If the BBC licence fee is scrapped, Doctor Who should disappear behind a paywall
I've spent most of my career watching television and, through thick and thin, I've always stood up for the BBC. Currently, for £14.50 per month, the licence fee pays for national and local TV and radio, the iPlayer, BBC Sounds, the BBC website, a selection of apps and the BBC World Service.
That represents incredible value for money, but the Corporation's Royal Charter is up for renewal in 2027. It's been a decade since the last renewal, and in that time, the media landscape has changed beyond recognition.
In 2017, Netflix were sending me DVDs through the post; now streaming services, YouTube and social media have changed the way we watch and have made it increasingly difficult to argue the future of the compulsory TV licence. This means even dyed-in-the wool supporters like me have to argue that the BBC's financing method has to change.
In an interview with the Sunday Times, BBC chairman Samir Shah has argued that the licence fee should be included with council tax payments, with a sliding scale of payments according to the value of your property. This sounds sensible – but with no council tax in Northern Ireland, the Channel Islands and the Isle of Man, that rather puts a spanner in the works.
As a huge supporter of public service broadcasting, I'd suggest something different: make the BBC a two-tier service, with a basic offering for all supplemented by premium services for those who want to pay extra for them. Once rid of the licence fee, a pared-back BBC could then be paid for out of general taxation, with a subscription service offering premium extras.
'BBC Basic', as it might come to be known colloquially, could breathe life into its Reithian principles – to inform, educate and entertain, offering all the important things that hold the nation together as well as a real service element: news, consumer programmes, popular drama like EastEnders and Death in Paradise, and revealing and positive documentaries.
Such a service would hopefully 'breadcrumb' viewers into paying for tasty and desirable treats, either via a rolling monthly subscription, or with individual programmes available to rent on demand. 'BBC Premium' might offer full coverage of sporting events (there could be highlights on the basic package), some popular flagship programming such as Strictly Come Dancing and Race Across the World, and all the programmes that cost more to produce, such as major dramas and nature series. As with the streamers, you'd get your first episode on the basic package and pay for the rest.
Shows that you pay for should be the icing on the cake of the BBC, and I'd even argue for shows like Doctor Who to go behind a paywall. Who else but the Beeb is making popular sci-fi with incredibly high production values, whose every plot twist and casting decision dominates the headlines?
The BBC has a massive archive of programming which could be open to subscribers. This would require spending money on rights clearances, but this would fit in with the corporation's public service ethos.
The iPlayer recently ran a pop-up TV station, Memories, aimed at those with dementia, but providing an incredible historic insight into the past, from arts programming to life in an insurance company in the 1970s (quite niche, but I enjoyed it), so a bigger offering than the current meagre and largely unchanging collection could prove a big draw. Archive material could also fill some daytime TV slots on a basic package as a money-saver and something for those of us bored with endless property programmes and gameshows.
The BBC's commercial arm is a big success, with 2023/24 figures showing sales of £1.9 billion, with the most popular shows sold to other broadcasters around the world including Planet Earth III, The Famous Five, The 1% Club and coverage of the Coronation. It has also made shows for Netflix and Apple TV+ that have never been shown on the BBC. Such commercial creativity should be able to come up with new programming that entices viewers to pay for a premium service, perhaps working with social media content creators to draw in the much-desired younger audience and reshape broadcasting for a new era.
As much as I've loved Auntie Beeb over the years, she has to change. She's not an auntie to younger viewers, more like one of those distant relatives you avoid at all costs because you think she's really boring. But you could probably learn something from her, which is why the good things that come from the BBC must continue, even though you're going to pay for them in a different way.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Daily Mail
2 hours ago
- Daily Mail
Landlord sparks fury for implementing outrageous $50-a-night charge: 'How is this fair in any way?'
A landlord has sparked outrage after trying to charge her tenant $50 per night for having his girlfriend stay over. British property strategist Jack Rooke read out the shocking email exchange between homeowner Rita and her renter Cameron. Rita had emailed Cameron to inform him of a little-known 'house rule' that imposes additional charges for overnight guests. 'It's been brought to my attention that your girlfriend has stayed overnight on multiple occasions this month. As outlined in the House Rules, overnight guests must be pre-approved and are limited to two nights per calendar month,' Rita's email read. 'Beyond that, a £25 ($A52.50) per night charge applies to cover shared space use and utilities. This will be included in your next invoice.' However, Cameron pointed out that there was nothing in his tenancy agreement about guest charges or pre-approvals - as he slammed Rita for 'running a guest policy like a boutique hotel'. 'Who exactly is keeping tabs on my bedroom?' Cameron replied. The landlord insisted the rules were shared in his 'welcome email' and are 'clearly displayed on the hallway noticeboard'. 'Excessive overnight visits put pressure on the household. I've had complaints. If you want to avoid future charges, please limit stays or register guests in the log book provided,' Rita responded. Furious, Cameron fired back: 'Let me get this straight. You're charging me £25 ($A52.50) per night because my girlfriend stays over a couple of times a week? That's £200 ($A420) a month... for someone sitting on a sofa and using the kettle. 'You've made up some "guest log" system that isn't in the tenancy. There's no approval process in the contract. No mention of fees,' Cameron replied. 'I live here because it's what I can afford. Now you're trying to backdoor in hotel charges? No. I won't be paying.' He added that if the charge appears on his invoice, he will submit a formal complaint. While Rita understood his frustration, she warned him not to 'speak to me like that'. 'These rules are there to keep things fair,' she said. 'Other tenants manage their guests without issues, but I've had complaints in your case. This isn't personal. If you need me to resend the house rules, I will. If you can't follow them, I'll have to review whether this tenancy is still working.' However, Cameron refused to back down as he called on the landlord to 'review' his tenancy agreement as he feels this arrangement won't work for him. 'You know what? Review it. Go ahead. If you genuinely think having my girlfriend stay over three nights in a month is causing long-term impact to your kettle and your precious hallway, then this probably isn't the right place for me either,' he said. 'You've decided you're running a guest policy like this is some boutique hotel. You're billing tenants for having a personal life, and then acting shocked when someone pushes back. "House rules were made clear"? No, they weren't. 'You sent a welcome email with your preferences. That's not legally binding. The tenancy agreement says nothing about guest logs, pre-approvals or £25-a-night fines. You're trying to invent policies mid-tenancy and dress them up as boundaries. 'It's not professional. It's not legal. It's you overreacting. So yeah - review the arrangement. And while you're at it, review your understanding of landlord responsibilities.' It's unclear what happened next - but Jack disagreed with the landlord's move. 'She sounds like she's got control problems, we don't like people with control problems,' he said. The video has been viewed 540,000 - with many divided over the situation. 'If this is a shared house and he's renting a room, I'm actually with the landlord. It's not fair to his other room mates to pay extra for his girlfriend. If he's renting the place solo, he's in the right to invite anyone he likes over as often as he pleases,' one said. 'I'm on the landlord's side, other than it should be included in the tenancy agreement. If it's not in the tenancy agreement, then it's not a valid charge. But a charge for additional guests is reasonable,' another suggested. 'Well, first of all, a housemate snitched. Second, that's actually mad. Third, I've had housemates whose girlfriend pretty much were there all the time. Still snitching on them for that is crazy,' one explained. 'Doesn't matter if the landlord found out, they're not allowed to police when you have guests,' another added. RITA: It's been brought to my attention that your girlfriend has stayed overnight on multiple occasions this month. As outlined in the House Rules, overnight guests must be pre-approved and are limited to two nights per calendar month. Beyond that, a £25 ($A52.50) per night charge applies to cover shared space use and utilities. This will be included in your next invoice CAMERON: I've read the tenancy agreement. There's nothing in there about guest charges. No mention of pre-approvals either. Also, who exactly is keeping tabs on my bedroom? RITA: The rules were shared in your welcome email and are clearly displayed on the hallway noticeboard. Excessive overnight visits put pressure on the household. I've had complaints. If you want to avoid future charges, please limit stays or register guests in the log book provided. CAMERON: Let me get this straight. You're charging me £25 ($A52.50) per night because my girlfriend stays over a couple of times a week. That's £200 ($A420) a month, Rita. For someone sitting on a sofa and using the kettle. You've made up some "guest log" system that isn't in the tenancy. There's no approval process in the contract. No mention of fees. I live here because it's what I can afford. Now you're trying to backdoor in hotel charges? No. I won't be paying. And if this appears on my invoice, I'll be submitting a formal complaint. RITA: Cameron, I understand you're frustrated, but please don't speak to me like that. These rules are there to keep things fair. Other tenants manage their guests without issues, but I've had complaints in your case. This isn't personal. If you need me to resend the house rules, I will. If you can't follow them, I'll have to review whether this tenancy is still working. CAMERON: Rita, You know what? Review it. Go ahead. Because if you genuinely think having my girlfriend stay over three nights in a month is causing long-term impact to your kettle and your precious hallway, then this probably isn't the right place for me either. You've decided you're running a guest policy like this is some boutique hotel. You're billing tenants for having a personal life, and then acting shocked when someone pushes back. "House rules were made clear"? No, they weren't. You sent a welcome email with your preferences. That's not legally binding. The tenancy agreement says nothing about guest logs, pre-approvals or £25-a-night fines. You're trying to invent policies mid-tenancy and dress them up as boundaries. It's not professional. It's not legal. It's you overreacting. So yeah - review the arrangement. And while you're at it, review your understanding of landlord responsibilities.
Daily Mail
3 hours ago
- Daily Mail
Entry-level job numbers have 'dropped by a third since ChatGPT was launched'
The number of new entry-level jobs has fallen by nearly a third since ChatGPT was launched in November 2022, it was reported last night. Openings for apprenticeships, graduate roles, internships and junior roles with no requirement for a degree fell by 31.9 per cent, according to The Times. Research by jobs search website Adzuna found that entry-level vacancies only make up a quarter of the overall jobs market, which is down by nearly 4 per cent since 2022. It comes as more companies outline their plans to use AI to reduce their headcount. BT said in May 2023 that 10,000 jobs would be replaced by artificial intelligence by the end of the decade. The roles impacted include call handling and network diagnostics. Its chief executive Allison Kirkby has claimed that advances in AI could result in even more job cuts at the company. Dario Amodei, head of $61billion AI start-up Anthropic, last month warned that the technology could cut half of all entry-level white-collar jobs within five years. He said this could increase unemployment by between up to 20 per cent. James Neave, the head of data science at Adzuna, said AI was a major factor in the reduction of entry-level jobs. 'If you can reduce your hiring at the entry level, that's just going to increase your efficiency and improve cost savings,' he said. Businesses are facing increasing costs including rises in national insurance contributions and the national minimum wage. The number of entry-level roles fell again by 4.2 per cent in May. Experts predict a 50-50 chance machines could take over all our jobs within a century. But a poll of 16,000 workers last year found many employees believe AI could do it already. Nearly half admitted the technology can outperform them in 'routine tasks' – while also paying better attention to detail. The 'jobs apocalypse' is expected to see admin and entry-level roles first – but will increasingly affect those higher paid as it becomes more sophisticated. The Future of Work Report by jobs website Indeed found just one in three respondents were confident AI would have a positive impact on their role. The majority however – nine in ten – felt confident they would be able to adapt to the changes over the next five years. Workers told how much of their day-to-day responsibilities were already ripe for automation – with three in five saying that AI can carry out data analysis better than humans. Routine tasks (48%) and attention to detail (45%) were other tasks where workers felt AI had the upper hand. While repetitive jobs are well-suited to AI, workers said they still felt confident they were better in critical thinking, creativity and emotional intelligence. Asked which jobs are most likely to be untouched by AI in a decade's time, PricewaterhouseCoopers (PwC) Chief Economist, Barret Kupelian said people should look to traditional trades - with roles plumbers, electricians and decorators He explained: 'It appears to me that jobs that require a quite a lot of manual labour...I don't think the technology is skilled there, in terms of augmenting those skills.' The PwC spokesman said that roles that require 'a high degree of judgement and creativity' are also unlikely to be able to be automated any time soon because they require 'bespoke skills that are quite difficult to replicate on a digital basis.' The IMF warned that, even where AI's effects are positive, computer automation is likely to drive wealth inequality. Highly paid professions will see AI boost their wages while lower paid roles are at a significant risk of pay cuts and lay-offs. A study by the IMF found that clerical workers such as secretaries and clerks are very likely to be replaced by AI because most of their could be done by machines. However, it is clerical support workers and technical service roles that are most likely to be replaced by AI. Professionals and managers, although they are very likely to be impacted by AI, are more likely to be impacted positively. These findings echo a previous study from the Department for Education which found that white-collar professionals were most likely to be replaced by AI. The study found that accountants, consultants, and psychologists were among the professions most likely to be pushed aside by computers.
FF News
3 hours ago
- FF News
Once-in-a-Generation Advice Changes to Help Millions Navigate Their Financial Lives
Millions more people could get help navigating their financial lives with support on pensions and investments, under proposals announced today by the Financial Conduct Authority (FCA). The FCA's proposals would allow firms to offer a new type of help called 'targeted support' and make suggestions to groups of consumers with common characteristics. These could include people who may be currently drawing down on their pension unsustainably, not saving enough for retirement or who have excess cash sitting in a current account. The changes, which have inbuilt protections for consumers, also support growth by enabling increased investment and innovation. Sarah Pritchard, Deputy Chief Executive of the FCA, said, 'We want to help consumers navigate their financial lives and plan for the long term. Some of the most difficult financial decisions we face are how to save, invest and prepare for a comfortable retirement. 'These once-in-a-generation reforms will help people navigate their financial lives and give them greater confidence to invest. This is a win-win for consumers and firms alike.' These reforms should set the framework for the next 20-30 years, to support consumers now as well as future generations. The FCA wants to see a thriving and trusted market for full financial advice, simplified advice, targeted support and guidance. Alongside today's proposals for targeted support, the FCA has set out plans to reform the framework for simplified advice. Consumer access to a choice of guidance, targeted support, simplified advice and full financial advice should help reduce the so-called 'advice gap'. This supports our ambition that consumers should have access to the help and guidance that they need, at a cost they can afford, when they need it, to make informed decisions about their financial lives. This advice gap is stark. Just 9% of adults received financial advice about their pensions or investments in the previous 12 months, according to the FCA's latest Financial Lives survey (FLS 2024). Of those who did not receive financial advice, but hold £10,000 or more in cash savings, 24% said they don't invest because they don't know enough about it, 12% because they feel overwhelmed by the number of options available, and 8% said they would need more support before they invest. There are about 7 million adults in the UK with £10,000 or more in cash savings who may be missing out on the benefits of investing throughout their lives. The FCA has worked in a smarter way to carry out this work, running its very first 6 week policy sprint, where firms designed consumer journeys to help design the rules in the consultation, with support from consumer representatives and other members of the regulatory family. Detailed consumer testing has also been completed, published alongside the consultation. The aim of this detailed sprint, and consumer testing, has been to help then accelerate the period for consultation, which is now open for 8 weeks. The FCA is also working with the government to help resolve issues that might prevent firms communicating with consumers, with issues having been identified early through the policy sprint. The FCA committed to support growth in its strategy. These reforms are among almost 50 initiatives the FCA set out in a letter to the Prime Minister in January 2025, which the FCA is delivering against this year.
