Hacker News new | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submit
I thought the BBC was state funded and didn't have to rely on undisclosed sponsorships.
The BBC is not state funded, it's a public broadcaster primarily funded by the general public, via the (admittedly outdated) TV licence fee system. Although the media output for the UK is non-commercial, it does have commercial operations and interactions though and they are mostly centred around the content produced for overseas consumption. As this post is on the .com domain where the international content exists (and which runs ads), I presume it is part of the paid content side of things.
loading story #47288928
loading story #47289355
> The BBC is not state funded, it's a public broadcaster primarily funded by the general public, via the (admittedly outdated) TV licence fee system.

How is that different from being state-funded? Everything state-funded is paid for by the general public, through taxes. That's part of what being a state is: an organization that forces people to pay taxes and directs them to various programs.

Are you claiming that the TV license fee isn't a tax? It's money that the state makes you pay so that it can fund something.

The state doesn't make me pay it because I don't watch live broadcast TV, therefore I don't have to pay it. It's not a general tax it's a hypothecated tax and is administered by the BBC not the UK government.

Furthermore the state isn't in charge of administering it anyway, it's a civil matter brought about by the BBC (or rather the company which is subcontracted to enforce licencing). The BBC has the authority to do this based on the Royal Charter that governs it, that doesn't make it "state funded" or a "state broadcaster".

loading story #47289949
The state has changed it from a criminal offence to a civil one. They also have to apply for a warrant to enter a home which takes time is legally difficult.

The enforcers work for neither the BBC nor the government but are subcontracted out.

loading story #47289252
From the footer:

> This website is produced by BBC Global News Ltd, a commercial company that is part of BBC Studios, owned by the BBC (and just the BBC). No money from the licence fee was used to create this website. The money we make from it is re-invested to help fund the BBC’s international journalism.

In the UK, the bbc.com link redirects to bbc.co.uk and the notification footer auto closes before even have a chance to read it.

And if it is an ad, doesn't the FTC require it to be labelled as such?

Why would the US FTC have any jurisdiction?
loading story #47289285
loading story #47288900
loading story #47288761