AfterDawn: News

13,000 UK households still using black and white TVs

In the age of 4K resolution and OLED super displays, some people seem to just not care.

The UK's television licensing authority has announced that just over 13,000 households in the region are still using black and white TVs, even though color broadcasts began on BBC in 1967.



While the display is certainly not current, users may have other motives for keeping them. A b&w TV license costs £49 compared to £145.50 for a color TV. However, if you own a computer, tablet, smartphone or DVR, you still have to pay the full color TV license fee.

In the year 2000, there were 212,000 households using the old school TVs, with a steady decline until today.

Overall, there are 25 million licensed viewers in the UK.

Written by: Andre Yoskowitz @ 12 Jan 2013 19:21

• Previous article

• Internet freedom activist Aaron Swartz commits suicide

• Next article

• Wii U launch brings in more revenue than original Wii

• 34 comments

• Azuran

  I always forget that in the UK you need a license to watch TV
  

  12.1.2013 19:35 #1

• JST1946

  Sounds like a great place to live.
  

  20 Year U.S.Army Veteran.Vietnam 1969-1972 101st Abn.Div.

  12.1.2013 19:42 #2

• Bozobub

  Well, remember, their OTA television and radio channels are mostly public-funded. They do get some money from commercials, but nowhere near enough to offset costs. These fees offset that.

  12.1.2013 20:15 #3

• Justoneguy

  If television is anything like it is here, nothing but ridiculous reality tv garbage and commercials, it doesn't surprise me.

  12.1.2013 21:53 #4

• Bozobub

  Compared to what they spend, the BBC gets 5-10x the effect out of the same (rather, usually far less) amount of money as the equivalent US production.

  12.1.2013 22:56 #5

• Justoneguy

  Originally posted by Bozobub: Compared to what they spend, the BBC gets 5-10x the effect out of the same (rather, usually far less) amount of money as the equivalent US production. I'm a little confused by your comment, the bbc gets 5-10x the equivalent, usually far less. I know it probably wasn't directed at myself, but could you elaborate?

  12.1.2013 23:38 #6

• KillerBug

  Here in the us every taxpayer pays for public TV even if they have no TV at all...and we don't even get top gear...

  13.1.2013 00:46 #7

• Bigwillyz

  We do have top gear. . . . . . the US version is way more interesting and fun to watch, the latter is stale with dry humor

  13.1.2013 01:16 #8

• Bozobub

  Public television gets very little, relatively, from the US government. If you charged a license fee on TVs to cover it, it'd work out to $1-3 per "license". Furthermore, more than half their funding is from private donations.
  
  The US spends over twice the annual federal funding of PBS, which is about $445 million, per day on servicing the interest on the national debt, to the tune of $1 billion each day. Similarly, at the height of the 2nd Iraq war, the US was spending $1.5-$2.5 billion per day on that conflict alone.

  13.1.2013 01:16 #9

• KillerBug

  Originally posted by Bozobub: Public television gets very little, relatively, from the US government. If you charged a license fee on TVs to cover it, it'd work out to $1-3 per "license". Furthermore, more than half their funding is from private donations.
  
  The US spends over twice the annual federal funding of PBS, which is about $445 million, per day on servicing the interest on the national debt, to the tune of $1 billion each day. Similarly, at the height of the 2nd Iraq war, the US was spending $1.5-$2.5 billion per day on that conflict alone. Originally posted by Bigwillyz: We do have top gear. . . . . . the US version is way more interesting and fun to watch, the latter is stale with dry humor Personally I am not a big fan of our version of Top Gear...and you have to pay for cable to get it anyway. Since I am always on the road, this isn't even an option. At least people in the UK can watch it online without paying for a VPN.
  
  I am not sure how much exactly goes to where as far as taxes...but I do know that I pay a huge amount for internet access taxes that would far exceed the color TV tax that covers this in the UK. I also know that the local PBS channel in my city got almost $1 million from the federal government last year, and other than one very crummy news show, everything was rebroadcasts of content from other stations...usually stuff that was rather old.

  13.1.2013 01:39 #10

• Justoneguy

  Originally posted by KillerBug: Here in the us every taxpayer pays for public TV even if they have no TV at all...and we don't even get top gear... We also spend billions upon billions on public works projects no one will ever see to create "jobs." I have to agree with you though, the exclusion of top gear form my channel lineup is complete bullsh*t.

  13.1.2013 01:40 #11

• xboxdvl2

  i live in australia.we have uk top gear but mostly just reruns now and we have an australian version of top gear.we have about 20- free to air digital channels.no licence required.
  
  i'd hate to have to pay for a tv licence to watch tv.even worst that you have to pay for a licence
  Quote:if you own a computer, tablet, smartphone or DVR, i did hear you can get tv,internet phone bundles (In uk) which are cheaper.
  

  i have the big screen tv,a ps3 and 5.1 channel surround sound.car still runs smooth and computer still works but its a bit outdated.

  13.1.2013 03:05 #12

• Bigwillyz

  Bottom line is TV is just garbage nowadays with reality that's not really reality and dumb trash can make it big by doing nothing. This kind of stuff makes me embarrassed to be American, it's just sad and makes people that work hard feel like crap. I really don't know where we are headed but it's not looking good so far. . . . . along with paying out the ass for less and less

  13.1.2013 03:08 #13

• ZippyDSM

  Originally posted by Justoneguy: Originally posted by KillerBug: Here in the us every taxpayer pays for public TV even if they have no TV at all...and we don't even get top gear... We also spend billions upon billions on public works projects no one will ever see to create "jobs." I have to agree with you though, the exclusion of top gear form my channel lineup is complete bullsh*t. A shame all that money has gone to waste...have you looked at our infrastructure lately?
  

  Copyright infringement is nothing more than civil disobedience to a bad set of laws. Lets renegotiate them.
  
  ---
  Check out my crappy creations
  http://zippydsm.deviantart.com/

  13.1.2013 05:56 #14

• PraisesToAllah

  Originally posted by Azuran: I always forget that in the UK you need a license to watch TV I never heard of this nonsense. It probably isn't nonsense after all the number crunching, but out front, it sounds like BS to me.

  13.1.2013 11:48 #15

• ddp

  PraisesToAllah, is not nonsense about having to have a license to have a tv & i think radio in the uk.
  

  13.1.2013 12:57 #16

• Bozobub

  Yes, you have to have a license for a TV or radio in the UK. In fact, if you play your boom-box outside where others can hear it (say, in a mechanic's shop or w/e), you're assessed a "public performance" fee. And yes, they have roving officials who enforce the fee.

  13.1.2013 13:28 #17

• JayBino

  I still dont get why people still have a Tube TV ... HDTV is awesome
  

  13.1.2013 13:59 #18

• PraisesToAllah

  ddp, you are correct. This isn't nonsense.
  
  Originally posted by Wikipedia: In the United Kingdom and the Crown Dependencies, any household watching or recording live broadcast television transmissions (terrestrial, satellite, cable, or internet) is required to purchase an annual television licence. As of 2012, this costs £145.50 for colour and £49.00 for black and white. Is this per household or per tv?
  

  13.1.2013 16:06 #19

• Justoneguy

  Originally posted by Bozobub: In fact, if you play your boom-box outside where others can hear it (say, in a mechanic's shop or w/e), you're assessed a "public performance" fee. And yes, they have roving officials who enforce the fee. Now that sounds ridiculous, but I'm sure the fees go directly to the artists, so it's all good....
  

  13.1.2013 17:04 #20

• xtago

  It's per household, and they have scanners to check if you have a TV or not.
  
  I think radio is free now in the UK. Main reason for so many stations in the UK.

  13.1.2013 21:23 #21

• Bozobub

  Originally posted by JayBino: I still dont get why people still have a Tube TV ... HDTV is awesome An HDTV is still assessed as a TV, and you pay the color TV fee. It doesn't matter whether it's a CRT or flat panel.
  
  If you meant the people still using black-and-white TVs, the article clearly explains why (they're cheap). I'd bet most of those folks are Welsh/Scottish — lol...

  13.1.2013 22:45 #22

• steveuk9000

  You only need a licence to watch live tv. The licence fee goes to the BBC, not the independent channels. You dont need a licence to Listen to the radio. A shop must pay a fee to ppl for listening to music in the public place. You do not need a licence for a computer. Only when you do not watch live tv then a licence is not required.
  
  The law states that you need to be covered by a TV Licence if you watch or record television programmes, on any device, as theyre being shown on TV. This includes TVs, computers, mobile phones, games consoles, digital boxes and Blu-ray/DVD/VHS recorders.
  ----------
  goto www tvlicensing co uk/notv
  
  You dont need a licence if you dont use any of these devices to watch or record television programmes as theyre being shown on TV - for example, if you use your TV only to watch DVDs or play video games, or you only watch ?catch up? services like BBC iPlayer or 4oD.
  

  14.1.2013 00:34 #23

• townliar

  YOU DO NOT NEED A TV LICENCE IN THE UK FOR A COMPUTER OR TABLET OR DVD PR GAMES MACHINE DO NOT BELIEVE THE BBC SPIN TO MAKE YOU PAY!!!!!

  18.1.2013 07:44 #24

• townliar

  Originally posted by PraisesToAllah: ddp, you are correct. This isn't nonsense.
  
  Originally posted by Wikipedia: In the United Kingdom and the Crown Dependencies, any household watching or recording live broadcast television transmissions (terrestrial, satellite, cable, or internet) is required to purchase an annual television licence. As of 2012, this costs £145.50 for colour and £49.00 for black and white. Is this per household or per tv? Household

  18.1.2013 07:47 #25

• ddp

  taysider, post edited.
  

  18.1.2013 11:32 #26

• Bozobub

  Originally posted by taysider: there is no such thing as a tv licence,you have never required a licence for mere ownership of a television,it is a broadcast reception licence.And to the edited by ddp bozobub why would you make the assumption that most black and white licences will be held by scots and welsh people.Tvl quite clearly states that these licences are held accross the uk and as england is the largest constituent country in the uk it would be a fair assumption that most will be held in england sorry to burst your stupid anti welsh/scots bubble I'm not anti-Scot or Welsh, silly git. I figure that, since they are on the average FAR more rural than England itself, they would be less tied to the idiot box; farmers tend to not have a lot of free time to watch TV. Furthermore, both the Welsh and Scots are quite well-known to be crusty "auld sods", in general.
  
  Put that back in your pants; if you can't take a mild bad joke, get off the internet, lest your head explodes.

  18.1.2013 12:02 #27

• ddp

  idiot banned, posts deleted. i'm at least 2nd generation born english canadian but my background is from montreal, ireland, england & texas.
  

  18.1.2013 12:52 #28

• xboxd00d

  Just to chip in, I pay a tv licence which is just for the bbc, which sux but is pretty good if your watching cos it means no advertising spoils your program or movie.
  That being said I would take more advertising any day than pay for my tv licence cos I just record everything I watch on my dvr so the ads can be skipped through.
  As for tv in the usa, I have been twice and while watching tv I did think it was insane how much advertising you have to endure, a 30min broadcast should not have 2 or more breaks for commercials.
  

  "Trying is the first step towards Failure" Homer.J.Simpson

  18.1.2013 13:39 #29

• leglessoz

  Yeah no TV licence fees here in Australia and look at the damned fine TV we've created and shared with the world - Skippy, Prisoner, Home and Away, Neighbours. I'm so proud I'm almost choked with tears here. Just excuse me while I go vomit and have a quiet chuckle to myself.

  19.1.2013 05:57 #30

• DADEO1

  TV license, what the heck is that? Thanks alot for bringing that up. This will be added to the list of "what stuff haven't we thought of a way to tax yet". Another thing, the U.S. Top Gear sucks, the U.K. version way better, by far. What the heck, here's some more crap, this reality TV crap has got to come to an end. What lazy, cheap, talentless crap. What's next, Reality TV-The Movie, The Kardashians Movie. Give me a Three Stooges Festival any day. Now, what's on the radio....oh no, no, tell me this isn't happening.

  19.1.2013 07:54 #31

• Dr_Shifty

  Originally posted by leglessoz: Yeah no TV licence fees here in Australia
  We used to have radio and tv license fees here in Australia. When I was a uni student in the late 1960s the student hostel I lived in only allowed residents to have a radio in their room if they had a paid up license.
  
  When I went to the UK for post-grad study in the mid 1980s we used to get cards in the letter box telling us we needed to get a TV license. We did not have a tv set there so we just chucked them. But every few months there was another one, so one day we got our young son to scribble on the card and we posted it off. We never got another card after that. Somewhere there is a bureaucrat who understands messy little boy scribble. :)
  
  

  19.1.2013 22:07 #32

• xboxdvl2

  Originally posted by Dr_Shifty: Originally posted by leglessoz: Yeah no TV licence fees here in Australia
  We used to have radio and tv license fees here in Australia. When I was a uni student in the late 1960s the student hostel I lived in only allowed residents to have a radio in their room if they had a paid up license.
  
  When I went to the UK for post-grad study in the mid 1980s we used to get cards in the letter box telling us we needed to get a TV license. We did not have a tv set there so we just chucked them. But every few months there was another one, so one day we got our young son to scribble on the card and we posted it off. We never got another card after that. Somewhere there is a bureaucrat who understands messy little boy scribble. :)
  ive never had to pay for a tv or radio licence living in australia.ive been here since 1986.
  

  i have the big screen tv,a ps3 and 5.1 channel surround sound.car still runs smooth and computer still works but its a bit outdated.

  20.1.2013 04:25 #33

• Dr_Shifty

  Originally posted by xboxdvl2: Originally posted by Dr_Shifty: Originally posted by leglessoz: Yeah no TV licence fees here in Australia
  We used to have radio and tv license fees here in Australia. When I was a uni student in the late 1960s the student hostel I lived in only allowed residents to have a radio in their room if they had a paid up license.
  
  When I went to the UK for post-grad study in the mid 1980s we used to get cards in the letter box telling us we needed to get a TV license. We did not have a tv set there so we just chucked them. But every few months there was another one, so one day we got our young son to scribble on the card and we posted it off. We never got another card after that. Somewhere there is a bureaucrat who understands messy little boy scribble. :)
  ive never had to pay for a tv or radio licence living in australia.ive been here since 1986. That means you missed this on the telly. :)
  http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_5B_6qPW0k8
  Frank Thring was a well known actor back then.
  
  They got rid of them in 1974.
  http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Television_licence#Australia
  

  21.1.2013 02:47 #34