Time to unfollow them, I guess.

  • whatevercomeon@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    55
    arrow-down
    4
    ·
    1 month ago

    The UK obviously is no longer a superpower. But the BBC is the cornerstone of the UKs modern global soft power projection. Broadcasting it free projects the UK government’s voice around the world directly into homes, influencing world policy to their liking.

    Putting a paywall in the US sends a message that they feel it is not needed or not effective in the US market.

    It also mirrors what paid sport broadcasting in the UK has done. Paywall it for short term gain, at the expense of long term viewership growth. The UK is struggling.

    • Raltoid@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      15
      ·
      edit-2
      1 month ago

      Paywall it for short term gain, at the expense of long term viewership growth.

      Making a company worse for increased short term revenue, at the cost of customer retention, product quality, etc. causing increased turnover which further compounds all the other steps. Is a common issue among all modern companies.

      In short, there was a shift in MBA education a while back that includes a bunch of lies-by-omission and misrepresented data. Meaning that the only thing on their mind when they graduate, is to please investors at any all costs, including company longevity.

  • alexc@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    26
    arrow-down
    4
    ·
    1 month ago

    And just at a time when the US really needs a decent news service…

    I am sure this was discussed at the Starmer - Trump talks as a way to further isolate Americans from the truth.

    I guess it’s just Al-Jazeera now…

      • alexc@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        1 month ago

        I am guessing you’ve never watched (say) Fox News in the US?

        I’m not saying the BBC is good per se. I’m saying it’s slightly more objective than the rest.

          • alexc@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            1 month ago

            Not arguing that. Of the broadcasters / big media types, I find the BBC usually one of the better ones. But then I get my news from a wide variety of sources. The Intercept is generally a very good addition to my daily intake.

    • tormeh@discuss.tchncs.de
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      23
      arrow-down
      3
      ·
      1 month ago

      Exactly this. Isn’t the point of the BBC world service to communicate/propagandise the British view of what’s happening in the world to other countries? Imagine Russia Today adding a paywall? It’s counter to the entire point! I think you may be on to something about this being a concession to Trump.

      • alexc@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        1 month ago

        Actually, the World Service will remain accessible, but that’s also not where most people go these days.

  • otp@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    22
    ·
    1 month ago

    As a Canadian, I’d be upset if we got paywalled. The BBC is where I go to for trusted news on international concerns.

    Understandable, but I’d still be upset.

    • Sturgist@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      1 month ago

      Could just VPN into the UK. Proton offers a free, no login required, VPN tier with several end points in the UK

  • ShittyBeatlesFCPres@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    6
    ·
    1 month ago

    I know there’s rights issues and all but if they made a real BBC streaming service with their back catalog and every David Attenborough special in 4K, it’d be one thing but Americans are inundated with news and streaming services. I pay for my local newspaper’s digital site — mostly because if I don’t, who will? But even The NY Times has to have recipes and word games to keep people subscribed. Why would anyone pay more than a dollar a month or something for BBC News?

    The U.S. seems like an odd place to trial this. It’s the most competitive media market in the world and we’re all already sick of being asked to pay for 40 different services. In conclusion:🏴‍☠️

  • Alex@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    2
    ·
    1 month ago

    Seems fair enough, these things cost money and the #BBC is in a race to diversify it’s income in preparation for the license fee going away. The dynamic description sounds like they want to preserve the casual visitors experience of an open site.

    I get ads on my BBC podcasts when I’m abroad. I assume that’s all part of it.

  • DancingBear@midwest.social
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    1 month ago

    Can you just use a vpn to listen to the radio? I listen to bbc every morning before work, I will not pay though

    • BeBopaLula@piefed.ca
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      1 month ago

      Would not be surprised if it was not Thiel and gang ensuring only the billionaires newspapers are read by all us plebes by paying BBC to go paywall.

    • NotSteve_@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      30
      arrow-down
      6
      ·
      edit-2
      1 month ago

      I love the US defaultism even when they’re talking about another country’s public news station

      (edit: the title originally just said it was adding a paywall without mention of any country)

        • NotSteve_@lemmy.ca
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          7
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          edit-2
          1 month ago

          The original title just said something like “BBC is now paywalled” making it sound like it applied to more than 1 of the 195 (worldometers.info recognised) countries in the world.

          I’m not British but it’d be pretty alarming to hear that the BBC was adding a paywall that applied to the British if I was British

          • errer@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            11
            ·
            edit-2
            1 month ago

            Honestly this sucks balls for the US. One more credible news source made less accessible.

        • NotSteve_@lemmy.ca
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          6
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          1 month ago

          I asked OP to update the title in another comment which they did (and appreciate) but it made this comment of mine confusing 😅. The original title didn’t have any mention of which country. It just said they were adding a paywall

  • Obinice@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    17
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    1 month ago

    Makes sense, we pay our licence fee for our public service, why should people abroad get for free what we have to pay for?

    I was happy with the current arrangement of adverts supporting the service use abroad, but if it has to migrate to a subscription model to meet modern demands then that’s the way it is.

    I wouldn’t go to another country and ask them to make one of their government’s national public services free for me to use, after all.

    • NigelFrobisher@aussie.zone
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      28
      arrow-down
      3
      ·
      1 month ago

      The world service was always free because it’s a propaganda platform that promotes Britain and British values abroad. I guess they are content just to push Reform propaganda to a domestic audience from now on.

    • crapwittyname@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      7
      arrow-down
      4
      ·
      edit-2
      1 month ago

      Nah mate. Information is free the second it leaves its source. Any attempt to curtail it after then is just a cunt’s trick.

      • TheGrandNagus@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        1 month ago

        I imagine you wouldn’t be saying this if it was your work being used.

        If you went through the painstaking effort or writing a book or something, I imagine you’d be pretty unhappy if nobody wanted to reimburse you, and you were called a cunt for wanting to be paid for your labour.

        • crapwittyname@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          1 month ago

          I work for a living, so I’m used to my work being exploited as a matter of course.

          • TheGrandNagus@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            1 month ago

            That’s exactly my point.

            Presumably you’re paid for the work you do, and you shouldn’t have to do it for free, yes?

            • crapwittyname@lemm.ee
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              edit-2
              1 month ago

              Yes. But I’m not paid continuously for the work I’ve done in the past, and I’m not paid the actual value of my work.

              Should we still be paying Homer for his incredible work on the Iliad, do you think?

    • N-E-N@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 month ago

      Well to be fair, a perpetual license for media/news wouldn’t make sense

  • Blackmist@feddit.uk
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    16
    ·
    1 month ago

    A bizarre decision.

    Every paywalled news site is a news site I don’t read.

    I mean, nobody likes adverts, but I think even fewer people like paying.

  • Humanius@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    20
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    1 month ago

    So that sounds to me that Americans should use a VPN to pretend they are accessing the website from Europe

    • Imgonnatrythis@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      7
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 month ago

      Seems like a high bar for checking the news. I’ll just switch to a different news outlet.

      Shame to further isolate the US towards the largely crappy intranational journalism options.

  • pelespirit@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    8
    ·
    1 month ago

    They’re not that great anyway. They’re barely holding on to my personal list of reliable sources. If I really need something, there are other places to go. Good luck BBC.

      • pelespirit@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        6
        ·
        1 month ago

        The Guardian isn’t horrible, but not perfect. Reuters, if you squint, is pretty good 3/4 of the time. Propublica is great for investigative journalism. All of them have horrible headline writers at least half the time. Politico isn’t worth checking, but every month or so, you might miss something. It’s a mixed bag basically, so you have to check out a few.

        I try to post the “real” stuff (not what trump says, but what he and the republicans are doing) on politics at sh.itjust.works on weekdays. It’s US based and I’m anti-right.

      • KumaSudosa@feddit.dk
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        1 month ago

        I usually use Deutsche Welle actually. Generally happy with it! Also available in English, of course