BBC has no right to taxpayer money if it cannot prove impartiality
Unless the BBC can prove, definitely, that it is unbiased, it has no right to taxpayer money, writes Oliver Dean
The BBC’s latest bias scandal has blown a hole in the last remaining defence of the licence fee. For decades, the corporation’s unique funding model has been justified on the basis of trust: that in the hands of public ownership, news coverage cannot be swayed to favour any particular party or cause. But after a wave of senior resignations, the future of the corporation looks to be shaky. Unless it can prove to the British people that it is impartial, then it may be time to review its funding model altogether.
The BBC’s problem is not that it made a simple, editorial mistake that can easily be corrected. It’s that this mistake undermines the very foundation on which its entire funding model rests. Those that most strongly defend the institution point to its role as an impartial and unbiased source of news amidst an increasingly polarising world. Martin Wolf, for instance, argues that in recent years it has “helped to keep our most divisive national debates anchored in a bedrock of fact”. When 90 per cent of adults use the outlet to gather their news, one would hope that to be the case.
BBC must prove it’s different from the rest
But all of those positives are secondary to one core principle: impartiality. That’s the deal. Taxpayers fork out money for a TV license fee because they trust the BBC to rise above commercial incentives, political agendas and cultural tribalism that so often drive other news outlets. In short, taxpayers pay because it’s supposed to be different. But this latest scandal makes the BBC look just like every other private news outlet. And that raises an awkward yet important question. If it’s no longer distinct, why are taxpayers still compelled to pay for it?
True, the amount taxpayers actually contribute to the operational running of the BBC may seem insignificant. £174.50 a year (or just £58.50 for those still living in the 1950s with their black and white TVs) might not sound much, but on aggregate it adds up to over £3.5bn. That is a figure that should not be shirked, especially at a time when the Chancellor is scraping the bottom of the barrel for extra revenue through punitive tax raids. With the Budget looming closer, every public institution is under pressure to justify its existence and its cost to the taxpayer. Why, then, should the BBC be any different, particularly when it’s struggling to fulfil its sole defining mission?
This is by no means a call to scrap the BBC – much to the dismay of many who may place themselves in that camp. Britain without the BBC would be poorer, both from a cultural and journalistic standpoint. But affection is not justification for compulsion and the BBC can no longer take the taxpayer’s trust, or indeed the taxpayer’s money, for granted. It must prove, unconditionally, that it is unbiased. It must demonstrate that it is genuinely different from the partisan media it loves to look down upon.
Right now, the case for the BBC is failing to hold water. The BBC says it is independent, impartial and “not institutionally biased”. But when those words are said by the CEO who was forced to resign in disgrace, it becomes difficult to believe. The BBC says it’s for everyone and that it is held to higher standards. Yet when it is challenged, it defaults to denial.
Licence fee model needs review
If the BBC cannot prove to both the taxpayer and the government that it is unbiased and impartial, then the government has no choice but to launch a review into its funding. Darwin Friend, head of research at the Taxpayers’ Alliance, summed this up perfectly, arguing that the real disgrace is that the BBC is able to rely on a TV tax for its funding to the point that “no matter how far it falls”, the British public will “always be forced to catch it”. Taxpayer money should not prop up a broadcaster that cannot demonstrate its neutrality on incredibly important issues, and this is especially true at a time when everyday Britons are expected to splash out even more money for increases in government spending.
The BBC’s most valiant defenders often warn that challenging the licence fee threatens “British culture”, and will see our news cycle become dominated by partisan-charged news outlets. But British culture isn’t the BBC’s property and neither is impartial journalism its exclusive domain. The licence fee was always justified on a level of trust between the taxpayer and the institution. A social contract, if you will. Yet, with this recent scandal, that trust has been shaken – and unless the BBC can rebuild it, the days of its guaranteed public subsidy should be numbered, and justifiably so.
Until the BBC proves it’s truly impartial, there’s no moral or economic case for forcing the public to pay. The burden of proof is on them. And right now, they’re failing it.
Oliver Dean is a political commentator with Young Voices UK. He studies History and Politics at the London School of Economics and Political Science (LSE) where he is the President of the LSE Hayek Society.