Doesn't the BBC get it's money from TV's people have. If you have no TV you pay nothing, but if you do, you pay for each one you have?
No you only pay one licence regardless of how many TV's you have.
Commercials don't bother me at all. That's what a DVR is for, to just skip them all. Hell now with my Tivo Roamio and it's new update I can hit the green button once and it'll skip them all and start right at the end of all the commercials. I get my TV with a Antenna and so pay ZERO for TV service per month!!!
BBC don't have any ads at all - I guess that is the difference. Maybe the BBC is a kind of happy accident that has largely avoided toeing the governmnt line despite being publicly funded.
What bothered me was that the arguments you made were very reminiscent of the Murdoch press' attempts to bring down the BBC - when of course the Murdoch press is more biased than just about any other mainstream media outlet.
. That means it is financed by every German household with a part of the mandatory payment of about €20 per household and month Like the BBC then. The function of these channels is to keep the provate channels honest - without them the private channels fill up with ads at an annoyance level that is beyond funny as I rediscover anytime I watch television outside the UK.
The real risk with the publicly funded channels is government interference - and since this particular video is also taking a sideswipe at Merkel I don't think there seems to be a problem there.
Many, perhaps most, definitions do mention race at some point - and I still maintain that this is in practice the most common usage. This applies particularly in the UK in relation to those who complain about immigrants - as in the Gordon Brown/Gillian Duffy incident.
Dictionaries often don't capture the most common current usage of a word - because part of their mission is to educate. As I'm usually on the side of the dictionary in these debates I feel a bit odd arguing the other way on this one.
btw - I am not the AC above - just trying to explain why he said what he said.
Objectively the US is just as bad but in different ways. We don't have the aggressive plea bargaining culture that you have. We don't have the executions that you have. We don't have to be in fear of our lives if a traffic policeman stops us like you do - because our policemen are not armed. (I would say that this forces them to do the job better).
So NO the UK is no worse than the US - and in any ways better.
If the US was better for freedom and justice then there would never have been the high profile cases where people tried to avoid being extradited there from the UK or other european countries.