[Sussex] BBC Video Downloads

[Nic James Ferrier]

"Mark Harrison" <Mark at yourpropertyexpert.com> writes:

> However, given that over £600m of the BBC's revenue comes from "Commercial
> Activities", we mustn't ignore the fact that a lot of its income comes "NOT
> FROM TAX" but from "SALE OF PROGRAMMES".
>
> If the material currently sold is made available Free Of Charge, then it
> will inevitably reduce that income... dramatically.

This is the argument that other media companies are using. It's not
necessarily true is it?

People will still buy content. The BBC could charge for downloads (as
long as it was free thereafter). There's nothing wrong with charging
to make up for distribution costs.

What most of us object to is DRM and limited rights to use
something. We especially object to it from the BBC because we've
already paid for it.

It's ok to use the argument "but BBC Worldwide"... but who paid for
BBC Worldwide to be created? We, the taxpayer, did. So that's our's as
well.


> What would you prefer the BBC to do?
>
> 1: Reduce its output to live within the 80% of the budget funded by taxation
>
> OR
>
> 2: Increase the tax per household to support the current level of production
>
> OR
>
> 3: If you do not like either of these alternatives, then feel free to
> suggest a third option...

I will suggest a 3rd option. Since the BBC's commercial activities
are already causing consternation to commerical broadcasters I'd say:

  privatize the BBC

Give it charitable status if you want and I'll happliy contribute to
get high quality television and radio (if it ever starts making those
again) but I'd rather not agree to it screwing the other commercial
broadcasters in return for no further consumer concessions.


But given that this is about the people's money I'd say we ought to
have a plebisite on the matter.


> I have to say, Option 1 doesn't feel entirely bad... Having only 85% of the
> current production output, but having ALL of that 85% available under an
> Open licence does strike me as a good compromise.
>
> My fear, however, is that the 15% cut would overlap heavily with the
> material I choose to watch, and that we'd see a race to the bottom :-)

Well, if the BBC remains funded by the public that could not
happen. It is required by the charter to do some of that stuff.

They could get rid of Woss, Moyles, Norton and management consultancy
and you'd get your 15% cut.

-- 
Nic Ferrier
http://www.tapsellferrier.co.uk   for all your tapsell ferrier needs