[interestednovice]

It’s a tricky point, but I think you could make valid arguments about a TVL levy being good for wider society in similar ways to public (free) museums that receive arts funding, the indirect benefit of road and rail infrastructure and so on.

The availability of the BBC as FTA broadcast channels and high-quality but free web services benefits the cut-off, lonely, isolated members of society - disproportionately the elderly and the poor, so to have “a friend” in the BBC is important. If it is direct subscription, you take that away.

It is also good for society in a more indirect way to have a high-quality broadcaster for state occasions and major news events with coverage that is impartial and free of advertising or spin, as part of our shared moments of national significance. I really think the BBC is uniquely placed to do all of that broadly as it is constituted now, which is why I’d be wary of splitting off news.

The BBC existing also helps to support the independent production industry in this country, which allows a whole sector of the economy to stay afloat. The film and media industries would not be nearly so successful without the BBC, and some kind of “subsidy” to support those jobs (if you chose to see the LF in that way) probably provides far more back than it actually costs.