(Original post by River85)
Still doesn't explain why they should bully people into getting a licence (especially when it's not needed). It's plain immoral.
They also make a bomb from DVD sales and seling their programmes abroad (and, along with government grants, that makes about on quarter of their operating expenditure?)
They already get money from the taxpayer (in the form of government grants). So every tax payer already makes a contribution even without paying for a licence fee.
Can't be too hard up if they were able to give a tit like Jonathon Ross 20 million quid or whatever.
1) They don't use bullying tactics. TV Licensing do. The BBC cannot be held responsible for TV Licensing's actions because TV Licensing is not the BBC.
2) Yes, they do make a bomb from BBC Worldwide, but there is a limit to how much of BBC Worldwide's income can be spent on BBC programmes. The only thing that the two organisations have in common is the name. BBC Worldwide is wholly privately owned.
3) And don't you think that those grants would stop under this government?
4) The figure was £18million per 3 years. Wossy is actually paid much less than that. Even though I don't work for the BBC, I've had the payment details slips explained to me by a BBC employee who is a personal friend, and they include the *total* spent on that personality. The problem is that the BBC do not publish details of what exactly that £6 million per year is spent on, when they should do to clarify the situation that they are in with the national papers.
Total pay for the star
Total pay for the staff to make his programmes
Paying rights to play songs in his radio show
Ditto for movie clips in Film 20XX
Paying for Four Poofs on Friday night . . .
Plus various other expenses
It's obvious to me that the Daily Fail Crew just took one look at the pay slip without examining it in detail and immediately thought that Ross was paid £6million per annum for three years.