So you’d need a license to watch live coverage of Rampage on Red Bull’s Youtube channel?
Yes, slightly daft as it seems.
The licence fee isn’t paid directly to the BBC, it’s a licence to watch live broadcasts. Which is then used to fund the BBC.
Here in Sweden the TV licence is paid through your taxes. Clever huh!
Thanks to the unique way Swedish TV is funded that’s what the propaganda would say isn’t it.
The alternative of a no publically funded BBC world is pretty sure. But it’s not as big a loss as it would once have been.
The loss wouldn’t be the BBC, that would still exist, just with adverts, arguably it would improve as despite advertising revenues falling the budgets at ITV etc are much higher.
The loss would be that it would start a race to the bottom. Going after the lowest common denominator and only commissioning mass audience shows. Love or hate A Christmas Carol, at least it’s not another Cold Feet Christmas special. No more BBC4, R4, test match cricket, infact probably little mainstream coverage of anything other than profitable stuff like mens football. ITV news has to compete with BBC for viewers, so has to appeal to everyone. Remove that competition and you’d end up with a USA style CNN Vs Fox choice.
Independent news coverage is worth having, even if no one watched it, that wouldn’t prove the alternative is better, it proves the alternative is telling people what they want to hear.
And in a different way, think about it as funding for the Arts. It’s a whole creative industry churning out producers, directors, script writers, actors, cameramen, researchers, editors, and a whole plethora of technical trades too.