TV Licensing Drip Feed Misinformation

I was browsing cyberspace as I often do in the pursuit of TV Licensing related articles and I happened across the Yahoo! Answers site.

For those unfamiliar with it, as I was until recently, it allows people to pose questions for others to answer. People can also vote on suggested answers to show their agreement or otherwise. Quite alarming is the number of Yahoo! Answers members who have become "experts" by providing dubious information to say the least.

One question in particular drew my attention: "Do I want to pay TV licence fee if I go to www.bbc.co.uk/iplayer to watch recorded programs?" Excuse the poor sentence structure, as originally posted by the questioner.

The last words of the question, underlined by me, make it perfectly clear that the questioner wants to watch pre-recorded programmes on the iPlayer, which definitely does not require a TV licence. The top answer therefore provides incorrect information so please give it a thumbs down if you can.

Remember that a TV licence is only required where equipment is used to receive or record live (as broadcast) television signals. A licence is not required for viewing pre-recorded media of any description.

I am pretty confident there are undercover BBC employees posting misinformation on sites like Yahoo! Answers, with the intention of deceiving people into paying for a licence they do not need.

Coincidentally, a comment left here earlier reinforces the idea that TV Licensing are deliberately economical with the truth when it comes to the legalities of when a licence is required.

The commenter said: "I have just had an interesting conversation with someone who is a magistrate. It appears that the guidance they are given means that they are directed to find people guilty of licence evasion even if the person up in front of them in court is simply in POSSESSION of a TV, although there is no evidence of the person WATCHING TV without a licence."

If true that is absolutely scandalous. In effect it means innocent people are being convicted of an offence they have not committed.