Exactly. It’s not a lot to pay really yet there are libertarian types who will thrash out at the BBC at every opportunity, decrying it as some sort of tax payer funded socialist brainwashing front because it doesn’t always echo their particularly right-wing viewpoint. Likewise, weirdo Corbynites see it as a Tory-sponsored mouthpiece for the government. People see what they want to see in it and, whilst not without fault, the BBC does do a lot of things pretty well that others don’t do.
If a TV licence isn’t the option for some, the alternative options aren’t without flaws.
- Advertising only – I watched a drama on ITV last night. I quite enjoyed the seven minutes I watched before a truckload of adverts came my way. Plenty of time to make a brew every break, mind.
- Netflix-style subscription model – Spend 30 minutes scrolling for something to watch before deciding on an episode of Friends which is now on Channel 5 anyway. No sport, no local programming, no news, rather reliant on the US. Tiger King and that Fyre Festival documentary were fun though.
- Sky-subscription model – All the wall to wall sport you could want plus signing your viewing away to betting adverts. I had a pass for Sky Sports for the playoff matches having not watched Sky since moving out of my parents place a long while back. I was astounded at how little coverage the game itself received before or after it had finished in order to ram in commercials. It was a horrible viewing experience. Throw in an astonishing number of channels you don’t want and will never watch for a monthly cost that could fly you to Turkey and back and you have a model that is surely a prime funder for seeing Pogba make £300k a week.
Just maybe a TV licence with a few channels sans adverts and then choice for the consumer to choose whatever package they want thereafter is a the best approach. To have a network where I know I won’t hear ‘Go Compaaare’ every ad break or broadcasts local news rather than another US drama import is maybe worth that £150 a year or so.