Support NeoGAF

[TeamGhobad]

Even in North Korea the propaganda is free. New law by Sweden's interim parliament forces all citizens above 18yo to pay around 200dollars in TV license fee, regardless if they own a tv or not. The state owned TV channels 1 and 2 mostly airs downtown abbey and cheese making documentaries, stuff that only people 65 and up find interesting. Odd law since people spend more and more time on the computer, I personally haven't watched TV well over 10years now, I do however use my tv for netflix or movies i download or to play games. Upside is that the swedish government found a new way to nickle and dime the citizens. oh and the icing on the cake, only the far right wing Swedish Democrats voted against this law. Ya this will make them even more popular YIPPIE.....(sarcasm). Sorry had to vent.

EDIT: Ya and this is 200dollars per person not per household.

 

[cryptoadam]

I think the UK has the same thing and in Canada we have the CBC which is paid for by our tax dollars.

It seems stupid and high but public broadcasting is a valuable service.

Who passed this law and why?

 

[michaelius]

Most of Europe has public broadcasters who are financed by various forms of mandatory payments or taxes.

 

[TeamGhobad]

I think the UK has the same thing and in Canada we have the CBC which is paid for by our tax dollars.

It seems stupid and high but public broadcasting is a valuable service.

Who passed this law and why?

all parties voted for this law to pass, all of them right left center, except for the anti-immigration party. the why well government loves more income. and by making it per person they infact doubled their revenue since most households have 2 adults. t
they use to have door knockers who asked if you had tv, then they forced anyone that had a computer or even a cellphone to pay but the high court ruled agains it. as for being valuable i dont agree, nobody watches tv anymore.

Most of Europe has public broadcasters who are financed by various forms of mandatory payments or taxes.

well making people pay for a service they dont use....also its per person now, not per household. and they increased the fee. maybe im the crazy one, but forcing somebody to pay for a tv license when they don't even have a tv is kinda stupid. and its also very expensive.

 

[cryptoadam]

all parties voted for this law to pass, all of them right left center, except for the anti-immigration party. the why well government loves more income. and by making it per person they infact doubled their revenue since most households have 2 adults. t
they use to have door knockers who asked if you had tv, then they forced anyone that had a computer or even a cellphone to pay but the high court ruled agains it. as for being valuable i dont agree, nobody watches tv anymore.

Nice little cash grab. The amount seems high to me but I am not against public broadcasters. At least having one station that isn't beholden to corporate interests is good. But ya at 200$ per head its damn steep.

 

[TeamGhobad]

Nice little cash grab. The amount seems high to me but I am not against public broadcasters. At least having one station that isn't beholden to corporate interests is good. But ya at 200$ per head its damn steep.

again i reiterate nobody watches tv. its like charging for fm radio. as for content, its mostly boring documentaries about how food is produced nothing of value.

 

[Domisto]

UK is slightly better. Basically a racket for the BBC. If you watch any live TV you must pay for a license, £150 per household I think. I expect people will try to copy the Swedes as more people don't pay for a license now (I haven't for 5 years or so) but I'd rather see the BBC go private.

Public broadcasters can be okay, but it's open to waste and abuse. The BBC is frequently out of touch middle class crap, serving up stuff you can get better on commercial channels, and they are still biased in subtle ways. They also rarely break stories but rather react. And it's filled with utter trash looking for ratings.

Feel sorry for Swedes getting shafted like that. Sounds like worse content than BBC and for $200 per person! Must be some nice salaries for head management.

 

[eot]

Slightly sensationalist title, but it's true that Swedish public service does have a noticeable political bias

 

[Kenpachii]

Pretty sure The Netherlands also has this. It's mostly watched by old people or has talk programs about current events + political talks etc.

X amount of money is divided over the content makers and everybody can make content for it or apply towards it if you got enough followers or something.

I think the reason why it exists is to have a neutral platform that isn't out of money and therefore doesn't need to spout hate in order to create more money when it comes to information.

 

[TheShadowLord]

Isn't the PBS pretty much like this(minus the propaganda thing)?

 

[Airola]

Finland says hello.

At first we had the fee only for people who had a tv receiver.
Now the cost is mandatory for everyone. It's based on income though so luckily for us it's now cheaper than what it was before so I'm not complaining.

 

[Melubas]

Not really new but changed. Before this we paid a fee of about 250-300 dollars a year if we owned a TV or other thing that could receive those types of signals. Now this cost will be spread out to include all adult citizens. Personally I'm glad since this means I'll pay like 60% of what I did before, but I agree that it's stupid to have a state funded media apparatus that you're forced to pay for. I don't watch / listen to it and would rather there was some kind of subscription model for people that are interested.

 

[gela94]

Germany says hello. GEZ it is called 18,49€ per month doesn't matter if you have an TV you have to pay anyway.

 

[Saturnman]

Should be just part of the overall government's budget of which a small portion is taken to finance public broadcasting.

A separate, highly visible tax is stupid and self-defeating.

 

[Mr Hyde]

Public service and watching telly is dying so I guess they had to do something. I believe a lot of people in Sweden skipped paying the bills to Radiotjänst so in order to collect lost revenue the government decided to shift it to be included in the taxes. They´re putting taxes to everything else so why not this? The thing that bothers me is that everyone in the household must pay. This only benefits people who are single or lives by themselves, everyone else gotta cough up the dough no matter what. It´s fucking shitty but hey, that´s the way the cookie crumbles.

 

[Ma-Yuan]

We have this shit in germany forever at least its per household . . . But yeah I mainly pay for left agenda propaganda on news and talk shows and shows my parents would watch . . . At least the KIKA is nice for my son but not worth more then 100€ per year . . .

I basically stoped watching TV its only used for my son and this one kids channel . . . All the stuff i like I can see on amazon, netflix or youtube . . . And the news that try to brainwash me to like my government and their outlandish decisions I can't bear anymore . . .

 

[Texas Pride]

Get rich or die trying. That's quite the hustle there. You not only don't have to watch it OR like it but goddamn you're paying for it. Pretty fucked up.

 

[TheKingOfPain]

We've got it in Italy, too. 90€ per family, paid in the electricity bill unless you self-certify via registered mail, once a year, that you don't have a tv-set in any of your houses. Considering no-one can enter you house without a warrant, and "having to check if there's a tv" is not a reasonable motivation for a magistrate to sign one...well, do the math.

 

[llien]

Germany has the same.
It used to be dependent on whether you have a TV, then they came with a brilliant idea of "but internet too" and added streaming services, then some people didn't have internet, but hey they had mobile phones that "could stream", say, at a coffee shop.

It all ended abruptly with state deciding "ok, we are tired from inventing excuses, it is simply everyone pays, "

I wouldn't say there is that much propaganda on TV though.

 

[Breakage]

This is sounds much more stricter than what we have here in the UK. Per person and even if you don't own a TV sounds crazy. The UK's TV licence is £150 per household and that's only if you watch live broadcasts.

 

[Boss Mog]

Germany has the same.
It used to be dependent on whether you have a TV, then they came with a brilliant idea of "but internet too" and added streaming services, then some people didn't have internet, but hey they had mobile phones that "could stream", say, at a coffee shop.

It all ended abruptly with state deciding "ok, we are tired from inventing excuses, it is simply everyone pays, "

I wouldn't say there is that much propaganda on TV though.

Wasn't there some show promoting an adult muslim migrant dating a 15 year-old German girl?

 

[Papa]

Sounds like ABC in Australia. Sadly just another left wing propaganda tool these days.

 

[Dunki]

Wasn't there some show promoting an adult muslim migrant dating a 15 year-old German girl?

This was on the children channel yes. But they also got a ton of flak for it. Especially after it came out that the guy lied about his age etc.

 

[Boss Mog]

This was on the children channel yes. But they also got a ton of flak for it. Especially after it came out that the guy lied about his age etc.

On the children channel? Wow... I didn't even know that part. So they were promoting it to kids, trying to indoctrinate them at any early age about their islamic future.

 

[Makariel]

As many have pointed out already: that's quite common for Europe. I am actually surprised to hear that wasn't the case so far? In the UK at least you only have to pay if you actually want to use the content. I'm not certain if it's still "live tv only", because the BBC iplayer also asks if you paid for your license now if you want to log in to watch something. At least the BBC has some good stuff, e.g. some great documentaries and they still let Adam Curtis do his thing:

https://www.bbc.co.uk/iplayer/episode/p04b183c/adam-curtis-hypernormalisation

https://www.bbc.co.uk/iplayer/episode/p02gyz6b/adam-curtis-bitter-lake

Just one thing:

Even in North Korea the propaganda is free.

Nothing and nobody is free in North Korea.

 

[Dunki]

On the children channel? Wow... I didn't even know that part. So they were promoting it to kids, trying to indoctrinate them at any early age about their islamic future.

basically she also said that my new friend does not allow me to wear short clothes like skirts and that he wants her to wear a hijab and convert to Islam Also he said that eating pork is bad so she stopped doing so. He also tries to prevent her to meat with other men(friends) and that he has to follow the Rules of the Islam etc.

And this was also present as a feel good story. There were some concerns from hthe girl itself and her parents but this was just washed away....

Also to note the girl was 15 the guy in the end was 20 but this is really nothing strange in Germany. No matter if he is a Muslim or not.

 

[Super Mario]

The difference in opinion on this matter is quite comical.

Here in the US, we pay for our own propaganda. No, we aren't writing a check for it. Doesn't mean we aren't paying for it.

 

[Shai-Tan]

CBC in Canada tries to be neutral. I know Conservatives complain about them like they are NPR but I think that’s an exaggeration. You also have to put it into context of the other media sources. I subscribe to Toronto Star, Globe and Mail, New York Times, Washington Post and they are all way more polemical than the CBC not just in opinion but also in news coverage.

 

[Elfstar]

Yeah, it's a really common thing in most European countries as well, and it's not just about having to pay for political propaganda, you're also forced to fund a bunch of trashy, horrible tv shows of any kind that no one watches outside of old, retired people and housewives that don't know any better. It really sucks.

 

[SLoWMoTIoN]

Source OP?

 

[pr0cs]

CBC in Canada tries to be neutral.

Keyword there is tries. They fail most of the time. They should have to conform to running a business like every other Canadian broadcaster.. Translation, provide compelling content or go under. Our leftist govt however will never allow that since the CBC is a the perfect mouthpiece. Feigned neutrality while collecting a govt cheque

 

[cryptoadam]

Keyword there is tries. They fail most of the time. They should have to conform to running a business like every other Canadian broadcaster.. Translation, provide compelling content or go under. Our leftist govt however will never allow that since the CBC is a the perfect mouthpiece. Feigned neutrality while collecting a govt cheque

I think 50 years of Don Cherry is enough of a counterweight to our lefties in this country

 

[Forsete]

We need a reboot when it comes to politicians.

 

[The Janitor]

oh and the icing on the cake, only the far right wing Swedish Democrats voted against this law. Ya this will make them even more popular YIPPIE.....(sarcasm). Sorry had to vent.

Far right? Maybe by Swedish standards. They are pretty moderate.

I would say the far right parties are AFS and NMR.

 

[TeamGhobad]

Far right? Maybe by Swedish standards. They are pretty moderate.

I would say the far right parties are AFS and NMR.

ok pelle

 

[The Janitor]

ok pelle

And when and who is that from? That's obviously not what the party stands for. If anyone from the party did that they would be expelled immediately.
Yes, in the beginning SD had problems with nazies in party, but if we're gonna bring up history then it's nothing compared to what the Socialdemocrats did:



The centerparty were also ethno-nationalist at one point. Not to mention current day MP and SSU that has extreme islamists in the party.

If SD is nazi just because they had a nazi in the party at some point (that gets kicked out) then S are islamist for having islamists in the party.

 

[TeamGhobad]

And when and who is that from? That's obviously not what the party stands for. If anyone from the party did that they would be expelled immediately.
Yes, in the beginning SD had problems with nazies in party, but if we're gonna bring up history then it's nothing compared to what the Socialdemocrats did:



The centerparty were also ethno-nationalist at one point. Not to mention current day MP and SSU that has extreme islamists in the party.

If SD is nazi just because they had a nazi in the party at some point (that gets kicked out) then S are islamist for having islamists in the party.

just because they have smartened up and cleaned up their language doesn't change what they are.

 

[The Janitor]

just because they have smartened up and cleaned up their language doesn't change what they are.

lol ok. And the same doesn't apply to the other parties because...?

 

[TeamGhobad]

lol ok. And the same doesn't apply to the other parties because...?

what are you talking about?

 

[The Janitor]

what are you talking about?

You're saying they can't change because they had far-right leanings in the beginning, but most other parties have an even shittier history than SD. Why are they not held to the same standard?
It's because of our state propaganda as you put it, constanly reminding us of SDs history while conveniently ignoring the other parties. Anyone can find dirt on a party, but it's not the dirt that defines them. It's how they act, how they debate and their party platform. So if you actually follow swedish politics and not just listen to left wing media and other politicians, you'd know that they aren't far-right.

We've seen what happens in our neighbor countries Denmark, Norway and Finland, their goverments actually cooperate with when their SD counterparts. Did they turn in to Nazi Germany? No, what happened is they got a sensible and sustainable immigation policy. But that wont happen in Sweden, because the only party that can bring a sensible immigation policy have been branded as nazis so we must never cooperate with them. Can't
you see this is counterintuitive? If you want SD to stop growing you have to cooperate with them, simple as that.

That's why this constant branding of SD annoys me. If they are wrong you should be able to destory their arguments in debates, but usually no one can because SD are more often than not the most logical ones (as evidenced by your OP) so they just resort to branding them and calling them names. So we are left with completely crazy and illogical politics.

 

[TeamGhobad]

You're saying they can't change because they had far-right leanings in the beginning, but most other parties have an even shittier history than SD. Why are they not held to the same standard?

because enough time has passed between then and now. when jimmie åkeson joined SD the party's ambitions were

1. Get rid of all non nordic immigrants regardless of citizenship
2. No non-nordic adoptions
3. All immigrants are parasites

Your dear Jimmie saw this and thought this would be a good party to join.

 

[The Janitor]

because enough time has passed between then and now..

lol, Stefan Löfven joined the Socialdemocrats when they were still doing forced sterilisations.

 

[TeamGhobad]

lol, Stefan Löfven joined the Socialdemocrats when they were still doing forced sterilisations.

and that excuses SD how? nice cherrypicked event. as far as i can see sweden stopped forced sterilization in 41 and completetly abandoned it in 76.

 

[The Janitor]

and that excuses SD how?

It doesn't excuse anything, it's just to put things in perspective and I'm sick of the hypocrisy. I wish the other parties were held to the same standard as SD because they get away with so much shit.
For the record I don't think SD is perfect either, just that on most issues they are way more rational. But that's politics, you have to pick you poison.

 

[TeamGhobad]

It doesn't excuse anything, it's just to put things in perspective and I'm sick of the hypocrisy. I wish the other parties were held to the same standard as SD because they get away with so much shit.
For the record I don't think SD is perfect either, just that on most issues they are way more rational. But that's politics, you have to pick you poison.

there is no hypocrisy going on. SD is a racist party with a far right agenda. only difference is that they have cleaned up their language.

 

[Supreme Allah]

I live in Sweden. The "Public Service" here is basically only pushing the "migration is wonderful" agenda down everyone's throats. Lots of shows (positive) about immigrants, multiculturalism, islam, and feminism. They even have news anchors who can barely speak Swedish: https://samnytt.se/svt-avvisar-kritik-dalig-svenska-en-del-av-den-sprakliga-mangfalden/

54% and 52% of the people who work at SR (Public Service State Radio) and SVT (Public Service State TV) sympathize with the "Green Party": https://www.dagensmedia.se/medier/dagspress/miljopartiet-storst-bland-journalister-6141799

This is a party that has around 4% in the pools: https://val.digital/Party-MP/ But don't let that name fool you. Environment is not the "Green Partys" main issue. Their main issue is mass migration from the Middle East and Africa.

A couple of years ago they aired a Christmas special from a church on SVT and in the middle of it they brought in a middle eastern rapper, this is the most cringiest shit you have ever seen in your entire life:

 

[The Janitor]

there is no hypocrisy going on. SD is a racist party with a far right agenda. only difference is that they have cleaned up their language.

Yeah right. SSU have radical islamists members spreading homofobia and antisemitism but that's totally fine because they ain't SD. No hypocrisy here folks.

 

[TeamGhobad]

Yeah right. SSU have radical islamists in the party spreading homofobia and antisemitism but that's totally fine because they ain't SD. No hypocrisy here folks.

they might have that or not i dont know. but as a party S is not for anti-semitism or homophobia but SD most definitely is racist.

 

[The Janitor]

they might have that or not i dont know. but as a party S is not for anti-semitism or homophobia but SD most definitely is racist.

Compelling argument. Well you can rest easy, SD is probably gonna be shut out this term too. So you can look forward to even more taxes.

That's the last thing I'll say, peace out.