7 ms·
This applies also to BBC Travel, which is run in partnership with Lonely Planet, last I checked. I used to really enjoy those articles, now I never read them be
by josscrowcroft 13y ago
This applies also to BBC Travel, which is run in partnership with Lonely Planet, last I checked. I used to really enjoy those articles, now I never read them because I can't be faffed to proxy up every time...
- jpatokal 13y agoLonely Planet was, until very recently, owned by BBC Worldwide.
- gadders 13y agoWhich they sold at an £80m loss. How many license fees is that?
- sambeau 13y agoBBC Worldwide is a separate commercial organisation. It does not get to spend any of your license-fee.
- gadders 13y agoI will re-state then. If BBC Worldwide had not lost that £80m, how much in additional funds could have been offset against the license fee that UK people pay?
- whiskers 13y agoNone. BBC Worldwide is a separate entity that neither takes money from license fees nor produces anything specifically for license fee payers.
- gadders 13y agoWhiskers - it seems I can't reply to you, but according to the top-rated comment on this page: The majority of the operation is a taxpayer-funded public broadcaster with a remit to produce high quality programming for free; but there's a unit called BBC Worldwide whose job it is to battle it out in the red-in-tooth-and-claw world of commercial TV programming, selling BBC programmes overseas and minting money that can then be used to subsidize the public broadcasting component. That would imply that BBC Worldwide profits do impact the license fee (assuming the BBC don't just spend the profits, but use it to drive down license fee costs).
- zorbo 13y agoIf anybody is still wondering why BBC Worldwide would block its contents from viewers in the UK, it seems reactions like these are what they're trying to prevent.
- gadders 13y agoYes, they block the websites from the UK because people being outraged at a ("commercial" arm of a) state broadcaster losing £80m is a complete overreaction.