[Connews]

Very good point — but as a public broadcaster operating through a licence fee, you could argue the BBC has bigger considerations to make.

You can equally argue that the domestic viewer is going to benefit from seeing a news channel which may be largely funded externally.

Editorially I disagree — domestic viewers aren’t going to benefit when there’s a story of huge interest to the U.K. but not worldwide. Global viewers don’t pay the licence fee, and so you could also argue that those who do should get a service tailored for them. A profit-making channel shouldn’t impact the service. (Being devil’s advocate.)

Because BBC World News turns a profit (one of the few news channels anywhere to do so) and uses this profit to subsidise BBC News' UK operations. Turning this profit is dependent on it being an international news channel and if it ceases to turn a profit then it has to be axed as the licence fee cannot subsidise the BBC's commercial operations, particularly not at the minute.

If BBC World News goes then so does the enormous amount of output that it produces for the BBC News channel. While BBC News do (or certainly did) pay a fair use fee to use this output, the amount of money required for the BBC News channel to fill those hours would require a significant increase in budget - try justifying that in the current climate.

In short, an international news channel with UK opt outs is the only thing keeping the BBC from having a news channel for both the domestic and international markets. While BBC World News would probably surivive without the BBC News channel, the same is not true in reverse.

You make compelling points here. My argument: would be…

1. Are all profits from World News being used to help the U.K. news channel? Probably not. And even if not, the licence fee is paid to provide such a service. I’d suggest that the BBC ought to focus on its public service obligations rather than blockbuster dramas — using the licence fee to provide content that isn’t profitable but important.

2. If the U.K. channel disappears, that’ll eliminate the vast amount of content that it creates for local radio, local TV news, online and social media.

3. I agree that BBC World is more financially viable because sponsorships, product placement and advertising are possible, but a licence fee should be used to support services that aren’t lucrative but are beneficial to the public.

Just to stress, only my opinion!