A guy goes into a shop and buys his favourite newspaper, however, he also has to buy The Wall Street Journal as it’s a legal requirement. Is it conceivable? Here in the UK this same concept applies to television; we can buy subscriptions to cable, Internet or satellite television so long as we pay the BBC first.

The BBC is primarily funded by a television licence. Actually, a more accurate term might be “media licence” as it is not dependent on the ownership of a television. Any household which receives near live television broadcasts must obtain a licence, this includes for example, television over the Internet or on a mobile phone. Reception of television broadcasts without a licence is a criminal offence. Successful prosecutions result in a fine of up to £1000 (approx. €1470 or US$1990). Persistent offenders are sent to prison.

Currently (2007), the price of a television licence is £135.50 per year (approx. €199 or US$268). Unfortunately, this fee has a negative effect on low income families as they may not be able to subsequently afford additional broadcast services such as cable.

At a different level, broadcasters are fighting two major battles. First there is falling revenue from advertising as the leisure habits of people change and diversify. Secondly, broadcasters are subject to higher scrutiny and standards than their Internet counterparts. For UK broadcasters the television licence is their third battleground as licence money significantly interference with free market forces. Simply put, commercial broadcasters are forced to compete with an organisation which does not have to ask their “customers” for financial support. To help blur the line, a small percentage of the licence fee is given to commercial broadcasters.

The TV licence has existed for more than 70 years and this goes some way to explain why it is seemingly tolerated. However, avoiding mutiny is not easy so the BBC outsources most of its payment collection through a publicly traded company called Capita (FTSE:CPI). Capita allocates approximately 2000 staff, many of which are given the grand title of “Enforcement Officer”, which are sent out to investigate and interview all those without a valid licence. Capita are known for their bullish approach, often seeking entry into an household to determine if there is illegal television reception. If entry to a household is blocked and there are reasonable grounds of said offence, an applications for a search warrant is made. Bonuses are paid for catching licence evaders which has lead in several cases of forged confessions. Capita is also known for entrapment, where they send letters “signed for” in order to obtain people’s names and signatures.

Beyond this, Capita capture and cross reference information from various sources, some of these include:

• Customer names and addresses are passed from retailers for every appliance sold with a built-in television tuner. This includes the sales of computers and mobile phones where appropriate.

• Access to government records such as the Criminal Records Bureau and Department of Work and Pensions.

• Regular updates of the Postal Address File from the Post Office.

Not buying a licence leads to many letters which, under any other circumstance, would be construed as harassment. They can not be avoided as letters are typically marked with a mix of surname and / or “The Occupier”; a convenient method of circumventing rules of the Mail Preference Service. This also leads to many personal visits to your home until you prove your innocence, despite this being a matter of criminal law. If you continue to live without television, even if you have proved your innocence, they will usually be back within six months (officially two years).

All of this comes at a cost. The fact is, millions of pounds are diverted from the BBC to chase unlicensed households. The net result of all this is a highly contrasted perception between those who buy a licence and those who do not.

Capita administer many other public services such as Congestion Charging. For this they have access to the DVLA database (Driver and Vehicle Licensing Agency). Various scenarios have been tabled such as wheel-clamping television licence dodgers.

Finally, the terms of the licence are very broad and there is almost no guidance on how to identify content requiring a licence. With so much content available online, how do we identify channels, videos and websites requiring a licence?

It all started with the Broadcasting Receiving Licence in 1922 to protect national security. The idea was to create a register of people capable of monitoring naval movements and radiotelegraph messages. It was later extended to television reception to which the BBC was given exclusive rights.

With the arrival of the transistor radio, the government bowed to the impracticality of enforcing the radio part of its licence and thus the radio part of the licence was dropped. When colour television appeared, a supplementary fee was levied. This two tier licence fee still stands today; one licence for black and white reception, another for colour reception.

Over the years, as new technologies emerged, the licence gradually morphed and extended its reach far beyond its original purpose. When the video recorder came out a licence was required as it contained a television tuner. Additionally, a colour licence was required for a video recorder even if a black and white television was used for viewing. In modern times, equivalent attempts have been made where the use of cable set-top boxes are attached to black and white televisions, their justification the same; a colour signal is present even if your view is black and white.

The black and white licence continues to mar licensing, for example, a legally blind person receives a 50% discount off a colour licence yet a black and white licence is even cheaper.

Today, money from the licence fee powers BBC Internet, radio and television services, all free of advertising within the UK. Whilst minority programming such as Welsh language programmes are present, the BBC has increasingly found itself competing for audience attention.

Frequency allocation is disproportionately weighted in favour of the BBC, often leading to stronger signals than their commercial adversaries. Invariably, people in nearby countries such as Ireland, northern France, Belgium and the Netherlands are able to receive these broadcasts for free.

While the BBC within the UK contains no external advertising, they do hold commercial interests throughout the world. For example, they sell books, CDs and they sell advertising on services such as BBC America and BBC World. Significantly, their programming includes content generated from the licence fee.

There are two arguments often cited in favour of the television licence:

• Commercial independence allows for the production of more diverse, educative and innovative programming.

• Higher quality and more accessible programming compared to commercial rivals. In addition, this higher quality programming challenges commercial channels to do better.

Generally, these arguments assume advertising is the only viable alternative. In practical terms, the BBC could be funded in a variety of ways including cooperatives, subscriptions, public access, underwriting and so on.

When it comes to media consumption, how important is your freedom of choice? In any other industry the television licence would be considered anti-competitive and a nuisance; holding a dominant position and market manipulating. It would be tempting to conclude it could be fought head on. Yet the path-of-least-resistance might be to simply switch off. Really, try it, break your routine. Here’s a challenge - list five things you and your family could be doing instead of watching television, here are some ideas - karaoke, dance, gym, swimming, skating, cycling, fishing, tennis, camping, kayaking, photography and the list goes on!

If you make one change, it might change ones life.

• TV Licensing, official UK site
• BBC Resistance, an anti-TV licence campaign
• A fair representation of one person’s letters from TV Licensing.