01-06-2022, 09:25 AM
(This post was last modified: 01-06-2022, 09:26 AM by headliner101.)
(01-06-2022, 08:48 AM)DTV Wrote:(01-06-2022, 07:06 AM)Matrix Wrote: International rights is a huge issue for programming, not necessarily news coverage but think about the rights issues associated with programmes like Killing Eve (which has a fairly *wild* distribution agreement) and you begin to see why geo-blocking exists.
The same sorts of rights issues don’t really exist with radio - although, arguably, the growth of podcasts is a form which can be restricted or limited in a much more systematic way if required.
So: the answer to the question boils down to £££. In a nutshell.
Relatedly due to it being down to £££, there is also a massively different commercial relationship between the World Service and domestic radio and World News and domestic TV. Neither domestic radio or the World Service are money making ventures for the BBC, while World News is. The BBC won't want to undercut their commercial news channel (as well as their distributors) by making similar content freely available online.
Though I am a bit puzzled by World's FTA availability in Europe (less so elsewhere). Also, it makes me think: who funds the salaries of staff working on stories relevant to World audiences given that they share the same office space as domestic services and their content is also used by licence fee-funded services?