4 ms·

> BBC News, BBC Weather, BBC Sport, ... A similar argument can be applied there. They could adopt an online subscription model like other similar companies (NY

> BBC News, BBC Weather, BBC Sport, ... A similar argument can be applied there. They could adopt an online subscription model like other similar companies (NYTimes, etc) did, or they could have ads or whatever. There is no reason to have every taxpayer pay for something that they do not need. So let me correct what I said: "BBC only benefits the few who use its services". > There are many things which I disagree with in this comment and some things that I don't think are relevant at all Such as?

lol768 7y ago
>So let me correct what I said: "BBC only benefits the few who use its services". Except it's not "the few". The BBC has 81% audience reach amongst adults in the UK across different mediums (source: https://www.ofcom.org.uk/__data/assets/pdf_file/0024/116529/news-consumption-2018.pdf https://www.ofcom.org.uk/__data/assets/pdf_file/0024/116529/...) and 62% reach for the flagship BBC One channel. It's simply not comparable to American newspapers with as little as 3% audience (source: (5 / (0.76239))100 - https://nytmediakit.com/newspaper/ https://nytmediakit.com/newspaper/ and https://www.kff.org/other/state-indicator/distribution-by-age/ https://www.kff.org/other/state-indicator/distribution-by-ag...) reach across the country's adult population. Out of interest, do you yourself live in the UK? I suspect you don't from the way you've written your comment, but I do genuinely think you might have a different opinion if you consumed its output in the same way as the vast majority of people do.
- dependenttypes 7y ago
  I will address your post and your question once you address mine. It is rude to ask others questions if you are not willing to reply to the questions that they ask you. (That being said, I will assume in good faith that you simply forgot about it, which happens sometimes) > > There are many things which I disagree with in this comment and some things that I don't think are relevant at all > Such as?
  - lol768 7y ago
    I think it's already clear I disagree with your premise that the BBC is only useful to an insignificant number of tax payers and that such taxation is therefore "theft". I also disagree that the only use of this money is to "inefficiently fund some low-quality education for someone else's child". I think an educated populace is in everyone's interests. There are obvious public health benefits, for a start. In terms of parts of your comments I consider irrelevant: in your later comment, the reference to the NYT (I explained why earlier), and the earlier reference to e.g. the Iraq war - although I can see what you're trying to get at with this point (civilisations doing questionable things, therefore the idea of doing things "for the good of civilisation" being something of a fallacy) I find it difficult to understand the relevance when we're considering a public broadcaster.
    - dependenttypes 7y ago
      Thank you for your reply. > civilisations doing questionable things, therefore the idea of doing things "for the good of civilisation" being something of a fallacy Ah, I should clarify (although while you are not wrong, this was indeed part of the point), it was mostly a reference to "pay the membership club" - that taxes, the "membership fee" for civilization was used to do uncivilized things. > The BBC has 81% I certainly was not aware that BBC had such reach. I guess it has to do with the people that I associate with. It was indeed incorrect to say "the few" then. > do you yourself live in the UK? I lived in the UK for 5 years (until last year).

lol768 7y ago

>So let me correct what I said: "BBC only benefits the few who use its services". Except it's not "the few". The BBC has 81% audience reach amongst adults in the UK across different mediums (source: https://www.ofcom.org.uk/__data/assets/pdf_file/0024/116529/news-consumption-2018.pdf https://www.ofcom.org.uk/__data/assets/pdf_file/0024/116529/...) and 62% reach for the flagship BBC One channel. It's simply not comparable to American newspapers with as little as 3% audience (source: (5 / (0.76239))100 - https://nytmediakit.com/newspaper/ https://nytmediakit.com/newspaper/ and https://www.kff.org/other/state-indicator/distribution-by-age/ https://www.kff.org/other/state-indicator/distribution-by-ag...) reach across the country's adult population. Out of interest, do you yourself live in the UK? I suspect you don't from the way you've written your comment, but I do genuinely think you might have a different opinion if you consumed its output in the same way as the vast majority of people do.

dependenttypes 7y ago
I will address your post and your question once you address mine. It is rude to ask others questions if you are not willing to reply to the questions that they ask you. (That being said, I will assume in good faith that you simply forgot about it, which happens sometimes) > > There are many things which I disagree with in this comment and some things that I don't think are relevant at all > Such as?
- lol768 7y ago
  I think it's already clear I disagree with your premise that the BBC is only useful to an insignificant number of tax payers and that such taxation is therefore "theft". I also disagree that the only use of this money is to "inefficiently fund some low-quality education for someone else's child". I think an educated populace is in everyone's interests. There are obvious public health benefits, for a start. In terms of parts of your comments I consider irrelevant: in your later comment, the reference to the NYT (I explained why earlier), and the earlier reference to e.g. the Iraq war - although I can see what you're trying to get at with this point (civilisations doing questionable things, therefore the idea of doing things "for the good of civilisation" being something of a fallacy) I find it difficult to understand the relevance when we're considering a public broadcaster.
  - dependenttypes 7y ago
    Thank you for your reply. > civilisations doing questionable things, therefore the idea of doing things "for the good of civilisation" being something of a fallacy Ah, I should clarify (although while you are not wrong, this was indeed part of the point), it was mostly a reference to "pay the membership club" - that taxes, the "membership fee" for civilization was used to do uncivilized things. > The BBC has 81% I certainly was not aware that BBC had such reach. I guess it has to do with the people that I associate with. It was indeed incorrect to say "the few" then. > do you yourself live in the UK? I lived in the UK for 5 years (until last year).