Unless you have detached yourself completely from the UK you benefit in the same way everyone benefits. The BBC is a national asset, alongside all the others. We pay for most via taxation. We pay for the BBC in a different way to ensure it stays away from political influence. Which alone is something of inestimable value.

For the avoidance of doubt any comments in response to a previous post are directed to its ideas and not at any, or all, posters personally.

In your opinion! I benefit in no way at all from BBC tv or radio....and you didn't answer at 11.33 on the 14th I just looked. So this inestimable value is what exactly?

Fred knows HOW

As I have asked before, do you read the links you provide?

What that one actually says is what I have also said many times now.

That the BBC could have done better, and have learned how to. If their staff really felt intimidated then that obviously needed to be rectified and the revised protocols have hopefully addressed that.

That all might be true but what isn’t is that there was a deliberate cover-up by management. What happened was the consequence of a different culture during a different time. Instead of using hindsight to try to bring down an organisation that some despise for their own reasons we ought, in my opinion, give due credit for the willingness to learn and allow the BBC to move on and do what they do best. Provide unbiased journalism of the highest order with the maximum integrity.

For the avoidance of doubt any comments in response to a previous post are directed to its ideas and not at any, or all, posters personally.

And as I have said I'm more concerned with the fate of abused children than in defending the reputation of a broadcaster however unbiased they're claimed to be.
A different culture in a different time is a pointless defence. Does that count for Nazi war criminals or the descendants of slave owners?

The BBC is a left wing, liberal monolith - that might not be the right word - that believes it can do no wrong.
There are no rules - bar their own.
They are funded by stupid people - their thoughts not mine - and so they self-govern and when it doesn't work out, nothing really happens to them - the ball just keeps rolling.
They produce some good stuff for sure but they are nothing like the great Broadcaster that they once were.
If they did what they do and behaved as they behave in the real world they would be dismantled in minutes.
I take no joy in saying it - I was brought up on the BBC.
I always thought that it was the best news channel in the world - I am patriotic and do silly things - like fly BA whenever I can.
The BBC is bloated and beyond its sell by date. It is out of control and a dangerous organisation and should be forced to fend for itself without us backing it.
Defund asap!

I'll apologize oh pompous one, I have now found your nonsensical reply...still find that the BBC benefits me or many others in any way so we'll leave it there, anyway old boy the sun is out so Cornwall's nudist beaches must be calling you, you have a nice day!!

Thank you for accepting that I replied and the confirmation that, as I suspected, you are too wrapped up in yourself to comprehend it.

It’s raining. I am busy playing bowls and don’t tend to go on any beaches here in the summer. Too full of tourists.

For the avoidance of doubt any comments in response to a previous post are directed to its ideas and not at any, or all, posters personally.

This is the crux of the matter though. Will anyone mount a defence for them because people like their hamburgers?

Changing the basis of the funding in that way makes perfect sense provided the way it is set up cannot be tampered with politically by future governments, without passing primary legislation.

So long as the BBC’s independence is set in stone I don’t care how they are funded or if their peripheral activities curtailed.

For the avoidance of doubt any comments in response to a previous post are directed to its ideas and not at any, or all, posters personally.