Funny you say bias yet say they are critisised by everyone. If they were biased they wouldnt be hated by everyone. The soft power aspect is about the UK in the world, not the domestic audience.
Many public transport networks, agricultural sectors, and certain energy industries rely heavily on taxpayer subsidies because their core commercial operations do not generate a net profit on their own.
Passenger Rail Networks
- The Reality: Regular passenger rail services rarely turn an independent profit from the fare box alone.
- The Subsidy: Governments treat transit as a public good, using billions in taxpayer funds to cover capital costs, maintenance, and operating shortfalls.
Agriculture and Farming
- The Reality: Farm gate prices often fail to cover the volatile costs of production, weather risks, and global market competition.
- The Subsidy: Direct income supports, crop insurance, and export enhancements keep rural farming viable and stable for food security.
Fossil Fuel and Energy Production
- The Reality: While major energy firms are profitable overall, specific high-risk exploration, extraction projects, and legacy operations often depend on state backing. [1, 2]
- The Subsidy: Tax credits, liability caps, and royalty exemptions effectively redirect public funds to maintain output. [1]
Regional Aviation
- The Reality: Low-traffic regional flight routes to remote communities operate at a permanent commercial loss.
- The Subsidy: Programs like the Essential Air Service in the U.S. directly subsidize carriers to maintain links to isolated areas.
Yes I know soft power is not measured domestically, as I said the BBC soft power is weaker then many assume, its not really that great anymore. I didn't say everyone hates them. I said they are doing such a bad job they are getting criticism from all sides, even opposing sides. As for bias its not opinion its fact they admit themselves. The major fallings are all over there internal reports, annual reports as well as all the leaked internal memos. The BBC has all but lost the prestige it once hold and is in a sorry state these days compared to decades back.
The only reason the power wanes is because its not funded properly since 2014, although you keep saying its 'weaker than many assume', how are you measuring that? Anyway the funding cuts are a choice and a very poor one.
Once simple measure is declining audience to world services. If 50+ million less people are watching that’s 50+ million less people being exposed to the soft power. Another measure it reduced trust and grater polarisation. Soft power depends heavily on credibility and BBC have lost a great deal of their credibility.
Defining it as a "service" or "PSB" doesn't change anything though, it is still a concept from the past that doesn't need to be paid for by the masses, instead it should just be those who use it, like other forms of media.
you make it sound like they are doing people a favour. they are fleecing millions more that are then forced to pay, so they make up way more in total with the lower price. and it will be guaranteed.
But far more people may have the internet these days and not a BBC TV licence
The same way they currently charge people who watch non-BBC content.
It won't happen, I agree but the question of "how would they do this?" is easy - the legislation would be drafted to say if you had broadband then you have to pay it, job done. Maybe they'd even change the name to 'Media Licence' or something.
