[Re: Scrap the licence fee – and drag British TV into 21st century, yesterday]
Surely the biggest scandal at the BBC is that, for an organisation with revenues of £3.5bn, the quality of programmes is so poor. A change in the way the BBC is funded would not only cut costs, but would force it to produce better programmes to attract new subscribers.
The licence fee is an ideologically unsound system. It is both a regressive tax in practice, and an example of socialist interference in the market of ideas. The only problem is that, pragmatically, it does arguably work in creating the best possible content for the lowest possible price, and forces the rest of the market to compete with it in a race to the top, rather than to the bottom.
The BBC may have its shortcomings, but what about the Proms, BBC Radio, or the World Service? Yes, the BBC is falling behind the likes of HBO or ABC in the US in terms of the quality of programmes on offer. One solution might be for the BBC to offer an advert funded model, and have a separate advert-free service for those willing to pay a fee?
BEST OF TWITTER
Sustained economic growth will happen not through Ed Balls’ fiscal stimulus, but with supply-side reform.
George Osborne says the focus is on living standards. Does he realise UK real wage growth is negative?
The HS2 project is flawed, and the money for infrastructure could be spent in better ways.
If you disagree with zero-hours contracts, don’t agree to one. But don’t ruin the choice for others.