By Jo Best, 1 March 2005 15:45
NEWS The BBC's online presence could be under threat from Brussels, as the EC's competition authorities look to scale back the internet offerings of all Europe's public service broadcasters.
The head of the European competition directorate, Nellie Kroes, is believed to be against the use of Europeans' TV licence fees to fund state broadcasters' online content, considering it as an illegal cross subsidy, according to unnamed sources quoted in The Guardian.
The report claims that the competition watchdog will bow to commercial interests and draft new policies which would see the BBC's ability to offer online services severely curtailed.
The decision follows a case in Germany where state-owned broadcasters ZDF and ARD have been accused of receiving unlawful state aid over their internet presence. The EC is expected to rule on the case this week.
Top BBC execs are in talks with their counterparts at the German broadcasters, as well as EU officials, over what the case may mean for them, The Guardian reports.
ARD and ZDF are to prune back their internet services as a defensive measure and only provide internet content relating to their programming schedules.
It's a strategy that the BBC has already pursued. Following a review of its online services by the government, the BBC agreed to axe five of its websites on the grounds they were in direct competition with commercial offerings, in order to head off a more wide-ranging cull by Whitehall.
Comments
There are 41 comments. Join the discussion
1. anonymous
I wouldn't pay to use a "commercial" site. My licence fee pays for the BBC, and its website gives me good value.
2. anonymous
Brussels obviosly cannot tell the difference between corporate led and public service based offerings.
Oh the ineptitude of Brussels never ceases to amaze does it.
They obviously cannot tell the difference between advertiser based offerngs and public service based offerings which are not led by the largest purse strings.
3. anonymous
If it was necessary to deflect the EC, I would have no objection to having to log on to the BBC site using my licence number, turning it into a service directly paid for by the consumer. Run that past the European Commission Eurocreacy and see what kind of a legal mess it generates - should keep them occupied for years!!
4. Jamie
That's great for "anonymous" in the last comment, his/her licence fee pays for their online content. What about people who pay their license fee and don't use the BBC online websites, or don't even have an internet connection. Don't they deserve their money to be spent on better quality TV and radio since this is what they are supposedly paying/taxed for?
And if the BBC believe they are at the pinnicle of televisual excellance and have spare money to spend producing non-TV-related online content then maybe we should see a reduction in license fees.
5. Jim
To be honest, the BBC offers content that is similar to those offered in the free market.
Want news? Go to google news, reuters, guardian. Tech news? Right here at silicon, or The Register.
There is just too many other options out there to justify the BBC's one-stop-shop approach, and it's simply wasting our money trying to compete.
I think this issue will widen to all aspects of the BBC's service. Just please get rid of it, and please let me use the 'poll tax' levied by the license fee on something I do want!
6. Simon
isn't it a sad world where the only way these 'commericial offerings' can get a slice is by crippling the already established and perfectly fine resources.
If they want us to use them in preference to the BBC they should offer us something better rather than resorting to these dirty tactics.
7. anonymous
Whose interest is this in. Another idiocy, no doubt laden with political motive. The BBC's website is without doubt one of the best designed, most unbiased, highest quality news and entertainment sources anywhere on the web. In 2005 the meaning of "broadcasting" has to encompass web media and commercial restrictions on their web presence makes no more sense that restricting their ability to broadcast the world service or sell content to satellite operators.
8. Ian Hawkings
I don't see why I should be made to pay another company for this content. I already pay a license fee to the BBC. This is just the sort of innovative service I expect from the BBC. Most people in the UK trust the BBC over the Government. I really don't want their online content restricted yet further with some flawed commercial market (or more likely cynical political) argument.
9. anonymous
This topic about the BBC and what they can and cannot do always makes me angry. The BBC provides an excellent service for both adults and children. They should just make the license non-compulsory and introduce commercials - but only at certain times and a very limited amount. I for one would pay to receive BBC services - BUT as a whole package because the BBC's services are excellent especially when delivered together as a complete package Internet Site included
10. Chris Walker
Tell the EC to take a running jump at itself. The BBC is open about how much of its licence fee it spends on Internet services and I am quite happy with my share being used for the provision of a very good facility
11. alan smith
Another EU decree eroding our institutions and traditions. what is the BBC? a source of data and information on most topics. Its the first place i visit for sport and current affairs.
Disgusted of Yorkshire
12. Ray Winter
We should all have freedom-of-choice and not be forced to pay any form of licence fee as the orignal reasons for its introduction are now way out of date. In this digital age the government can reach all of us at any time via a multiplicity of ways so now is the time to strip the BBC of any right to any form of licence fee. They need to prove they can survive in the commercial world instead of being protected by the government insisting the population continues to pay a tax to them and for the next ten years.
13. Nigel Perry
You have to admire the brass neck of the commercials! They know darned well that only sport and news will be broadcast in a few years time - everything else will be downloaded to PVRs. "Let's edge out the public service providers now, while the politicians are still asleep..."
14. T Barnes
The BBC news site is one of the most highly rated in the World, not least because it does not suffer from commercial bias. If it was to go, their would be a reduction in competitive pressure and one less reason for other news outlets to be reliable rather than sensationalist.
15. peter wallace
The BBC presence is a real gift - it is so useful, and any attempt by Brussels to curtail it is an infringement of being British - we need more balanced, open and honest and publically accountable news provision on the internet, not more commercially biased news services. It is at the heart of freedom.
16. Kieren Spooner
I would happily subscribe to bbc online, to enable them to improve/ keep it going. In the long term, this subscription will replace the lic fee, if my subscription allows me to see tv over the net as well.
why should we all buy tivo's, when we can stream direct?
17. Kieren Spooner
I would happily subscribe to bbc online, to enable them to improve/ keep it going. In the long term, this subscription will replace the lic fee, if my subscription allows me to see tv over the net as well.
why should we all buy tivo's, when we can stream direct?
18. anonymous
The reply that said "I wouldn't pay to use a "commercial" site. My licence fee pays for the BBC, and its website gives me good value." is from a developer.
Would his view be the same if the BBC offered free software that caused his employer to be unable to sell the software that he is developing?
19. Jamie Bishop
Hands off the BBC! I live in Spain and maintain a home and TV licence in the UK for the occasions I visit. I am happy to pay the licence because the BBC delivers value.
If the turkeys in Brussels get away with this then it will be a blow to common sense.
If commercial websites want to compete then all they have to do is apply for a grant, they'll be entitled to spend as much if not more than the BBC on their web, and unlike the BBC they won't have to justify their failure to the public if they mess up.
It's about time we told the whole damn Brussels Tea Party to take a hike. The USA kicked Britain into touch for "Tax without representation" - Well they want to try it WITH representation, it stinks, and they just gotta put there nose into EVERYTHING!
If Brussels touch the BBC then they will be igniting a fuse they won't be able to put out.
20. anonymous
EU Stick it up your A*#@!!!
BBC Licence fee is staggeringly good value for money for what the UK and world gets, though as Winston Churchill said about democracy, it is the 'least worst solution'. Renew the charter, keep the licence fee.
Commercial TV isn't free remember !!!
You pay much more than the £130ish for
BBC Licence fee it costs via paying for advertising the Pringles, Ariel Washing Power, Cadbury's Chocolate, Coke etc. Would all be much cheaper if they didn;t have to spend million on advertising. Does someone have a rough idea the advertising 'tax' per household ?
Maybe we should take the French attitude more, snort, shrug our shoulders and ingore the EU. They get away with it.
BBC World when abroad is a lifeline from the dross of CNN and MTV. If the BBC disappeared, Sky TV and ITV1 will be the standard. Bugger! (Though Sky+ box is good hardware!).
Has anyone noticed, the BBC and people mucking about with it gets the most popular and heated debate !!
People advocating commercial TV only or removing the licence fee seem to have an axe to grind, or have interests in commercial TV......
21. anonymous
For those with Sky, take a look at Fox News. If you get your way and destroy the BBC that's what we'll get.
Fox News is America's fastest growing News Network, and has CNN worried.
22. Alistair Thomas
First of all, until any country in Europe has anything vaguely as good as the BBC then they are simply not qaulified to comment and they should butt out!
Public broadcasting is much more of a cultural thing than commercial so it should be one of the last things Brussels trys to centralise / normalise as diversity is the whole point.
Is the remit of the BBC to give government a channel to talk to us? What happened to developing content of cultural value that would otherwise struggle to find commercial sponsorship. Personally, I rather hear a lot more from the BBC and a lot less (New) Labour lies and spin.
Who died and made commercial concerns the gold standard anyway? In a world of 500 channels of reality / chat / DIY / garbage and commercial favourites like sport then the BBC has never been more important. It's presence forces the terrestial commercial channels in this country to maintain a certain level of programming. Lose the BBC or even curtail it at your peril. If you've never lived in a world without it, it's far too easy to take it for granted.
I hope for its own sake that, with the exception of news and current affairs, the BBC does not try to compete in areas where commercial competition gets the job done. I've mixed views about essentials like sport. I think it is wasteful for the BBC to compete with Sky for certain rights. But, however it gets done, there needs to be a certain amount of free content of this type available so some of the licence fee has to deliver it.
Before we go fixing anything radical, just remember that we are getting about 80% right at the moment so ill considered change is likely to be for the worse.
23. anonymous
The BBC online service is a national treasure. If it is further restricted, this may be such an unpopular move, that even more people will vote 'no' in a referendum on the European Constitution. This judgement is a big mistake and a cut in consumer benefit with respect to the German stations which have been affected. I hope the BBC executives and the Government will be able to persuade the EU to take this no further.
24. Captain Blink
Jaime mentions about Anon paying for a web service and argues about subscribers paying for this and not being online to receive this serivice. What about me who can't receive digital broadcast and I do not live in the sticks. BBC provide a excellent web service and it should continue - stuff the Sprouts.
Capt Blink
25. anonymous
To Jamie, from the Midlands complaining 'what for those without an internet connection' - what about those without a radio? Should all radio stations be scrapped too?
I think it is right that the BBC produces content for all forms of popular media.
I think I definately get value for money from the BBC, long may it continue as it is.
26. Hugh
I get sick of the BBC bashers, especially those who say that the licence fee should not be used for internet sites because not everyone has internet access.
The same argument could be used about local radio stations, and the TV channels BBC3 and 4 which not everyone has access to. Overall the BBC provides a good service in broadcasting and Internet and should be left alone.
I have not heard any complaints about other broadcasters non broadcast content on their web sites which may be in competition with other commercial sites so why pick on the BBC?!!!!
27. Mr Angry
Where I live we are unable to receive the new BBC TV and radio channels through Freeview. I do not wish to pay for satellite services as I feel that my licence fee entitles me to the services at no extra charge. In my view the BBC online content provides me with some compensation for my licence fee helping to subsidise the provision of those services I am unable to receive to those areas of the country with high population densities. If I had Freeview, I would happily forgo the online content for the sheer convenience of being able to access the full range of its services without having to involve telecom or satellite companies.
If the EU must get involved in the rights and wrongs of what the BBC does with its licence money it should examine the extent to which the BBC's much vaunted services meet the requirements of all of its licence payers, particularly those in small, outlying rural communities that currently receive only the bare minimum of channels available. There are more of us than the BBC likes to believe.
28. anonymous
The EU (in Brussels), seems to be full of jumped up un-elected bureaucrats. Who seem determined to destroy or control everything. What exactly did our fathers & grandfathers fight for in WWII, (& others since,) That the EU bureaucracy has been proven to be corrupt on more than several occasions, does perhaps give a clue about hidden agendas, etc
29. anonymous
Would this not also make the BBC's radio output illegal since that too is funded through the television license? If this affected news sites then it could also substantially inhibit the number of objective online news sources, as well as slowing the uptake of "broadband Britain" that the BBC is meant to be spearheading.
30. Paul Goldstone
I only listen to 2 of the bbc radio stations, does that mean my money should not be spent on the extra stations? I am sure others only listen to a few.
The real thing the BBC does offer is tv, radio and web without Advertisements. There is advertising everywhere, and it is nice not to be pestered to buy coconut oil skin care, or real vegetarian cat food and other such inaneness.
Who really cares what the BBC does with its money? People who have nothing better to do (EC), and people with rubbish websites that no one visits cos the BBC site is better.
31. anonymous
The idea that it is just a TV licence fee is misguided. It also pays for radio and online content. And since it's some of the best radio, tv and online content around it'd be ridiculous to curtail the BBC. Just because someone doesn't watch every BBC programme or read every BBC website doesn't mean u should cutdown the licence fee. People expect the world for free these days.
32. Ray Winter
As can be seen from the posted comments, the BBC clearly has great support and many employees prepared to write in support of their jobs, but then again so would any other organisation with Billions £'s Poll Tax funds behind it. If the BBC is so great, they should easily be able to stand-up against the financially unsupported competition, so let's give them their freedom to do so.
Frankly, I'm all for the EU enforcing the cessation of BBC enforced sbscriptions and whilst they are about it they can insist Blair and his lot spends our road fund licence money on our roads.
As to the Government's latest plan to switch the tax to one on computers, they will have a real fight on their hands.
33. anonymous
Has anyone actually tried the comercial competition? Most of the sites are terrible. Annoying pop-ups, bad design making navigation a chore and worst of all lack of information.
Has anyone tried the ITV website? or tried to find ITN news? Not as good as the BBC sites.
You could, as someone suggested, use 8 different websites, but if it's all in one place why should we?
Silicon is a fine website, but, the technology news on the BBC is aimed at a different market. Reuters is ok, but isn't user friendly etc.
I could live with only one BBC TV channel (just cut out all the rubbish and you wouldn't need the rest), a couple of BBC radio channels. But take away the website and you'd have a fight on your hands.
I truly believe we have a world leading website and peoples jealousy is going to cause it to close down.
The BBC does a lot of R&D which peple don't always know about. For instance they invented Teletext in the 1970's. That isn't strictly TV (although broadcast with the TV signal) so should that be banned?
They are also working on an open-source codec for media compression. From what i've heard it's going to be great. I'd imagine it's to do with plans for streaming programs online etc. Should they stop that as well?
If people can't compete then they should try harder. You can't blame the BBC for the lack of imagination and thought that goes into other websites.
I would pay extra to keep the BBC site as it is (with the fantasy football!!) but i wouldn't pay 8 other sites for the same information.
34. James H
The concept of a licence fee funding the development of news, information and entertainment has created an organisation that is respected throughout the world.
This lack of mainstream commercial pressure and generally unbiased approach has made its content a beacon that shines out in the ever increasing haze of information, mis-information and spin.
To me, the most important area they can continue this good work is online. I now use the BBC's online resources more than their broadcast services and while it is true that there are many other sources of news and information, I have yet to find one that delivers it with the intelligence, depth and authority that the BBC does.
The idea that these activities will be curtailed by beaurocrats in Brussels is appalling and demonstrates, perhaps above everything thing else, the degree to which these people can be lobbied, manipulated and corrupted by those with more commercial interests. Even more reason to fight it!
35. anonymous
"That's great for "anonymous" in the last comment, his/her licence fee pays for their online content. What about people who pay their license fee and don't use the BBC online websites"
Sigh. I imagine that those in the 1940's raised exactly the same kind of objections to the scandalous waste of their radio licence fees on those new-fangled televisual sets owned by a minority of rich people. Wake up, Jamie - it isn't about the technology, it's about the process.
36. anonymous
How about letting everyone who pays the licence fee vote on what they want? If the BBC is so wonderfully impartial how come the government is permitted to threaten its funding every few years like a gangster? If we pay a TV licence because our TVs are capable of receiving the BBCs broadcasts, then by that logic all other terrestrial channels are also entitled to a share of the funding to improve their own output. And the idea of taxing computers to fund a state channel simply because I will 'have access to it' over the internet is a nonsense. If people are that desperate to view the BBC's services on the web then let them pay a subscription like any other web service that wants to charge. I wouldnt expect people to fund my interactive games or the Google news page, so why should I be forced to fund mind-numbing soap operas, gameshows and chatshows.
37. Paul Tansom
The BBC is a broadcasting company. When it started it broadcast radio, when technology moved on it added television broadcasting to that. Now technology is moving on again and internet based broadcasting has been added to that. Should we ban the BBC from keeping up with the current forms of broadcasting technology?
Perhaps we should have banned them from starting television broadcasts and kept them with radio? Perhaps we should also ban them from moving into digital television with added internet style services that improve on the teletext concept? Perhaps we should now ban the radio services because you can access those without paying a license fee too.
Perhaps Brussels should concentrate on more significant problems with companies that it is difficult to compete against. Microsoft has a far more significant stranglehold on its market - in fact I wouldn't say the BBC had any real impact on its competitors, all they need to do is produce decent quality content!
Commercial websites are perfectly capable of producing quality content if they put the effort in. If they do they can generate more revenue from advertising because of the increased readership. Come on, the BBC manages it without the commercial incentives to drive success!
It is becoming clear that Brussels is more about decisions being lobbied by big business than real democracy - read up about the current patent legislation that is clearly not wanted by anyone other than big business, but is still being pushed hard in spite of being rejected already.
By the way, I don't work for the BBC, I am just a very satisfied customer - of the radio, television and internet services.
38. Dr Colin F Parsons
With media convergence and the rise of the wholly IP integrated network, there will be no boundary between wireless broadcasting and direct internet access. Brussels should be encouraging broadcasters into web access, not hindering it. Typical of their response to existing commercial lobbying
39. anonymous
Working at the EC - not in the Competition dept - I find some of the intemperate reactions below depressing. There seems to be a problem in the reporting of this story. Here's what the Commission press release said. You can find the full text at www.europa.eu.int by searching on IP/05/520.
"The complaints in Germany and The Netherlands have also raised new issues, such as the financing of public broadcasters’ online activities. The Commission does not question that public broadcasters offer online services as part of their public service mission. However, the scope of such online activities and whether they are financed by public funds should be determined not by the public broadcasters themselves but by the Member States concerned, to ensure that only those services are included which serve the same democratic, social and cultural needs of society as traditional broadcasting."
40. Ian Farrell
Why are we even having this discussion. The answer is really easy... leave Europe and get back to a little sanity. I don't care what shape my banana is as long as I have a choice as to where it comes from (freetrade and hopefully organic) and definitley NOT from USA! I am heartily sick of faceless overpaid and unaccountable people telling me I have limited choices about anything.
41. Stuart J
Another way that we the British are in fact governed by a foreign power!
If we want OUR BBC to provide a service it is up to US the BRITISH licence payers, not a bunch of chinless beurocrats!!!