"This was not challenged by the presenter despite the fact that it has never been proven that Ms Rowling has said anything transphobic in her career."

State-funded media, people.

:ukkk: :ukkk: :ukkk: :ukkk: :ukkk: :ukkk: :ukkk: :ukkk: :ukkk: :ukkk: :ukkk: :ukkk:

  • save_vs_death [they/them]
    ·
    edit-2
    2 years ago

    This 100%, in practice the rules for how tv licencing is violated are incredibly dumb and impossible to "track" for. For example, if you don't pay for the TV licence, even if you don't have cable or a TV in your house, if you watch Youtube on your phone or tablet using the internet subscription you pay for, you can be violating the rules if you are watching something that is being broadcast on cable "at the same time" (this accounting for delayed feeds). So yes, you would need a TV licence if you have nothing but an internet subscription and watch SkyTV (which also broadcasts live on Youtube) on your phone.

    Very theoretically, if your favourite streamer gets a live segment on a show one time, you are violating TV Licencing for watching them on Twitch that one time if you're not paying for it, etc.

    • CarmineCatboy [he/him]
      ·
      2 years ago

      the only way the UK will get those licensing fees is gonna be when they legalize bounty hunting for the BBC only

      • save_vs_death [they/them]
        ·
        2 years ago

        the only people willing to put that law on the books are in the process of cutting tv licencing away anyway so you know "issuing a correction on one of my previous posts" etc, etc