| mainstream vs. special interest is probably better, I.e. content that appeals to lots of people but has low value to the average person vs. content that only appeals to a few people, but has a higher value to the people that enjoy it. Of course nobody goes out of their way to make unpopular content, but content that is less mainstream is less popular. I basically agree with your point about providing a high quality alternative. That's what the charter says the BBC should do, however it is supposed to be a balance, in order to provide a service that people want to pay for. > If a talk-show host wants a large six-figure sum they should go look in the commercial sector Yeah, there needs to be a balance. The BBC should use its position to grow new talent, but equally it needs to be able to pay close to market rates in order to make high quality output. > For things like F1 BBC should only be stepping in if no commercial station will take it as FTA I agree that it must push up the price, but I'm not sure by how much. The BBC doesn't dominate sports coverage (there seems to be a change to what is shown every year), so I don't see why the market rate with/without the BBC would be that much different. People like watching watching sports on the BBC, because the coverage is good and there are no adverts. I don't watch sports myself, but I find value in the BBC output in other ways, so it balances out. |