Guardian backs the BBC licence fee rise

Ian Forrestor has a post here that picks up on the Guardian endorsement of the BBC licence fee increase.

Back in May the BBC - Radio 1, actually - was prescient in launching a pop concert in the now-fashionable Second Life virtual world that attracted 6,000 people. The spin-off from the event is credited with tripling the number of SL participants and helping to change it from a geek's secret paradise into a mainstream phenomenon. Justin Bovington, chief executive of Rivers Run Red, the enterprising Soho company that employs 22 people to build projects in SL, reckons that only the BBC could have done that because private sector companies wouldn't have taken the risk.

Hmmmm. So an example of the value added by the BBC is its' endorsement/promotion of a American commercial enterprise has helped Second Life's commercial success.

A commercial broadcaster would have been paid for such a promotion, given the value its' brand brought to the party, but the BBC undoubtedly refused to take any fee, citing its need for independence etc. and not wishing to entangle itself commercially.

So we have broadcaster that can selectively bestow its' favours on companies (not even a UK firm in this example) and thereby allow those companies to benefit commercially, at UK licence payer expense. Does this make sense?

Labels: ,

posted by John Wilson @ 11:19 AM Permanent Link newsvine reddit


Post a Comment

newsvine reddit

Links to this post:

Create a Link

<< Home