Ben wrote:
Mark Carver wrote:
"NO LOGO" wrote in message

my brother got my mum a freeview digibox for her birthday. We don't
have an
outsider aerial but the picture is great. I know that you can pay
to "add
on" at least E4 but can you get anything else added on and if so
would we
need an aerial then?

I hate technical stuff

What are you doing on usenet then? That probably puts you in the top
few percent of tech-savvy geeks already, and thats before you include
the fact that you're not top posting ;-)

Please be careful with your quotations, neither myself, nor "No Logo"
actually wrote any of that !

Mark Carver wrote:
Please be careful with your quotations, neither myself, nor "No Logo"
actually wrote any of that !

Apologies to yourself and No Logo, as usual I was being over-zealous
with the snipping.

Mark Carver wrote:
Please be careful with your quotations, neither myself, nor "No Logo"
actually wrote any of that !

Apologies to yourself and No Logo, as usual I was being over-zealous
with the snipping.

"Simon Gardner" [dot]co[dot]uk wrote in message


In article lgate.org,
"NO LOGO" wrote:

So the BBC who instigated the collapse of a multi PSB Free Sat have made
a statement of intent to reverse this problem. Good.

In what sense do you claim "the BBC instigated the collapse of a multi PSB
Free Sat?"


;-)

http://logofreetv.org/redirect.asp?i=1760
http://logofreetv.org/redirect.asp?i=1758

On 12/03/2003, when Greg Dyke announced the BBC would de-crypt, they did
so without consulting with ITV, Channel 4, and FIVE, and without
consideration for those channels' positions.

Consider, FIVE, who's programme budget of £185M is barely more than
just the BBC's marketing and advertising budget alone, and the scale of
the problem for FIVE, C4, and the smaller ITV companies (then) was
obvious.

The problem is cultural. The BBC "awash with cash" (in the words of Mark
Thompson) does not spend real world cash. The needs of both channels 3,
4 and 5 plus 750,000 homes were ignored by the BBC decision.

Without Free To Air (or free at the point of access) for channels 3, 4,
and 5, Digital Satellite is thwated as a Public Service Platform for
all.

Plurality and multitude of independent sources is considered an
essential component of the UK's PSB ecology.

At least the BBC, in words, has today said it needs to correct this.


http://logofreetv.org/
http://newsmine.logofreetv.org/



--
Posted via Mailgate.ORG Server - http://www.Mailgate.ORG

"Simon Gardner" [dot]co[dot]uk wrote in message


In article lgate.org,
"NO LOGO" wrote:

So the BBC who instigated the collapse of a multi PSB Free Sat have made
a statement of intent to reverse this problem. Good.

In what sense do you claim "the BBC instigated the collapse of a multi PSB
Free Sat?"


;-)

http://logofreetv.org/redirect.asp?i=1760
http://logofreetv.org/redirect.asp?i=1758

On 12/03/2003, when Greg Dyke announced the BBC would de-crypt, they did
so without consulting with ITV, Channel 4, and FIVE, and without
consideration for those channels' positions.

Consider, FIVE, who's programme budget of £185M is barely more than
just the BBC's marketing and advertising budget alone, and the scale of
the problem for FIVE, C4, and the smaller ITV companies (then) was
obvious.

The problem is cultural. The BBC "awash with cash" (in the words of Mark
Thompson) does not spend real world cash. The needs of both channels 3,
4 and 5 plus 750,000 homes were ignored by the BBC decision.

Without Free To Air (or free at the point of access) for channels 3, 4,
and 5, Digital Satellite is thwated as a Public Service Platform for
all.

Plurality and multitude of independent sources is considered an
essential component of the UK's PSB ecology.

At least the BBC, in words, has today said it needs to correct this.


http://logofreetv.org/
http://newsmine.logofreetv.org/



--
Posted via Mailgate.ORG Server - http://www.Mailgate.ORG

In article lgate.org,
"NO LOGO" wrote:

"Simon Gardner" [dot]co[dot]uk wrote in message


In article lgate.org,
"NO LOGO" wrote:

So the BBC who instigated the collapse of a multi PSB Free Sat have made
a statement of intent to reverse this problem. Good.

In what sense do you claim "the BBC instigated the collapse of a multi PSB
Free Sat?"


;-)

http://logofreetv.org/redirect.asp?i=1760
http://logofreetv.org/redirect.asp?i=1758

On 12/03/2003, when Greg Dyke announced the BBC would de-crypt, they did
so without consulting with ITV, Channel 4, and FIVE, and without
consideration for those channels' positions.

Consider, FIVE, who's programme budget of £185M is barely more than
just the BBC's marketing and advertising budget alone, and the scale of
the problem for FIVE, C4, and the smaller ITV companies (then) was
obvious.

The problem is cultural. The BBC "awash with cash" (in the words of Mark
Thompson) does not spend real world cash. The needs of both channels 3,
4 and 5 plus 750,000 homes were ignored by the BBC decision.

Without Free To Air (or free at the point of access) for channels 3, 4,
and 5, Digital Satellite is thwated as a Public Service Platform for
all.

Plurality and multitude of independent sources is considered an
essential component of the UK's PSB ecology.

At least the BBC, in words, has today said it needs to correct this.

No sorry. I don't see that stands up your allegation. The BBC's laudable
decision to go FTA did not mean it "instigated the collapse of a multi PSB
Free Sat". C4, C5 and particularly ITV did that, the Government contributed
and OfCom topped and tailed. If it is a failure anywhere, it's a failure at
the utterly useless Department of Culture and its utterly useless Minister
- WHO ALREADY HAS THE POWERS TO RECTIFY THE MATTER AND HAS HAD SINCE THE
BEGINNING OF THE YEAR.

In article lgate.org,
"NO LOGO" wrote:

"Simon Gardner" [dot]co[dot]uk wrote in message


In article lgate.org,
"NO LOGO" wrote:

So the BBC who instigated the collapse of a multi PSB Free Sat have made
a statement of intent to reverse this problem. Good.

In what sense do you claim "the BBC instigated the collapse of a multi PSB
Free Sat?"


;-)

http://logofreetv.org/redirect.asp?i=1760
http://logofreetv.org/redirect.asp?i=1758

On 12/03/2003, when Greg Dyke announced the BBC would de-crypt, they did
so without consulting with ITV, Channel 4, and FIVE, and without
consideration for those channels' positions.

Consider, FIVE, who's programme budget of £185M is barely more than
just the BBC's marketing and advertising budget alone, and the scale of
the problem for FIVE, C4, and the smaller ITV companies (then) was
obvious.

The problem is cultural. The BBC "awash with cash" (in the words of Mark
Thompson) does not spend real world cash. The needs of both channels 3,
4 and 5 plus 750,000 homes were ignored by the BBC decision.

Without Free To Air (or free at the point of access) for channels 3, 4,
and 5, Digital Satellite is thwated as a Public Service Platform for
all.

Plurality and multitude of independent sources is considered an
essential component of the UK's PSB ecology.

At least the BBC, in words, has today said it needs to correct this.

No sorry. I don't see that stands up your allegation. The BBC's laudable
decision to go FTA did not mean it "instigated the collapse of a multi PSB
Free Sat". C4, C5 and particularly ITV did that, the Government contributed
and OfCom topped and tailed. If it is a failure anywhere, it's a failure at
the utterly useless Department of Culture and its utterly useless Minister
- WHO ALREADY HAS THE POWERS TO RECTIFY THE MATTER AND HAS HAD SINCE THE
BEGINNING OF THE YEAR.

No sorry. I don't see that stands up your allegation. The BBC's laudable
decision to go FTA did not mean it "instigated the collapse of a multi PSB
Free Sat". C4, C5 and particularly ITV did that, the Government contributed
and OfCom topped and tailed. If it is a failure anywhere, it's a failure at
the utterly useless Department of Culture and its utterly useless Minister
- WHO ALREADY HAS THE POWERS TO RECTIFY THE MATTER AND HAS HAD SINCE THE
BEGINNING OF THE YEAR.


Well it is largely irrelevant what I think, so this is academic.

I would not ask the DCMS to help an old lady cross the road let alone
run a broadcasting system, so no disappointment there.

History does however record that Dyke's Free to Air Satellite revolt
appears to have been executed without discussing the matter with BSKYB,
ITV, C4, FIVE, not to mention the equipment suppliers, and that small
group of unimportant people; The UK citizens, general public, licence
fee payers, and viewers.

Whoops.



--
Posted via Mailgate.ORG Server - http://www.Mailgate.ORG

No sorry. I don't see that stands up your allegation. The BBC's laudable
decision to go FTA did not mean it "instigated the collapse of a multi PSB
Free Sat". C4, C5 and particularly ITV did that, the Government contributed
and OfCom topped and tailed. If it is a failure anywhere, it's a failure at
the utterly useless Department of Culture and its utterly useless Minister
- WHO ALREADY HAS THE POWERS TO RECTIFY THE MATTER AND HAS HAD SINCE THE
BEGINNING OF THE YEAR.


Well it is largely irrelevant what I think, so this is academic.

I would not ask the DCMS to help an old lady cross the road let alone
run a broadcasting system, so no disappointment there.

History does however record that Dyke's Free to Air Satellite revolt
appears to have been executed without discussing the matter with BSKYB,
ITV, C4, FIVE, not to mention the equipment suppliers, and that small
group of unimportant people; The UK citizens, general public, licence
fee payers, and viewers.

Whoops.



--
Posted via Mailgate.ORG Server - http://www.Mailgate.ORG

NO LOGO wrote:

2. "On this, the Corporation welcomes the opportunity to work with other
organisations as quickly as possible to begin to make a non-subscription
digital satellite option a reality."

So the BBC who instigated the collapse of a multi PSB Free Sat have made
a statement of intent to reverse this problem. Good.

This means that something major such as ITV, C4, and FIVE going Free To
Air will happen, or something major in resetting up SOLUS must happen.
May be now Dyke-head is gone, the BBC may even re-encrypt.

There is no earthly reason why the BBC or any other broadcaster should
have to pay Sky an arm and a leg to have FTV cards issued.
Sky must be obliged by law to provide these at cost (£5?) to anyone
who wants one and must also be made to charge a really fair price for
EPG placement and FTV encryption services. Current rates for both of
these are an absolute joke that makes Ofcom look like the toothless
NewsCorp lackey it is. Mind you, the same applies to Blair and cronies
in spades.

--
Digibox problem? : A reboot solves 90% of these.
The Sky Digital FAQ: http://tinyurl.com/yvnsy
How to get UK TV overseas: http://tinyurl.com/6p73
Fed up with logos / red buttons? : http://logofreetv.org/
BBC gone? : http://www.astra2d.co.uk/
----
Only the truth as I see it.
No monies return'd. ;-)