ccfcchris
Fan Favourite
- Joined
- Sep 3, 2011
- Messages
- 2,844
- Reaction score
- 2,720
If it is so good and so loved, why are we being coerced into paying for it?
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
Go and study what BBC does and how it provides information and benefits the Country educationally. It aims to caters for everyone and is amazing value for money. It promotes tv, film, comedy, creative filmmaking. It promotes and links with science, technology, politics, news, history, archives, careers, health, food, sport, art, music, and is a major source of entertainment on tv and radio.If it is so good and so loved, why are we being coerced into paying for it?
This thread seems apt.
Not at all right. Whatever you think of them is your opinion. But if they were to be replaced, it should always be the best person for the job, not because they are black, gay, disabled or whatever other quota is short. They equally shouldn't be excluded because of being black, gay, disabled etc but should always be on merit.Quite right too. 3 fucking wankers.
Well…we could get into a very long discussion here…Not at all right. Whatever you think of them is your opinion. But if they were to be replaced, it should always be the best person for the job, not because they are black, gay, disabled or whatever other quota is short. They equally shouldn't be excluded because of being black, gay, disabled etc but should always be on merit.
I agree, but watching the clip all he was asked is if they had considered employing a presenter that represented a portion of the demographic or their viewers. Like he said, if he'd have said "we'll give that some thought", he'd have left and got on with recruiting whoever he felt best without and come back. But stupid middle class middle aged man made in the same mould of the 3 middle class middle age wanker presenters decided to be an arse.Not at all right. Whatever you think of them is your opinion. But if they were to be replaced, it should always be the best person for the job, not because they are black, gay, disabled or whatever other quota is short. They equally shouldn't be excluded because of being black, gay, disabled etc but should always be on merit.
So out of Chris Evans, Matt LeBlanc and Eddie Jordan which one is black, which one is gay and which one is disabled?But if they were to be replaced, it should always be the best person for the job, not because they are black, gay, disabled or whatever other quota is short.
EJ disabled (midget)So out of Chris Evans, Matt LeBlanc and Eddie Jordan which one is black, which one is gay and which one is disabled?
CE dates young women while he's in his thirties I think.EJ disabled (midget)
MLB gay
CE deviant
BillieCE dates young women while he's in his thirties I think.
BBC 6 Music is my go to.Compared to what I pay to other TV subscriptions BBC Radio is worth the licence fee alone. BBC Radio 4 and World service is unparalleled.
Disagree completely. It should be a choice and a subscription service like all the others. Nobody forces me to have Netflix or Sky, but if I want to watch those I also need to have a TV licence to fund the BBC.I love the BBC. People pay for enough crap Tele but begrudge paying for the BBC. Imo it should be put into normal taxation so no one can avoid paying
You do realise that if you only watch on-demand or catch-up (as long as it's not i-player) you don't have to pay a tv licence, right?Disagree completely. It should be a choice and a subscription service like all the others. Nobody forces me to have Netflix or Sky, but if I want to watch those I also need to have a TV licence to fund the BBC.
No I didnt, I always thought if you had a tv you had to have a licence. Back when there was only analogue, you couldn't claim you only watched ITV.You do realise that if you only watch on-demand or catch-up (as long as it's not i-player) you don't have to pay a tv licence, right?
So are you just going to promise to not listen to any of the BBC radio stations like CWR on an away day when the game isn’t on TV? The big difference is that the BBC is on the open air, Netflix ect isn’t. It’s a false equivalence.Disagree completely. It should be a choice and a subscription service like all the others. Nobody forces me to have Netflix or Sky, but if I want to watch those I also need to have a TV licence to fund the BBC.
I'll be at the match Tony, you should try it.So are you just going to promise to not listen to any of the BBC radio stations like CWR on an away day when the game isn’t on TV? The big difference is that the BBC is on the open air, Netflix ect isn’t. It’s a false equivalence.
You don't need a TV licence to listen to radio.Compared to what I pay to other TV subscriptions BBC Radio is worth the licence fee alone. BBC Radio 4 and World service is unparalleled.
But the fee contrbutes to the maintenance and broadcastYou don't need a TV licence to listen to radio.
No thanks.But the fee contrbutes to the Maintenance and bradcast
I didn't know they had a Walliams LandLooks like Alton Towers have jumped first.
You should see the Stuart Hall of mirrorsI didn't know they had a Walliams Landright next to Rolf World and Bill Cosby Creek.
I didn't know they had a Walliams Landright next to Rolf World and Bill Cosby Creek.