The License Fee

I see that the BBC license fee is a hot topic once again. Unfortunately, since last time the discussion came up I've had rather a change of heart, and as such am finding it rather hard to justify.

As far as I can see, there are two arguments that get put forward for the license fee: that the BBC represents good value for money, and that the BBC is a public good.

Well, I have some sympathy with the argument that the BBC is good value - between the various TV and radio channels, particularly CBeebees, and iPlayer, that's an awful lot there for a decent price.

Except... I fail to see how it being good value is a justification for demanding people pay for the service in order to watch any live TV, backed by a threat of jail. Yes, maybe I agree that it's good value, but I don't see how that means I should force you to pay for it?

The other argument, that the BBC is a public good, is a much stronger argument for compelling people to pay. (Though personally I'd rather the payment be taken from direct taxation, which could at least theoretically be progressive, rather than a regressive fixed payment.)

My problem with the "public good" argument is that my trust in the BBC to report the news in an impartial manner was shattered in 2014, and their coverage of the 2019 election did nothing to reinforce it (quite the opposite, in fact). Too much of their coverage is politics-as-soap-opera, when they're not busy reporting on postal vote results (which is a massive no-no).

Unfortunately, that lack of trust rather demolishes the "public good" argument for the license fee.

Where does that leave us? Well, if the BBC did go for a subscription model, we actually would pay for it. Unless, that is, they really did get rid of CBeebees (as mooted today). But lose that, and I'd save the money.

The alternative is for the BBC to take action to restore trust. Which means several things: most importantly, they'd need to replace the existing complaints procedure with a fully transparent process that is seen to work. It probably means that Question Time needs to end. It certainly means that their review of the papers needs to go - our print media are overwhelmingly biased, as is their prerogative, but that means that the BBC can't just follow the agenda that they set. And it would require a fairly extensive change in staff, especially in Scotland. They need to change, and they need to show that they've changed.

I'm not holding my breath for any of that. Instead, I fear we'll see the BBC try to shift further to the right, in order to appease a Tory government that hates them, and in doing so squander any last vestiges of support they have from the other side. And then, when the Tories choose to wield the axe, there won't be anyone who laments it.