> UK Government cannot determine its agenda or directly influence its funding.
> The BBC will regularly criticise the government
The funding is set for a 10 year cycle, beyond the scope of any individual government specifically to protect the BBC from editorial interference by the government. That’s why it’s a publicly funded broadcaster, not “state media.”
The onus is now on you and the OP to prove your claim that the BBC is state media.
When I say state media I mean media that exists as a part of the state. Like when it's funded by the state or the state has some other kind of influence over it.
Your definition conflicts with UNESCO’s definition. By your reasoning, private US media outlets would have qualify as “State Media” because they kowtow to the Trump government - “some other kind of influence”. This is patently nonsense, so your definition is incorrect.
Did you miss this:
> UK Government cannot determine its agenda or directly influence its funding.
> The BBC will regularly criticise the government
The funding is set for a 10 year cycle, beyond the scope of any individual government specifically to protect the BBC from editorial interference by the government. That’s why it’s a publicly funded broadcaster, not “state media.”
The onus is now on you and the OP to prove your claim that the BBC is state media.
When I say state media I mean media that exists as a part of the state. Like when it's funded by the state or the state has some other kind of influence over it.
Your definition conflicts with UNESCO’s definition. By your reasoning, private US media outlets would have qualify as “State Media” because they kowtow to the Trump government - “some other kind of influence”. This is patently nonsense, so your definition is incorrect.
7 replies →