Very odd experience with the BBC

Sounds normal to me tbh. If the BBC has to have a demonstrable policy for these things then it makes sense anyone working with it commercially does too and no, ticking a couple of boxes prob isn't good enough, bearing in mind the BBC will have it's own (mandatory) policy of carrying out due diligence of groups it works with. You're not approaching them as a member of the public, you're approaching them in a business capacity, so yeah you need to have your policies established and checkable. Employees get to check a box and sign a form, commercial/contractors need to take their own responsibility whether it's 100 staff or just you.
No one is asking you to write an essay, there are plenty of 'standard' policy templates to use and the BBC even recommends this one
Likewise data handling/protection etc is a legal obligation there's no getting away from, you see countless examples of big companies who employed a contractor and every time there is a data breach the bigger company is the one asked (demanded) what it did to safeguard people, so they will want to cover themselves when they work with others.
Years back my final uni project was a survey I carried out of all the UK local authorities and because of who I was contacting and my association with the uni they insisted I have a data policy. I don't get to tick a box saying 'I'm cool bro', I need to provide all participants with information on how their data will be used, shared and disposed of (It took about 10 minutes)

It is not that they have a standard that is annoying, it is the fact that by this essay thing, they attempt to alter and change the views of those who sign up. And secondly they make their own sign up process more cumbersome. Remember 1. that i am one person and must have a policy for treating coworkers, and these do not even exist! And secondly, i must write an essay on discriminating myself?
So, in my view the BBC could maintain the same standard, but not try to educate or influence the views of those who want to sign up. These must either accept them or not.
I also think that having these procedures, in the very difficult political environment that we have today, undermines their authority by making themselves the enemy for a large segment of the electorate. And this at the time when they are very needed. I already listen to BBC, and always have. But many who do need the BBC even more than myself do not listen to them, and they never will if such procedures exist. And their replacement might be Alex Jones.

You seen determined to make this some sort of culture wars/identity thing?
Again, no one asked you to write an essay. Rather than being asked to simply tick a box you're being asked to copy and paste a small text and sign it, what's the big difference? no one asked you to change your views on anything? you're bring asked to clarify how you do business.
And again whether it's just you or 100 you still need to have these policies, which is still 5 minutes of copy & pasting, nothing more.
Anyone who would consider the BBC an 'enemy' and refuse to watch it because it has policies covering employee rights, diversity and data protection sounds like, well, a bit of a prat really and the BBC is not going to ditch their policies to appease them. Pretty much every broadcaster will have similar requirements be it ITV, Sky or Netflix btw

You seem to forget that they are now a huge segment of the electorates in many countries. It is not a minor thing, and all these voters are not expendable. What I am saying is that the terms for registering should be low, but it is the BBC editors that select what they want. It is also in their interest that that pool is wide and diverse. There are times that you actually want another view than the one you have yourself. In any event is it the case that the availability or representation of certain points of view is a threat to the BBC editors? They need to be protected from certain types of arguments? I do not presume to second guess the BBC.
Let us assume for the sake of argument that I was not gay and left wing, but in fact straight and right wing. Personally I also disliked blacks, gays and thought any woman I could get (probably not many, but still) belonged in the kitchen. But I had a ONE MAN BUSINESS, and these incel thought-crimes had never had any practical consequences?
Am I then not allowed to think certain things?
The right wing thinks they can bomb Muslims into changing religion, which is lunacy. But it is also insane to think that one can alter political persuasions by intimidation in stead of through argumentation. These things are not possible.
A few years back, this polarization problem was not as serious as it has now become.

Yeah as said, this sounds a lot more like a personal gripe with the BBC that anything to do with it's policies, but I still think there are huge holes in your logic.
I would argue such people are absolutely not a huge segment in the UK, they are a minority who realistically will never agree with the BBC, There isn't a lot of cross over with larger groups such as myself who just think the BBC is crap but don't consider it a specific enemy.
You're still not separating personal views from business ones. They don't care what your personal views are, they care about how you treat people you work with which is absolutely covered by law. As said almost all broadcasters and pretty much any body that gets public money will have people who work with therm jump through the same hoops, no getting away from it and the 'sole trader' argument doesn't cut any ice, it's one size fits all.

You are turning it on its head. It is these policies that do what you say, not me. Oscar Wilde once said (approximately): "A book is either well written or it is not. That is all." (notice the absence of an inclusion policy in his argument)

I am not as young as the rest of you in here, and i make audio books. And for this reason I wanted to register as a BBC supplier. Of course, given the competition I have no illusions about getting them to buy anything. But I do have a right to register.
And here is where it became odd. In order to do so I must 1. "have an employee policy" for my one man business, meaning i must write some essay about how i treat myself?
And then 2. I must have a "diversity policy", which is also some essay that must write. I am gay, I see no reason for why people need to have certain views to contribute. The only thing that is required is honesty.
And finally, 3. I needed to register and pay a fee at some government site for some data registration thing, which I think goes to pay the intelligence agencies for monitoring the medias.
In my view, everything should could be reduced to two tick boxes: do you accept these points? But this essay writing thing about equality is madness. It should be "these are the terms, click here to accept". In the end I decided not to make the effort because my chances of getting anything sold were so minute anyway.
This registration and essay writing thing was so weird that even I, a gay left wing man, felt that it was awkward. I also think there are circumstances in which do want that other view. And it is the editors who buy? So the only thing that is required to enter the database should be honesty. Nobody can tell the BBC what to buy? Patronizing and condescending registration processes create a lot distrust in the public.

You dont understand GDPR do you? 🤔

When a sign pops up at a website and intrudes on you with the following statement: "We respect your privacy, accept our commercial tracking or this website will not work", it tells you something. What might that be? It also tells you that some public regulation is simply for show, and does not really have any other practical function.

When a sign pops up at a website and intrudes on you with the following statement: "We respect your privacy, accept our commercial tracking or this website will not work", it tells you something. What might that be? It also tells you that some public regulation is simply for show, and does not really have any other practical function.

I am not as young as the rest of you in here, and i make audio books. And for this reason I wanted to register as a BBC supplier. Of course, given the competition I have no illusions about getting them to buy anything. But I do have a right to register.
And here is where it became odd. In order to do so I must 1. "have an employee policy" for my one man business, meaning i must write some essay about how i treat myself?
And then 2. I must have a "diversity policy", which is also some essay that must write. I am gay, I see no reason for why people need to have certain views to contribute. The only thing that is required is honesty.
And finally, 3. I needed to register and pay a fee at some government site for some data registration thing, which I think goes to pay the intelligence agencies for monitoring the medias.
In my view, everything should could be reduced to two tick boxes: do you accept these points? But this essay writing thing about equality is madness. It should be "these are the terms, click here to accept". In the end I decided not to make the effort because my chances of getting anything sold were so minute anyway.
This registration and essay writing thing was so weird that even I, a gay left wing man, felt that it was awkward. I also think there are circumstances in which do want that other view. And it is the editors who buy? So the only thing that is required to enter the database should be honesty. Nobody can tell the BBC what to buy? Patronizing and condescending registration processes create a lot distrust in the public.

"In my view, everything should could be reduced to two tick boxes: do you accept these points?"
They are not asking "do you accept and comply with the BBC's employee and diversity policies?". They are asking "as a business, what are your employee and diversity policies?"
If you don't have any, just say so. As you say, "the only thing required is honesty".
The only odd thing about the process seems to be your response to it.

That's not GDPR, that's separate and specific cookie registration.
It's not for show - the explanation and prompt lets you opt-in to tracking if you want to, OR just the necessary cookies for the website to function, OR having been explained how the website cookies work, you can choose not to use the website at all. That's the practical function. In the days before cookie legislation, you didn't know how websites were using your data at all.

There is nothing like this is any other country. Some of you in here misunderstand me. While i agree with the sentiment, I think it will have the opposite of its intended effect by verifying many things for many people. But it is very important to reach these people. To reach me as a person is another matter. I may not be as important as they are. I think this is strategically wrong from the point of view of a person who agrees with the sentiment.

There is nothing like this is any other country. Some of you in here misunderstand me. While i agree with the sentiment, I think it will have the opposite of its intended effect by verifying many things for many people. But it is very important to reach these people. To reach me as a person is another matter. I may not be as important as they are. I think this is strategically wrong from the point of view of a person who agrees with the sentiment.

Nothing has changed in this regards. Try searching for shoes online, and check how long you are stalked by shoes . It is still there, even with all the pop ups and all the fancy talk. It will also get worse. Because AI will create a difference between consumers and these big companies, which puts us at a huge disadvantage. They may apply these new tools in marketing. There will be very few ways for a PC with limited CPU or any ordinary consumer to respond to this. I think AI will push the centralization even further. But this is a slight digression, sorry. Because there are those who can use AI for many bad purposes, the ordinary consumer can never benefit fully from dramatic increases in computing power. Only those that are monitored and regulated will benefit.