Quote:
Originally Posted by Alan Fry
I do understand what you are saying, but the BBC world service and world news services are still important and now you can get them online, I feel that we need to expand the lisesnce fee to make it fit for purpose for this day and age.
|
We've established that World News is commercially operated already, so no change there, and that the target audience for World Service is outside the realm of the licence payer, so there are a few options available to reduce costs and source funding from elsewhere:-
- Merge World News and World Service and have them both commercially funded. There would be significant savings to be made anyway by merging.
- Make World Service an internet only broadcaster and do away with the cost of running and maintaining their transmission facilities and satellite leases. You would make a fortune selling off the vast transmitter sites. You could feed a third world country with the crops grown on the land if it were converted to agriculture.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Alan Fry
Which Is why I feel that the BBC should control the licence fee, not the government.
|
So, you're agreeing that the BBC should be "more autonomous and more business-like" but suggesting that it should have limitless, self-determined public funding with no supervisory body controlling the funding or overseeing how it is spent. Er, no thanks! Anyway, those are contradictory stances. Running an operation on the basis of limitless, self-determined public funding is not being "more autonomous and more business-like".