Do you like the BBC? Pay for it.
Taxpayers shouldn't support the BBC. Subscribers should.
In this undated handout photo, actors Tom Cruise (left) and Cameron Diaz (center) are interviewed by British television presenter Jeremy Clarkson during the filming of an episode of the BBC's Top Gear in July. British citizens should have the option of not subsidizing the BBC with license fees.
BBC/PA Wire/AP/File
Prompted by our latest report Global player or Subsidy Junkie?, Steve Barnett of OpenDemocracy gives an impassioned defence of the BBC.
Ultimately I think his article rests on the following arguments:
- The BBC is good and people like it
- Without the BBC our media would be worse
- Without the license fee we would not get the BBC
As someone who doesn’t have a television, I am not really in a position to give my opinion on argument (1). From talking with other people this appears to be one of those ‘Marmite issues’ – you either love it or hate it. Either way, I think it is fair for Mr Barnett to argue that a lot of people do indeed like the BBC and don’t mind paying the licence fee. Argument (2) is impossible to prove. We are not in a world without the BBC and a lot of people already pay extra money upon the cost of the license fee to use other media services.
It is the logic of argument (3) at which his position falls apart. If indeed the BBC is good and people like it and the alternative is worse, why would people not continue to pay for it as a subscription service? Unless Mr Barnett is wrong about (1) and (2), I don’t see how (3) can hold. If, as he believes, the BBC is such a desired institution, why can’t he and others who value it also pay for it, leaving those who would rather not be forced to do so, to pay for what they want to watch? However, if it turns out that he is wrong, we will know that (1) certainly does not hold and that it was wrong to force people to pay the licence fee.
This is indeed the ideological argument that Mr Barnett suggests. It is based on classical liberalism: the ideal of a limited government and the liberty of individuals. As David Graham shows in his report, there are other arguments for changing the funding stream of the BBC, but Mr Barnett does not adequately deal with these in his article. This is because his position is also ideological, one that allows for the state to have the power to force people to support a national media company.
To be worthy of the name, OpenDemocracy should not be defending the government’s involvement in the media at all.
Add/view comments on this post.
------------------------------
The Christian Science Monitor has assembled a diverse group of the best economy-related bloggers out there. Our guest bloggers are not employed or directed by the Monitor and the views expressed are the bloggers' own, as is responsibility for the content of their blogs. To contact us about a blogger, click here. To add or view a comment on a guest blog, please go to the blogger's own site by clicking on the link above.