TV Licensing

TV Licensing Dubious Evidence Thrown Out of Court

noreply@blogger.com (Unknown) — Wed, 18 Jun 2025 12:38:00 +0000

A Merseyside man is celebrating after being cleared of TV licence evasion after TV Licensing presented what can only be described as extremely dubious evidence against him.

Lee Stuart, from Kirkby, does not watch "live" TV programmes on any channel or use the BBC iPlayer, which means he does not legally require a TV licence. Instead he uses non-BBC on-demand services like Channel 4od, My5, Amazon Prime (sign up for 30 day free trial) and Netflix for all of his viewing.

Convinced of the legality of his set up Lee made the fatal mistake of inviting a TV Licensing goon into his home. This is something TV Licensing Blog discourages people from doing, for the simple reason that TV Licensing goons, as Lee's case further demonstrates, cannot be trusted.

Lee dutifully showed the goon his television, which was set up to watch on-demand programmes via a PlayStation. Seemingly satisfied with Lee's compliance with the rules the goon read back edited highlights from the paperwork he had completed during the visit.

Speaking to the Liverpool Echo, Lee said: "It was official, and I agreed with what he had said, so when I was presented with the big white signature box, I just signed it, and then he left. To be honest, I was really made up with myself, thinking I'd beaten the system and proved I didn't need a licence."

Given that Lee was later prosecuted for TV licence evasion, the form he signed must have been a TVL178 Record of Interview form, but nowhere in the article does he mention being interviewed under caution. The TVL178 should only be completed after the occupier of an unlicensed property has been cautioned.

I am sure if Lee had been cautioned he would have mentioned it, which leads to the obvious conclusion that the goon has filled in the form, thereby stitching Lee up, without even bothering to caution him - a gutter trick indeed, but one totally in keeping with TV Licensing's modus operandi.

Lee received a Single Justice Procedure Notice in the post, which he completed with a not guilty plea and elected to attend court in person.

The hearing at Sefton Magistrates' Court dismissed the allegation against Lee, citing the insufficient evidence in the case.

Lee said: "I can see why people just accept it, but I knew I was innocent and I wasn’t paying for a TV licence that I didn’t need so I fought it.

"I'll be totally honest, I was surprised by the outcome and I thought it might be good to share my experience."

Experience shows that TV Licensing is happy to prosecute on the basis of very sloppy (or even non-existent) evidence, because it expects most people receiving an SJP Notice to either ignore it or lack the inclination to put up a fight. If the matter does get to court, TV Licensing will often pull the prosecution at the last minute instead of risk having holes poked in its case (or having its lies exposes in open court).

A couple of concluding points:

Anyone who does not legally need a TV licence is under no legal obligation at all to TV Licensing. They do not need to engage with TV Licensing and should not do so.
TV Licensing goons have no automatic right of access to any property. The occupier should never allow them voluntary access, as they cannot be trusted to give an accurate account of any visit.

Further anti-BBC reading:

Is The True Or Did You Hear It On The BBC?, by David Sedgwick (aff. link)
The BBC: Myth of a Public Service, by Tom Mills (aff. link)

Toxic: Bullying "Rife" Behind the Scenes of BBC Breakfast

noreply@blogger.com (Unknown) — Mon, 16 Jun 2025 08:50:00 +0000

The BBC is embroiled in yet more controversy with allegations that bullying is rife behind the scenes for flagship morning news programme BBC Breakfast.

Editor Richard Frediani, known as Fredi on the studio floor, has been accused of "threatening" and "aggressive" behaviour towards staff working on the programme.

It is also believed there has been a massive falling out between the two main hosts of the show, Charlie Stayt and Naga Munchetty.

A BBC Breakfast insider told The Sun: "To the viewer BBC Breakfast is a warm, gentle programme, one that is flourishing in the ratings. But beyond the cosy red sofa it is a very different picture. Several people - crew, production and even presenters - have been very unhappy.

"Tension between Charlie and Naga is rife. Fredi is very old-school and has some slightly tyrannical tendencies. He is very cerebral but also quite aggressive in his methods. Some people think a recent promotion has gone to his head."

Media and entertainment news site Deadline has previously alleged that Frediani was subject of at least two misconduct complaints, including one that was upheld in relation to him "physically shaking" a female newsroom colleague during a heated exchange.

Insiders have also alleged that Frediani backed a BBC Breakfast colleague against a wall and unleashed a finger-jabbing, verbal tirade expressing displeasure at the morning's show.

The BBC refused to comment on the allegations, saying that the welfare of its employees are a priority.

Further anti-BBC reading:

Is The True Or Did You Hear It On The BBC?, by David Sedgwick (aff. link)
The BBC: Myth of a Public Service, by Tom Mills (aff. link)

BBC TV Licensing Goon Accused of Knocking Over Disabled Woman

noreply@blogger.com (Unknown) — Sat, 21 Dec 2024 15:25:00 +0000

A BBC TV Licensing goon has been accused of knocking over a disabled woman.

Amanda White, 50, of Chorley, Lancashire, told The Sun that the as yet unnamed TV Licensing goon turned up at her home a few weeks after she cancelled her TV licence. The goon tried to hand her a letter about her unlicensed status.

She told The Sun: "He was very aggressive. I refused to accept the letter but he chucked it through my door as I was closing it.

"He then wouldn't take it back, so I tossed it outside.

"He had the cheek to push it through my letterbox, so as he got in his car I walked up to his window to give it back to him.

"I had my hand on his vehicle and he just accelerated, pulling me to the ground. He paused for a second up the road, clearly saw I was injured on the floor, and drove off. It's disgusting."

TV Licensing goons, like the shitbag featured in today's article, are employed by BBC contractor Capita Business Services. The BBC, however, as the statutory Licensing Authority, retains full legal responsibility for everything done in the name of TV Licensing.

Based on previous dealings we've had with Capita, we'd fully expect it to deny any wrongdoing on the part of its miscreant employee. That is the Capita default setting, even when the evidence against its employees is overwhelming. We are reminded of previous occasions where Capita employees have attempted to force their way into properties and assaulted members of the public.

Amanda has reported the incident to Lancashire Police, so we eagerly await further updates.

Just a quick reminder to anyone who is new to these parts: If you do not legally need a TV licence, you do not need to communicate or cooperate with TV Licensing at all.

Ignore its shitty letters; close the door on its shitty operatives; and enjoy your legally-licence-free existence without giving TV Licensing a second thought.

TV Licensing simply cannot be trusted and is best ignored entirely.

Further anti-BBC reading:

Is The True Or Did You Hear It On The BBC?, by David Sedgwick (aff. link)
The BBC: Myth of a Public Service, by Tom Mills (aff. link)

Gregg Wallace: BBC Ignores Warnings Over Conduct of Pretentious Presenter

noreply@blogger.com (Unknown) — Mon, 02 Dec 2024 14:36:00 +0000

Gregg Wallace - that's Gregg with two "g"s and don't you dare forget it - is the latest "talent" to besmirch the reputation of the BBC.

The 60-year-old Masterchef host stands accused of making a string of inappropriate comments to woman he described yesterday as being "middle-class" and "of a certain age".

The comments are said to be of misogynistic and sexualised nature, as outlined in the allegations below.

Dr Kate Tomas, a contestant on Masterchef back in 2008, accused Wallace of "sexually harassing" her.

She left the programme just before the quarter finals, but declined an invitation to appear in a follow-up because of the impression Wallace had left on her.

Speaking on TikTok, Dr Tomas said: "I refused to go back because of him. I complained at the time, but nothing was said, nothing was done.

"He is disgusting. He is repulsive. Anyone who knows me will know my deep fucking hatred for this man."

Dr Tomas went on to describe how, in her view, Wallace was a "racist piece of shit", which she supported with a claim that he had feigned an Indian accent when speaking to an Asian crew member.

Former Newsnight anchor Kirsty Wark appeared in the 2011 series of Celebrity Masterchef.

Speaking to BBC News last week, Ms Wark recounted filming in a retirement home.

"Gregg Wallace came in and launched into a story of a sexually inappropriate nature about his now former wife," she said.

Ms Wark recalled how cast and crew were left uncomfortable by Wallace's comments, which she described as "one way traffic" with no-one else encouraging the conversation.

Author Emma Kennedy appeared in the 2012 series of Celebrity Masterchef.

Recalling Wallace's interaction with a crew member, she said: "The photographer had a young female assistant and she bent over and in front of me. Gregg went over and went 'corr!' with his hands over her arse."

Ms Kennedy said she complained about Wallace's behaviour at the time.

Television presenter Kirstie Allsopp met Wallace in the green room during the filming of a pilot episode. She recalls that Wallace was in the company of his then partner, who left the room for some reason.

Ms Allsopp said that the moment the woman left the room Wallace started boasting about the "sex act" the couple performed every morning.

Ms Allsopp remembers feeling flushed and embarrassed at the unprofessional topic of conversation.

Wallace denies the allegations against him. Given his chippy social media video yesterday, he's clearly aggrieved that "middle-class women" are picking on the "working-class grocer's boy".

It should come as little surprise that the conduct of the repugnant Londoner has been on the BBC's radar for at least the past decade.

In time honoured BBC fashion, it appears to have simply brushed the matter under the carpet and allowed everything to carry on as normal - just like it did with noncey news man Huw Edwards only a few months ago.

This is yet another demonstration of the BBC's inability to tackle wrongdoing and keep its house in order.

The whole organisation is rotten from the head downwards. It wants euthanised at the earliest opportunity.

Further anti-BBC reading:

Is The True Or Did You Hear It On The BBC?, by David Sedgwick (aff. link)
The BBC: Myth of a Public Service, by Tom Mills (aff. link)

TV Licensing Prosecutes Woman Detained Under Mental Health Act

noreply@blogger.com (Unknown) — Mon, 30 Sep 2024 10:56:00 +0000

There are seemingly no depths TV Licensing wont sink to in order to secure either a licence sale or conviction.

The BBC's scummy revenue generation arm has been at it again, this time with news that it decided to prosecuted a woman detained under the Mental Health Act.

The 32-year-old woman told the TV Licensing goon visiting her property that she was "not feeling well" and revealed that she had post traumatic stress disorder and trouble keeping up with her finances.

You'd think that would be a red flag to most decent people that her case needed closer investigation, but the shysters at TV Licensing decided to haul her to court anyway.

The woman, who admitted the offence of TV licence evasion, was prosecuted via the Single Justice Procedure.

In her letter of mitigation to the court, she said: "I have been in hospital since June of this year and have been struggling with my mental health for a long period (of) time.

"I did not intentionally not pay my TV licence, but due to my mental state during the time of the offence I forgot to pay and I am sincerely sorry."

Given the circumstances the magistrate dealing with the case decided to step away from their guidelines and impose an absolute discharge. This effectively marks the offence, but there is no other punishment.

However, it is yet another case that should never have made it as far as court.

Following the goon's doorstep interaction with the woman, alarm bells should have been ringing at TV Licensing that there was no public interest in prosecution. Even so, it could sense blood - and an easy result - so decided to press on with prosecution regardless.

TV Licensing told the Evening Standard that it was unaware of the woman's circumstances - not that you can believe a word uttered by TV Licensing.

A TV Licensing PR harlot said: "Our primary aim is to help people stay licensed and avoid prosecution, which is always a last resort.

"We followed established process in this case and asked for further information, however, details the customer provided to the court were not made available to TV Licensing.

"We will now contact the customer to review her case."

Yada, yada, yada - yet more TV Licensing bullshit. We've heard it time and time again. If it's not bullying the dead and bereaved, it's threatening people who have already paid.

There's not a day goes by where TV Licensing, acting fully in accord with its corrupt BBC paymasters, demonstrates how utterly clueless, incompetent and morally void it really is.

If you've found this article useful please consider liking us on Facebook, following us on Twitter or downloading our free ebook.

Further anti-BBC reading:

Is The True Or Did You Hear It On The BBC?, by David Sedgwick (aff. link)
The BBC: Myth of a Public Service, by Tom Mills (aff. link)

Government in Talks to Decriminalise the BBC TV Licence Fee

noreply@blogger.com (Unknown) — Sun, 29 Sep 2024 15:06:00 +0000

The Government is in talks to decriminalise the BBC TV licence fee.

Good news, if true, but we've heard it all before!

According to reports led by The Sunday Times the Culture Secretary, Lisa Nandy, and the Justice Secretary, Shabana Mahmood, are said to be in agreement that the criminal enforcement of the TV licence fee is no longer appropriate.

The pair are said to be very concerned about the disproportionate number of women criminalised for TV licence evasion.

The high proportion of women being prosecuted arises from the fact that they are far more likely to be at home when a TV Licensing goon calls.

This is particularly true of (invariably) younger women looking after young children at home. The unemployed and disabled people are also more likely to be at home during the day and answer the door to TV Licensing.

It is also believed that women are more likely to be cooperative, talkative and trusting when engaging with a TV Licensing goon, so they are far more likely to divulge information leading to a prosecution.

Human rights lawyer Cherie Blair KC told The Sunday Times it was "absurd" that a third of all female criminal prosecutions were in relation to TV licence evasion.

Demonstrating her ignorance about how the offence is punished, Blair continued: "The cost of those women's places in prison, the impact on their children, the fact that they'll probably lose their accommodation - I mean, what is the sense in that? There is absolutely no sense in it whatsoever."

Despite Blair's cluelessness we support her view that the continued criminal enforcement regime is perverse.

A TV Licensing spokesperson said: "TV Licensing enforcement policy has not changed, and we have a duty to enforce the law when there is evidence that someone has avoided paying for a TV licence.

"What we have done is made considerable efforts to help people get licensed and offer help and support. So while we take appropriate action where necessary, we work hard to support those most in need, offering a number of concessions and payment plans to ensure people can obtain a licence in the way that suits them best.

"Our focus on collecting the licence fee fairly and efficiently ensures that the overwhelming majority of households are correctly licensed."

You can be fairly confident the BBC will fight tooth and nail to avoid the decriminalisation of the TV licence fee. The BBC knows fine well that the threat of a criminal conviction is enough to scare people into paying, even if they have no legal reason to do so.

If you've found this article useful please consider liking us on Facebook, following us on Twitter or downloading our free ebook.

Further anti-BBC reading:

Is The True Or Did You Hear It On The BBC?, by David Sedgwick (aff. link)
The BBC: Myth of a Public Service, by Tom Mills (aff. link)

Perverted BBC Newsreader Huw Edwards Dodges Jail Time

noreply@blogger.com (Unknown) — Mon, 16 Sep 2024 19:35:00 +0000

Much to his undoubted frustration, perverted BBC newsreader Huw Edwards won't be playing hide the sausage with some teenaged lag in the communal showers of HMP Wandsworth this evening.

That's because the deviant broadcaster, who clearly has a bit of a thing about young boys, has been handed a suspended sentence for downloading indecent images of children.

On 31st July 2024 Edwards admitted three offences of downloading indecent images of children. The images were shared in a WhatsApp conversation with fellow Welsh nonce Alex Williams, who Edwards periodically sent cash payments to in acknowledgement.

Despite these payments Senior District Judge Paul Goldspring has somehow concluded that Edwards did not pay for the images directly.

Today, 16th September 2024, Edwards was sentenced to 6 months in prison suspended for 2 years.

He also has to complete a 40-day Sex Offender Treatment Programme and up to 25 days' rehabilitation work with the probation service.

Given the sentence imposed, Edwards is now subject to notification requirements of the sex offenders register.

Judge Goldsping decided against making the seedy Welshman subject to a Sexual Harm Prevention Order, saying that he didn't believe Edwards posed a risk of sexual harm in the future.

There has been a lot of public criticism of the apparent leniency of Edwards' sentence. However, legal opinion seems to be that the sentence was proportionate and in agreement with the relevant guidelines. It should also be noted that Williams, who had a more significant role in the crime, had previously been sentenced to a suspended sentence, so it didn't seem likely Edwards would go straight to prison.

The Sun has published a very interesting 40 minute documentary about how it first broke the story of Edwards' sexual deviancy. It is worth noting that the BBC, not for the first time, repeatedly ignored complaints in relation to its most prominent news presenter.

You can view the video here if you're interested.

If you've found this article useful please consider liking us on Facebook, following us on Twitter or downloading our free ebook.

Further anti-BBC reading:

Is The True Or Did You Hear It On The BBC?, by David Sedgwick (aff. link)
The BBC: Myth of a Public Service, by Tom Mills (aff. link)

Virtue Signalling BBC Still Pretending to Pursue Huw Edwards Salary Repayment

noreply@blogger.com (Unknown) — Wed, 11 Sep 2024 11:39:00 +0000

The virtue signalling BBC is still pretending to pursue disgraced former newsreader Huw Edwards for the repayment of around £200,000 in salary.

I say virtue signalling because the BBC Director General, Tim Davie, knows fine well that Edwards is under no legal obligation at all to repay salary to which he was contractually entitled when he was suspended from BBC duties. The BBC is maintaining the pretence of trying to do the right thing for no other reason than to save face.

Addressing Peers on the House of Lords Communications and Digital Committee, Davie said: "The BBC position is clear, the money should be returned and we have made the request. We do expect to make progress and get an answer. We will explore [a legal process] but that is challenging. Our position is clear, we have made the request and that is where we sit."

Old noncey chops Edwards vanished from the BBC airwaves in July 2023, amid rumours he had solicited intimated images from a vulnerable male adult. He was formally suspended by the BBC in November 2023, when it came to light he had been arrested on suspicion of downloading indecent images of children. He eventually resigned from the national broadcaster "on medical grounds" in April 2024, having pocketed around £200,000 in salary during his suspension.

As reported earlier on TV Licensing Blog, the 63-year-old sexual deviant admitted downloading indecent images of children when he appeared at Westminster Magistrates' Court on 31st July 2024.

His conviction relates to the production of 7 category A images (involving penetrative sexual activity); 12 category B images (involving non-penetrative sexual activity); and 22 category C images (involving sexualised poses).

It now transpires that the images were shared with Edwards in a single WhatsApp conversation with 25-year-old Merthyr Tydfil man Alex Williams. Williams has already been handed a suspended sentence for his role in the conversation.

Edwards is due for sentencing at Westminster Magistrates' Court on 16th September 2024.

It will be fascinating to see how much time, effort and public money the BBC invests in trying to recover salary payments it knows fine well Edwards was entitled to.

The BBC is fully aware that any effort it makes in that regard are entirely for show purposes. How much public money is the BBC prepared to flush down the toilet in order to give the right public impression?

If you've found this article useful please consider liking us on Facebook, following us on Twitter or downloading our free ebook.

Further anti-BBC reading:

Is The True Or Did You Hear It On The BBC?, by David Sedgwick (aff. link)
The BBC: Myth of a Public Service, by Tom Mills (aff. link)

Culture Secretary: "I'm Afraid I'm Announcing Today that I'm Shutting the BBC Down"

noreply@blogger.com (Unknown) — Sun, 01 Sep 2024 11:45:00 +0000

About a fortnight ago the recently anointed Culture Secretary, Lisa Nandy, visited BBC Media City at Salford Quays.

During her walkaround of the site she met mischievous CBBC character Hacker T Dog, who she accused of previously making her young son cry.

With a glint in her eye and her usual gawking facial expression, Nandy told Hacker: "I'm afraid I'm announcing today that I'm shutting the BBC down"

Quick as a flash, Hacker retorted: "Yay! It worked".

Nandy isn't quite at the stage where she is really thinking of euthanising the national broadcaster, but she will need to take desperate life support measures in order to secure its continued survival.

Last year around half a million TV licences were cancelled by people ditching the idiot's lantern altogether or by adopting alternative, legally-licence-free methods of viewing. As a result the BBC is hemorrhaging funds left, right and centre.

In the wake of the Jimmy Savile and Stuart Hall sexual abuse scandals, the BBC continues to be dogged by controversy. If it's not jug-eared sports presenters spouting political bias, it's flagship news presenters stashing sick indecent images of children.

The Corporation's current charter period draws to an end on 31st December 2027. It is widely expected that negotiations will begin shortly into how the BBC is funded beyond then.

Until now the BBC has fought tooth and nail to protect the TV licence fee. Every year, irrespective of how woeful its output or sordid its scandal, the BBC receives the best part of £4 billion of TV licence revenue on a silver plate. It gets those funds simply because it always has done, by virtue of being the BBC.

But people are becoming increasingly wise to the BBC's putrid operation and the unfairness of its funding model.

For the first time ever it is likely that the BBC will concede that the TV licence fee, which is currently losing it £80 million in revenue every year, is not the best option moving forward.

A subscription model would be fairest for the viewing public. If the BBC's creative output is as brilliant as it claims, it should have no difficulty in persuading people to subscribe. But of course the BBC knows, deep down, that given the choice people would rather pay for Netflix instead.

Having held out the public begging bowl for the last century, I expect the BBC will want to continue in the same vein. For that reason, I suspect the BBC will argue hard for funding from general taxation - either a special new communications tax levied on every household in the country, or an increased rate of VAT on communications related products and services.

The BBC will want to avoid having to work for its money, unlike its commercial rivals.

If you've found this article useful please consider liking us on Facebook, following us on Twitter or downloading our free ebook.

Further anti-BBC reading:

Is The True Or Did You Hear It On The BBC?, by David Sedgwick (aff. link)
The BBC: Myth of a Public Service, by Tom Mills (aff. link)

Important News About Your No Licence Needed Status: Another TV Licensing Fishing Expedition

noreply@blogger.com (Unknown) — Sat, 31 Aug 2024 10:09:00 +0000

Across this green and pleasant land thousands of legally-licence-free people are being subjected to TV Licensing's latest fishing expedition.

As previously discussed on this blog TV Licensing has been sending letters to "No Licence Needed" properties claiming that it has evidence of unlicensed BBC iPlayer use.

In common with most claims made by the BBC and TV Licensing, this is complete and utter bullshit.

In our view TV Licensing sends these letters in an effort to intimidate recipients into either making contact with it, thus confirming their personal details, or paying for a TV licence they do not legally require.

Suppose, just for one millisecond, that TV Licensing really did have some evidence that BBC iPlayer had been used at an unlicensed property - even in those circumstances that in no way proves than an offence has been committed.

This is because it is perfectly legal, for two main reasons, for a person to use BBC iPlayer even if their own property is unlicensed:

There is no legal requirement for a TV licence to watch S4C on-demand programmes via the BBC iPlayer;
It is perfectly legal for anyone who does not have their own TV licence to sign into BBC iPlayer inside another property that is covered by a TV licence.

Can I just stress, contrary to absolute twaddle being pedaled in various "Johnny come lately" Facebook groups, that TV Licensing has absolutely no way, at all, of tracing IP addresses to physical addresses.

That is a highly invasive legal power reserved only for the state and only then with the correct legal permissions. TV Licensing, as the bastard offshoot of the BBC, has no such powers.

The only way TV Licensing could possibly know that someone was using BBC iPlayer without a valid TV licence is if a person used the same email address for their dealings with TV Licensing and BBC sign in. Even if they did, for reasons mentioned in the bullet points above, that in no way proves they are guilty of unlicensed TV reception.

Remember that legally-licence-free people, like the majority receiving these letters, are under no legal obligation at all to TV Licensing. They should not feel intimidated into responding, even though the letters are trying to force their hand.

Our advice, as always, is to totally ignore TV Licensing.

Bin its caustic missives and keep its scummy operatives outside in the cold.

Tell TV Licensing nothing at all.

If you've found this article useful please consider liking us on Facebook, following us on Twitter or downloading our free ebook.

Further anti-BBC reading:

Is The True Or Did You Hear It On The BBC?, by David Sedgwick (aff. link)
The BBC: Myth of a Public Service, by Tom Mills (aff. link)

Ten Worst Criminals Who Worked for the BBC

noreply@blogger.com (Unknown) — Sat, 24 Aug 2024 19:08:00 +0000

A new upload on the WatchMojoUK YouTube channel gives an overview of the ten worst criminals who worked for the BBC.

You might notice a bit of a recurring theme with the crimes of these scumbag, with them all having depraved sexual interests.

The BBC criminals featured in the video are:

1. Jimmy Savile, the most infamous BBC nonce of them all, who managed to evade justice for decades despite committing offences right under the noses (and blind eyes) of BBC bosses. An independent report by retired High Court Judge Dame Janet Smith concluded that Savile abused at least 45 victims during his time at the BBC. Savile's youngest BBC victims were girls aged 9-years-old.

2. Rolf Harris, a former presenter of several BBC Television programmes including The Rolf Harris Show and Rolf's Cartoon Club. In 2014 Harris was convicted of 12 counts of indecent assault against women and children. In 2017 one of those convictions, in relation to an 8-year-old girl, was overturned on appeal.

3. Stuart Hall, a former BBC Radio, Sport and News presenter. In 2013 Hall was convicted of 14 counts of indecent assault against children. In 2014 he was convicted of a further 2 counts of indecent assault against children. Hall's youngest victim was a girl aged 9-years-old.

4. Stephen Kish, a former presenter on CBBC show Officially Amazing. In 2021 Kish, who ran a Brighton dog boarding business, was convicted of possessing extreme pornography depicting dogs.

5. Chris Denning, a former BBC Radio presenter. Deviant Denning has quite a rap sheet, having been convicted of literally dozens of child sex offences over the decades.

6. Dave Lee Travis, a former BBC Radio and Television presenter with the real name David Patrick Griffin. In 2014 Travis was convicted of indecently assaulting a female researcher working on the BBC's Mrs Merton Show.

7. Chris Langham, an actor who starred in BBC comedy The Thick Of It. In 2007 Langham was convicted of 15 counts of making indecent images of children.

8. Daniel Frogson, an actor who starred in the BBC adaptation of His Dark Materials and CBBC show Joe All Alone. In 2023 Frogson was convicted of 4 counts of making indecent images of children.

9. Huw Edwards, a former BBC News presenter. In 2024 Edwards was convicted of 3 charges of making indecent images of children.

10. Peter Rowell, a former BBC Radio presenter. In 2012 Rowell was convicted of 12 counts of indecent assault against girls under the age of 16; and 7 counts of making and distributing indecent images of children.

If you've found this article useful please consider liking us on Facebook, following us on Twitter or downloading our free ebook.

Further anti-BBC reading:

Is The True Or Did You Hear It On The BBC?, by David Sedgwick (aff. link)
The BBC: Myth of a Public Service, by Tom Mills (aff. link)

BBC Sacks Jermaine Jenas Amid "Inappropriate Behaviour" Complaints

noreply@blogger.com (Unknown) — Thu, 22 Aug 2024 15:46:00 +0000

The BBC has sacked Jermaine Jenas following an internal investigation into allegations of "inappropriate behaviour".

The 41-year-old ex-England international footballer has been a co-presenter on BBC One's The One Show since 2020. He has not appeared on the show since the end of July. He last featured on Match Of The Day at the start of May.

Precise details of the allegations against Jenas are unclear, but the bush telegraph (and social media) being what it is, I doubt it'll be long before full details emerge.

The BBC is tight-lipped, saying only: "We can confirm that Jermaine Jenas is no longer part of the presenting line up."

However, a report on this evening's BBC News at Six did mention that the allegations are said to relate to Jenas' use of electronic messages, "including by text". It has now been suggested that Jenas sent messages to a female member of The One Show staff.

People are invariably drawing conclusions with the recent Huw Edwards scandal, where the BBC failed to dismiss the deviant Welsh newsreader despite the serious, now proven allegations against him.

Jenas, who was paid around £190,000 a year directly by the BBC, is described as "not happy" with the situation. He is said to be seeking legal advice. The £190,000 figure does not include payments made by BBC Studios in relation to presenting The One Show.

If you've found this article useful please consider liking us on Facebook, following us on Twitter or downloading our free ebook.

Further anti-BBC reading:

Is The True Or Did You Hear It On The BBC?, by David Sedgwick (aff. link)
The BBC: Myth of a Public Service, by Tom Mills (aff. link)

Earning the Hate: Loathsome BBC News Sneers Contempt at Murdered Mother

noreply@blogger.com (Unknown) — Thu, 22 Aug 2024 09:56:00 +0000

The BBC has been earning hate again this morning, after publishing a headline apparently victim blaming a murdered Farnborough mother.

Adam Watson, 37, of Eastchurch, Kent, is currently on trial for the murder of 56-year-old Samantha Holden, who was found dead on the living room floor of her Farnborough flat on 9th September 2022.

Samantha's partially clothed body was discovered by her 18-year-old son. Forensic examination of her body confirmed that she had been strangled and suffocated.

BBC News wrote a trial update article with the headline "Murdered sex worker found dead by son, court hears".

The sneering headline provoked widespread revulsion on social media, with various commentators branding the BBC "a disgrace", "fucking scumbags" and describing its journalism as "the lowest of the low".

The headline has now been updated in response to the public backlash.

Samantha's family have described her as a "kind and beautiful soul, who will forever be loved".

BBC journalism really is the pits. The despicable national broadcaster might want to get its own sordid house in order, before it sits in judgement of anyone else.

There has never been a better time to cancel your BBC TV licence fee.

If you've found this article useful please consider liking us on Facebook, following us on Twitter or downloading our free ebook.

Further anti-BBC reading:

Is The True Or Did You Hear It On The BBC?, by David Sedgwick (aff. link)
The BBC: Myth of a Public Service, by Tom Mills (aff. link)

Huw Edwards: More Damning Allegations Against the BBC

noreply@blogger.com (Unknown) — Thu, 01 Aug 2024 08:32:00 +0000

After decades of selective deafness and blindness towards the crimes of Jimmy Savile, Stuart Hall and Rolf Harris, fresh allegations today that the BBC has done exactly the same in relation to its latest resident nonce, Huw Edwards.

Speaking to the Daily Mail, a BBC insider has said that Huw Edwards' interest in young boys was well known in the newsroom.

The insider said: "It was known for a few years he was messaging an assortment of lads in the newsroom for drinks etc, yet the feeling is senior editors might have turned a blind eye. If this was the case, it points to the usual 'protect the star' stuff."

It's a familiar story from the BBC, which vowed to learn lessons from the Savile, Hall and Harris sex scandals of the last decade.

An independent review by retired High Court Judge Dame Janet Smith DBE concluded that Savile sexually abused 23 victims on BBC premises, some of those crimes taking place right under the nose of bosses. His very first crime, the rape of a 13 year old girl, took place at the BBC's Lime Grove Studios.

Dame Janet fell short of saying BBC management definitely knew about Savile's crimes, despite several inside sources telling the media otherwise. She did acknowledge that some studio floor staff did know about Savile's antics.

The independent review was extended to cover the conduct of former BBC Radio 5 Live presenter Stuart Hall, who was convicted of 14 offences of indecent assault in 2013. He was convicted of a further two offences of indecent assault in 2014.

Dame Linda Dobbs DBE, another former High Court Judge, was tasked with reviewing Hall's crimes. She concluded that between 1967 and 1991 he sexually assaulted 21 girls, the youngest of whom was only 10 years old. Many of those crimes took place at BBC Manchester, where it was a running joke among coworkers that Hall would often invite "nieces" or young girls undertaking "elocution lessons" to his dressing room, which was equipped with a bed.

Dame Linda concluded that senior BBC managers did know about Hall's dressing room antics, not least because he was hauled over the coals by the BBC North West TV manager at the time, Ray Colley. However, she said there was no evidence to suggest that managers knew the girls were underage, despite gossip in the newsroom.

Turning back to Huw Edwards, who was paid £475,000 of TV licence payer's cash by the BBC last year despite being banished from the airwaves in July 2023.

The BBC has confirmed that it was aware of Edwards' arrest in connection with the allegations on 8th November 2023. The BBC didn't take any action at the time, seemingly on the basis that Edwards wasn't charged at the time and there was a significant risk to his health.

Instead he was kept on the BBC payroll, receiving a £40,000 pay hike, until he eventually resigned from the Corporation in April 2024.

The BBC does say that it would have dismissed Edwards if he had been charged prior to his resignation.

Not that anyone can believe a lot of what the BBC says, mind you.

If you've found this article useful please consider liking us on Facebook, following us on Twitter or downloading our free ebook.

Further anti-BBC reading:

Is The True Or Did You Hear It On The BBC?, by David Sedgwick (aff. link)
The BBC: Myth of a Public Service, by Tom Mills (aff. link)

Huw Edwards Confirms His Status as the Latest BBC Nonce

noreply@blogger.com (Unknown) — Wed, 31 Jul 2024 09:44:00 +0000

BBC News presenter Huw Edwards has today admitted making indecent images of children.

The 62-year-old sexual deviant appeared at Westminster Magistrates' Court earlier, where he admitted three charges of making indecent images of children.

According to the charges, now admitted by the former BBC News at Ten anchor, between December 2020 and April 2022 he made 7 category A images (involving penetrative sexual activity); 12 category B images (involving non-penetrative sexual activity); and 22 category C images (involving sexualised poses).

These child abuse images, which depict young boys, were sent to Edwards during a WhatsApp conversation. In terms of the legislation, they are technically "made" when they are viewed electronically. Edwards is not accused of being the person with the camera who took the offending snaps.

These are very serious allegations that could result in Edwards being jailed.

The case has been adjourned until 16th September, whilst the court considers its sentencing options.

Edwards was paid £475,000 by the BBC last year, despite being suspended in July 2023 amid rumours he'd shared dick pics with a vulnerable young adult.

He finally resigned from the national broadcaster in April 2024.

It is worth noting that at the time of these latest offences, as he was no doubt whacking one off over his mobile phone, he was still fronting the BBC News at Ten.

If you've found this article useful please consider liking us on Facebook, following us on Twitter or downloading our free ebook.

Further anti-BBC reading:

Is The True Or Did You Hear It On The BBC?, by David Sedgwick (aff. link)
The BBC: Myth of a Public Service, by Tom Mills (aff. link)

BBC News Anchor Huw Edwards Charged in Relation to Kiddy Smut

noreply@blogger.com (Unknown) — Mon, 29 Jul 2024 15:34:00 +0000

Former BBC News at Ten anchor Huw Edwards, who was paid £475k of TV licence fee payer's cash despite being suspended most of last year, has been charged with making indecent images of children.

Edwards, 62, left the BBC under a cloud last year when rumours emerged that he'd paid a vulnerable adult male £35,000 for intimate photographs.

Keeping with that theme, it has now emerged that the former BBC man was charged on 26th June with three offences of making indecent images of children. He has been bailed to appear at Westminster Magistrates' Court on Wednesday (31st July).

An offence of making indecent images of children is committed when a person downloads images from the web. According to reports, the allegations in this case involve images shared via WhatsApp. They are said to have taken place between December 2020 and April 2022.

Edwards is accused of making 6 category A images (involving penetrative sexual activity); 12 category B images (involving non-penetrative sexual activity); and 19 category C images (involving sexualised poses).

It now transpires that the 62-year-old was first arrested in relation to these allegations in November 2023, when he was still firmly on the BBC payroll.

As the legal wheels are in motion I shall not say anything else.

I may be able to write further after Edwards' hearing on Wednesday.

If you've found this article useful please consider liking us on Facebook, following us on Twitter or downloading our free ebook.

Further anti-BBC reading:

Is The True Or Did You Hear It On The BBC?, by David Sedgwick (aff. link)
The BBC: Myth of a Public Service, by Tom Mills (aff. link)

Brilliant News: Half a Million Households Ditch BBC TV Licence Fee

noreply@blogger.com (Unknown) — Wed, 24 Jul 2024 09:04:00 +0000

Brilliant news yesterday, with the BBC's latest Annual Report confirming that half a million households abandoned the TV licence fee last year.

Under current legislation a TV licence is needed for those properties where equipment is installed or used to receive TV programmes, at their time of broadcast, on any TV channel. A licence is also needed to watch or download BBC on-demand programmes via the iPlayer.

TV licence revenue is used almost exclusively to fund the BBC. In a glaring conflict of interests, the BBC is also responsible for administering and enforcing the fee that its very existence depends on. It does this under the guise of TV Licensing..

According to the report the BBC raked in around £3.66 billion in TV licence revenue in the financial year 2023/24, with around half a million fewer households stumping up the £169.50 annual fee.

The BBC also published the salaries of its highest paid "talent":

Gary Lineker, £1.35m
Zoe Ball, £950k
Hugh Edwards, £475k
Greg James, £415k
Stephen Nolan, £405k
Fiona Bruce, £405k
Lauren Laverne, £395k
Alan Shearer, £380k
Nick Robinson, £345k
Naga Munchetty, £345k
Mishal Husain, £340k
Laura Kuenssberg, £325k
Sophie Raworth, £325k
Vernon Kay, £320k
Justin Webb, £320k
Scott Mills, £315k
Sara Cox, £315k
Clive Myrie, £310k
Amol Rajan, £310k

These figures represent payments made directly by the BBC. They do not include any payments made via a third party like BBC Studios, which encompasses "talent" like Claudia Winkleman, Bradley Walsh, Michael McIntyre, Paddy McGuinness and Alexander Armstrong.

Hugh Edwards seems to have done particularly well, given that he disappeared from the airwaves in July 2023 after news emerged that he'd paid a vulnerable young man for intimate photographs of himself. It is, however, likely that the BBC had to honour contractual arrangements with Edwards, despite his seedy behaviour.

The newly installed Labour Government has already taken the knee for the BBC, by signalling its continued support for the TV licence fee.

We remind readers of the many legal alternatives to paying the £169.50 fee.

We would urge everyone to ditch the TV licence and starve a BBC deviant.

If you've found this article useful please consider liking us on Facebook, following us on Twitter or downloading our free ebook.

Further anti-BBC reading:

Is The True Or Did You Hear It On The BBC?, by David Sedgwick (aff. link)
The BBC: Myth of a Public Service, by Tom Mills (aff. link)

Strictly Come Dancing: The Next BBC Abuse Scandal?

noreply@blogger.com (Unknown) — Thu, 18 Jul 2024 18:22:00 +0000

BBC flagship entertaining programme Strictly Come Dancing is under intense scrutiny after allegations that some of the professional dancers are abusive towards contestants.

I say flagship, but it's relative really. It's just another BBC sack of shit in my eyes.

Anyhow, last week professional dancer Graziano Di Prima was dismissed from the show over unspecified allegations of "gross misconduct". Show insiders reported concerns about the Italian's manner with contestant Zara McDermott. It has now transpired that Di Prima kicked McDermott. He has admitted and apologised for the transgression, which was apparently caught on video.

A second Strictly pro dancer, Giovanni Pernice, was ditched from the show at the end of the 2023 series after one of his contestants, Sherlock actor Amanda Abbington, withdrew from the series early on medical grounds. She then requested video footage of her rehearsals with Pernice, with a view to allegedly seeking legal advice.

Former BBC journalist Fi Glover, who worked at the Corporation for almost 30 years, told The Sun that the BBC compels Strictly contestants to sign confidentiality agreements prior to their participation in the show.

Glover, now a Times Radio presenter, said: "They sign a contract that means that they show Strictly in a very positive way.

"I think it's been incredibly difficult for contestants to say things that we now realise they should have been able to say - which is that they were made to feel uncomfortable. And in these cases which are now emerging, there was really nasty physical and verbal abuse going on."

The Reverend Richard Coles, who was a contestant in the 2017, said that a Strictly insider once told him the show had a "dark heart".

Coles added: "I've spoken to contestants and also professionals about it. And I think no one has been surprised that this stuff has surfaced."

Reading around, it appears a lot of people had suspicions that verbal and physical abuse was going on behind the scenes of Strictly Come Dancing.

For all it was being discussed in hushed voices in darkened BBC corridors, it would appear that no-one has been brave enough to report their concerns to bosses for fear of the consequences. Now where have we heard that before?

It may well be the BBC's second abuse scandal of the twenty-first century.

If you've found this article useful please consider liking us on Facebook, following us on Twitter or downloading our free ebook.

Further anti-BBC reading:

Is The True Or Did You Hear It On The BBC?, by David Sedgwick (aff. link)
The BBC: Myth of a Public Service, by Tom Mills (aff. link)

Taking the Knee for the BBC: Labour Government Commits to TV Licence Fee

noreply@blogger.com (Unknown) — Sun, 14 Jul 2024 10:56:00 +0000

The BBC is breathing a sigh of relief as the recently installed Labour Government has pledged to retain the TV licence fee until at least 2027.

Speaking during his recent trip to the NATO summit in Washington, Prime Minister Keir Starmer said: "There's going to be some more thought between now and [2027], but we are committed to the BBC and we are committed to the licensing arrangements."

Under current arrangements the BBC is funded almost entirely by the TV licence fee. Every year it receives the best part of £4bn on a silver plate, regardless of how woeful its content or sordid its scandal.

Legislation requires that the £169.50 annual fee is paid by households receiving "live" broadcast TV programmes on any TV channel. It is also needed to watch or download BBC on-demand programmes from the iPlayer.

The previous Conservative Government blew hot and cold on the future of the TV licence, but was actively exploring alternative revenue streams for the BBC.

A BBC spokesman said: "We remain totally focused on offering value to the public and will engage with the Government on funding at the appropriate time."

If you've found this article useful please consider liking us on Facebook, following us on Twitter or downloading our free ebook.

Further anti-BBC reading:

Is The True Or Did You Hear It On The BBC?, by David Sedgwick (aff. link)
The BBC: Myth of a Public Service, by Tom Mills (aff. link)

BBC Slammed for Broadcasting Grossly Offensive Comments About Prime Minister's Late Mother

noreply@blogger.com (Unknown) — Sat, 13 Jul 2024 11:59:00 +0000

The BBC has been slammed for broadcasting grossly offensive comments about the late mother of Prime Minister Sir Keir Starmer.

The puerile comments, which have been widely reported, were broadcast during an election special of Radio Four satirical comedy The Skewer.

The Prime Minister's mother, Josephine, died of Still's disease in 2015.

The Corporation is unrepentant about the offensive broadcast, which is still available on the BBC Sounds website.

Talk TV's Peter Cardwell contacted the BBC in relation to the gutter comments. He asked the BBC a number of questions about its decision to broadcast the comment.

A BBC spokesman said: "The Skewer is well known for its obscure and ascerbic approach to comedy, weaving together audio clips from across popular culture and the media.

"When heard in context, the clip in question is clearly part of satire on the repeated references to family members and background during the election debates, rather than a direct comment on Sir Keir Starmer's mother.

"Comedy is subjective and while we understand that not everything will be to everyone's taste the content and language is within audience expectations for this multi award-winning satirical programme."

Whatever your political persuasion, these comments are absolutely disgraceful.

You can view Cardwell's piece here:

If you've found this article useful please consider liking us on Facebook, following us on Twitter or downloading our free ebook.

Further anti-BBC reading:

Is The True Or Did You Hear It On The BBC?, by David Sedgwick (aff. link)
The BBC: Myth of a Public Service, by Tom Mills (aff. link)

TV Licensing Cruelly Criminalises Dying Cancer Patient

noreply@blogger.com (Unknown) — Sat, 06 Jul 2024 08:43:00 +0000

A terminally-ill cancer patient has been convicted of TV licence evasion, despite having told TV Licensing about her medical condition.

This is yet another case demonstrating the falsehood of TV Licensing's regular claims that it only prosecutes cases in the public interest.

The 50-year-old mother, who has terminal breast cancer, was visited by a TV Licensing goon. She told the goon that she had watched Emmerdale the previous evening, but was unsure when her TV licence had expired.

Despite being aware of her circumstances, TV Licensing decided to prosecute regardless.

She was dealt with via the Single Justice Procedure and handed a 3 month conditional discharge and ordered to pay £26 surcharge. TV Licensing also asked for £120 prosecution costs, but the court decided to waive those. Such a sentence is at the absolute bottom of the guidelines, so it would appear that the court has been as lenient as possible.

In her mitigation, which will have been seen by the court but not TV Licensing, the woman said: "I have been very stressed and depressed. I am currently ongoing (sic) treatment for stage 4 terminal cancer.

"Further to this, every day is a struggle. I'm in a lot of pain and struggle to move out of bed. I get my daughter to help me with everyday needs.

"In addition my personal independence payment has stopped, so I haven't been receiving the money."

Evening Standard hack Tristan Kirk, who has been spearheading a campaign against the Single Justice Procedure, contacted TV Licensing to bring this case to their attention.

TV Licensing apologised to the woman and has said it will take steps to have her conviction overturned.

A spokesman said: "This case should not have proceeded to prosecution and we are extremely sorry for this.

"We will be writing to the customer to apologise directly and we will be re-opening the case as soon as possible so the prosecution can be withdrawn."

In our experience, despite TV Licensing claims to the contrary, cases like this are widespread. The BBC, which has overall responsibility for the administration and enforcement of the TV licence fee, knows fine well the gutter tactics employed by its TV Licensing contractors.

We reiterate our message that TV Licensing is never to be trusted under any circumstances.

Anyone who does not legally need a TV licence should ignore its letters and leave its miscreant goons out in the cold.

Do not make the mistake of engaging or trying to reason with the dishonest shysters at TV Licensing.

If you've found this article useful please consider liking us on Facebook, following us on Twitter or downloading our free ebook.

Further anti-BBC reading:

Is The True Or Did You Hear It On The BBC?, by David Sedgwick (aff. link)
The BBC: Myth of a Public Service, by Tom Mills (aff. link)

TV Licensing: 1 in 10 People Wrongly Claim No Licence Needed

noreply@blogger.com (Unknown) — Tue, 18 Jun 2024 10:24:00 +0000

According to one of TV Licensing's latest caustic missives, 1 in 10 people wrongly claim No Licence Needed.

Of course it requires a bit of leg work to establish who the 1 in 10 actually are, so true to form TV Licensing adopts the scattergun approach of threatening everyone anyway.

If you're one of the 9 in 10, which you probably are, then it's just tough shit, because you'll still be subjected to TV Licensing's sordid suspicions and continuing investigations too.

No-one is under any legal obligation at all to confirm their No Licence Needed status to TV Licensing, but some people make the mistake of doing so thinking it will lead to a cessation of TV Licensing's menacing enquiries. That is not always the case, with TV Licensing routinely ignoring No Licence Needed declarations.

Even if it accepts a No Licence Needed declaration, thereby acknowledging it has no lawful business with the occupier, TV Licensing will still attempt to extract personal information and engage in future communication.

As discussed in an earlier article, TV Licensing may also conduct Unconfirmed No Set (UNS) visits to No Licence Needed properties.

TV Licensing Blog's view is that no-one should provide TV Licensing with information to which it has no legal entitlement. If they do, they run the risk that TV Licensing will use and abuse that information later on.

TV Licensing, just like its BBC puppet master, is a thoroughly corrupt and dishonest organisation. It makes the Post Office look like a shining beacon of legal morality.

The full text of a letter distributed to new No Licence Needed households is reproduced below:

====

1 in 10 people wrongly claim No Licence Needed.

Please make sure you're not the one.

Thank you for letting us know that you don't need a TV Licence. This address is now registered as No Licence Needed until [date]. However, we may still visit to check - and will be in touch if anything changes.

We tried to email you this message, but it was returned undelivered. Please update your details at tvl.co.uk/nlnupdate so you receive future emails from us.

Why we visit addresses that claim No Licence Needed.

Our officers visit thousands of addresses that have claimed No Licence Needed. On average, they find that 1 in 10 people they speak to are watching TV illegally. And breaking the law.

They risk prosecution. And up to a £1,000 fine.

If your TV habits change, it's easy to buy a TV Licence.

If you or anyone you live with want to start enjoying live TV, or BBC shows on iPlayer, you can. Just make sure you are covered by a TV Licence first.

It only takes a few minutes to buy a licence. You can do this online at tvl.co.uk/buy. Or call us on 0300 790 6126. So you won't have to wait long to enjoy your favourite shows.

Yours sincerely,

[Name]

Customer Service Manager

====

We reiterate that no-one is under any legal obligation at all to confirm their No Licence Needed status to TV Licensing.

If you don't need a TV licence, you don't have any legal business with TV Licensing and should ignore it entirely.

Bin TV Licensing letters and immediately close the door on any TV Licensing goon that calls.

If you've found this article useful please consider liking us on Facebook, following us on Twitter or downloading our free ebook.

Further anti-BBC reading:

Is The True Or Did You Hear It On The BBC?, by David Sedgwick (aff. link)
The BBC: Myth of a Public Service, by Tom Mills (aff. link)

The Cost of Protecting Controversial BBC Broadcasting House Statue

noreply@blogger.com (Unknown) — Mon, 17 Jun 2024 15:53:00 +0000

The BBC has confirmed it will cost £89,000 to erect a glass screen in front of the Prospero and Ariel statue at Broadcasting House.

Prospero is shown sending Ariel out into the world. When the statue was commissioned, Ariel - as the spirit of the air - was seen as an appropriate symbol for the new dawn of broadcasting.

As mentioned in our earlier article, the controversial carving, created by paedophile sculpter Eric Gill, has been attacked twice in the last two years.

In order to deter further attacks the BBC plans on erecting a 13 ft by 9 ft protective glass screen.

The £89,000 price tag, which is the equivalent of 525 TV licence fees, includes the cost of the screen, fixings, scaffolding, licensing and labour.

According to the BBC the statue is an important feature of the facade of the Grade II listed building.

It adds that it does not condone the views or actions of Eric Gill, who sexually abused his adolescent daughters, had an incestuous relationship with his sister and performed sexual experiments on his dog.

Gill died in 1940. If he'd lived a while longer, he would have been the ideal host for a 1970s/80s BBC One light entertainment programme.

Credit to WhatDoTheyKnow.com user A. Willmore for obtaining this information.

If you've found this article useful please consider liking us on Facebook, following us on Twitter or downloading our free ebook.

Reform UK Pledges to Axe Despised BBC TV Licence

noreply@blogger.com (Unknown) — Mon, 17 Jun 2024 12:26:00 +0000

Reform UK has pledged to axe the despised BBC TV licence if it gets into power.

As far as I am aware, it is the only political party to give such a cast-iron guarantee on the future of the £169.50 annual fee.

The party's manifesto, which is has rebranded as an election contract, was launched by party leader Nigel Farage in Merthyr Tydfil.

In relation to the future of the BBC, the contract states: "The out-of-touch wasteful BBC is institutionally biased. The TV licence is taxation without representation. In a world of on-demand TV people should be free to choose."

Reform UK has said it will begin reforming the BBC within its first hundred days in power.

For all the opinion polls currently indicate a Labour majority Government, there is an outside chance that Reform UK could act as kingmaker in a Reform-Conservative coalition.

Stranger things have happened!

If you've found this article useful please consider liking us on Facebook, following us on Twitter or downloading our free ebook.

TV Licensing Threatens Euro 2024 Football Fans

noreply@blogger.com (Unknown) — Sat, 15 Jun 2024 09:34:00 +0000

Bang on cue at the dawn of a major international sporting event, the BBC's revenue generation pariahs have threatened fans with the consequences of unlicensed viewing.

Euro 2024 kicked off yesterday with the inaugural match of the tournament between hosts Germany and group A rivals Scotland.

It was always going to be a tough game for the Scots, who were three goals and man down by the end of the first half.

Despite clawing back a goal, the match finished Germany 5-1 Scotland. Fingers crossed for more success in the remaining group matches, although it already looks as though the Scots will face a steep climb into the knockout stage of the tournament.

Anyway, I digress. Before the first kick of the tournament the gluttonous BBC, via the medium of TV Licensing, had started spouted its bile about £1,000 fines and criminal records for anyone daring to watch the football without a valid TV licence.

As is often the case, TV Licensing has distributed its message to the mass media, which subserviently publishes anything it is told.

The message is targeted at two groups in particular: students and those who might like to watch the football at work.

Legally speaking a TV licence is required for any property where equipment is used or installed to receive TV programmes at the time they are shown. This would include "live" broadcast football matches on any channel. A TV licence is also required to watch on-demand programmes via the BBC iPlayer, although not on-demand programmes on other platforms.

TV Licensing concedes that anyone watching on an unplugged device powered by its own internal battery (e.g. laptop, tablet or mobile phone) would be covered by virtue of the TV licence of their home address, if indeed it had one.

TV Licensing warns: "If you plug your device into the mains, you'll be covered if that property already has a TV Licence. Otherwise, you'll need to buy a separate TV Licence for that property."

It also warns anyone who might be tempted to tune into the football on their work desktop computer, that they might not be correctly licensed to do so.

It signs off with one of its regular threats: "You could be prosecuted if we find that you have been watching, recording or downloading programmes illegally.

"The maximum penalty is a £1,000 fine plus any legal costs and/or compensation you may be ordered to pay."

The TV Licensing Blog always encourages compliance with the legislation.

That said, we're duty bound to mention the following: Anyone who tunes into the football without a valid TV licence has more chance of being mauled to death by a unicorn than being prosecuted by TV Licensing.

If you've found this article useful please consider liking us on Facebook, following us on Twitter or downloading our free ebook.