013 @ 01:20
|
AfterDawn Addict
1 product review
|
13. January 2013 @ 01:39 |
Link to this message
|
Originally posted by Bozobub:
Public television gets very little, relatively, from the US government. If you charged a license fee on TVs to cover it, it'd work out to $1-3 per "license". Furthermore, more than half their funding is from private donations.
The US spends over twice the annual federal funding of PBS, which is about $445 million, per day on servicing the interest on the national debt, to the tune of $1 billion each day. Similarly, at the height of the 2nd Iraq war, the US was spending $1.5-$2.5 billion per day on that conflict alone.
Originally posted by Bigwillyz:
We do have top gear. . . . . . the US version is way more interesting and fun to watch, the latter is stale with dry humor
Personally I am not a big fan of our version of Top Gear...and you have to pay for cable to get it anyway. Since I am always on the road, this isn't even an option. At least people in the UK can watch it online without paying for a VPN.
I am not sure how much exactly goes to where as far as taxes...but I do know that I pay a huge amount for internet access taxes that would far exceed the color TV tax that covers this in the UK. I also know that the local PBS channel in my city got almost $1 million from the federal government last year, and other than one very crummy news show, everything was rebroadcasts of content from other stations...usually stuff that was rather old.
|
|
Justoneguy
Member
|
13. January 2013 @ 01:40 |
Link to this message
|
Originally posted by KillerBug:
Here in the us every taxpayer pays for public TV even if they have no TV at all...and we don't even get top gear...
We also spend billions upon billions on public works projects no one will ever see to create "jobs." I have to agree with you though, the exclusion of top gear form my channel lineup is complete bullsh*t.
|
Senior Member
|
13. January 2013 @ 03:05 |
Link to this message
|
i live in australia.we have uk top gear but mostly just reruns now and we have an australian version of top gear.we have about 20- free to air digital channels.no licence required.
i'd hate to have to pay for a tv licence to watch tv.even worst that you have to pay for a licence
Quote:
if you own a computer, tablet, smartphone or DVR,
i did hear you can get tv,internet phone bundles (In uk) which are cheaper.
custom built gaming pc from early 2010,ps2 with 15 games all original,ps3 500gbs with 5 games all original,yamaha amp and 5.1channel surround sound speakers,46inch sony lcd smart tv.
|
|
Bigwillyz
Member
|
13. January 2013 @ 03:08 |
Link to this message
|
Bottom line is TV is just garbage nowadays with reality that's not really reality and dumb trash can make it big by doing nothing. This kind of stuff makes me embarrassed to be American, it's just sad and makes people that work hard feel like crap. I really don't know where we are headed but it's not looking good so far. . . . . along with paying out the ass for less and less
|
AfterDawn Addict
4 product reviews
|
13. January 2013 @ 05:56 |
Link to this message
|
Originally posted by Justoneguy:
Originally posted by KillerBug:
Here in the us every taxpayer pays for public TV even if they have no TV at all...and we don't even get top gear...
We also spend billions upon billions on public works projects no one will ever see to create "jobs." I have to agree with you though, the exclusion of top gear form my channel lineup is complete bullsh*t.
A shame all that money has gone to waste...have you looked at our infrastructure lately?
Copyright infringement is nothing more than civil disobedience to a bad set of laws. Lets renegotiate them.
|
|
PraisesToAllah
Member
|
13. January 2013 @ 11:48 |
Link to this message
|
Originally posted by Azuran:
I always forget that in the UK you need a license to watch TV
I never heard of this nonsense. It probably isn't nonsense after all the number crunching, but out front, it sounds like BS to me.
|
|
ddp
Moderator
|
13. January 2013 @ 12:57 |
Link to this message
|
PraisesToAllah, is not nonsense about having to have a license to have a tv & i think radio in the uk.
|
|
Bozobub
Senior Member
|
13. January 2013 @ 13:28 |
Link to this message
|
Yes, you have to have a license for a TV or radio in the UK. In fact, if you play your boom-box outside where others can hear it (say, in a mechanic's shop or w/e), you're assessed a "public performance" fee. And yes, they have roving officials who enforce the fee.
|
|
JayBino
Newbie
|
13. January 2013 @ 13:59 |
Link to this message
|
I still dont get why people still have a Tube TV ... HDTV is awesome
|
|
PraisesToAllah
Member
|
13. January 2013 @ 16:06 |
Link to this message
|
ddp, you are correct. This isn't nonsense.
Originally posted by Wikipedia:
In the United Kingdom and the Crown Dependencies, any household watching or recording live broadcast television transmissions (terrestrial, satellite, cable, or internet) is required to purchase an annual television licence. As of 2012, this costs £145.50 for colour and £49.00 for black and white.
Is this per household or per tv?
This message has been edited since posting. Last time this message was edited on 13. January 2013 @ 16:06
|
|
Justoneguy
Member
|
13. January 2013 @ 17:04 |
Link to this message
|
Originally posted by Bozobub:
In fact, if you play your boom-box outside where others can hear it (say, in a mechanic's shop or w/e), you're assessed a "public performance" fee. And yes, they have roving officials who enforce the fee.
Now that sounds ridiculous, but I'm sure the fees go directly to the artists, so it's all good....
This message has been edited since posting. Last time this message was edited on 13. January 2013 @ 17:10
|
|
xtago
Senior Member
|
13. January 2013 @ 21:23 |
Link to this message
|
It's per household, and they have scanners to check if you have a TV or not.
I think radio is free now in the UK. Main reason for so many stations in the UK.
|
|
Bozobub
Senior Member
|
13. January 2013 @ 22:45 |
Link to this message
|
Originally posted by JayBino:
I still dont get why people still have a Tube TV ... HDTV is awesome
An HDTV is still assessed as a TV, and you pay the color TV fee. It doesn't matter whether it's a CRT or flat panel.
If you meant the people still using black-and-white TVs, the article clearly explains why (they're cheap). I'd bet most of those folks are Welsh/Scottish ? lol...
This message has been edited since posting. Last time this message was edited on 13. January 2013 @ 22:45
|
|
steveuk9000
Newbie
|
14. January 2013 @ 00:34 |
Link to this message
|
You only need a licence to watch live tv. The licence fee goes to the BBC, not the independent channels. You dont need a licence to Listen to the radio. A shop must pay a fee to ppl for listening to music in the public place. You do not need a licence for a computer. Only when you do not watch live tv then a licence is not required.
The law states that you need to be covered by a TV Licence if you watch or record television programmes, on any device, as theyre being shown on TV. This includes TVs, computers, mobile phones, games consoles, digital boxes and Blu-ray/DVD/VHS recorders.
----------
goto www tvlicensing co uk/notv
You dont need a licence if you dont use any of these devices to watch or record television programmes as theyre being shown on TV - for example, if you use your TV only to watch DVDs or play video games, or you only watch ?catch up? services like BBC iPlayer or 4oD.
This message has been edited since posting. Last time this message was edited on 14. January 2013 @ 00:35
|
|
townliar
Newbie
|
18. January 2013 @ 07:44 |
Link to this message
|
YOU DO NOT NEED A TV LICENCE IN THE UK FOR A COMPUTER OR TABLET OR DVD PR GAMES MACHINE DO NOT BELIEVE THE BBC SPIN TO MAKE YOU PAY!!!!!
|
|
Advertisement
|
|
|
|
townliar
Newbie
|
18. January 2013 @ 07:47 |
Link to this message
|
Originally posted by PraisesToAllah:
ddp, you are correct. This isn't nonsense.
Originally posted by Wikipedia:
In the United Kingdom and the Crown Dependencies, any household watching or recording live broadcast television transmissions (terrestrial, satellite, cable, or internet) is required to purchase an annual television licence. As of 2012, this costs £145.50 for colour and £49.00 for black and white.
Is this per household or per tv?
Household
|
