I still think the BBC is worth preserving but I've no idea how it should be done

Direct gov funding seems out of the question as independence is required for reputational reasons at least

Extending license regs so you need one to watch youtube/netflix/etc an obvious non-starter (hopefully)

Expanding commercial operations so they can sell access to archives through iplayer, overseas subscriptions, Huw Edwards merch etc might be ok but unlikely to raise the billions required to operate

At this point is it saveable?

Netflix tax

I quite like this idea

They already sell it to the yanks as Britbox and are reasonably successful at it but the license fee currently covers about four billion quid of their six billion annual operating costs. They don't have to do Netflix numbers but it's a lot of subs to sell (assuming that it must remain free to UK viewers and of ads)

You're right. They hide their shame from curious limeys by geoblocking britbox.com, but a vpn trip to Texas reveals it looks like a load of old shit on offer (Twenty Twenty Six is probably good though)

So as for they should sell the full service to the rest of the world, I agree. i suppose it's licensing issues or they'd be doing it already? Much of their programming is not made not in-house but by external production cos

I meant to give a few of the alternative funding arrangements if the license fee were scrapped but I managed not to say that part out loud, oops

This is the best answer. Sixty quid in a card is much better than any items to the same value

He fucked up by apologising in the first place

The ears and teeth are probably fair game but his nose is normal and unremarkable. The nose in the first three is 100% hook nosed merchant jewish stereotype. The slimer one doesn't seem nearly as bad as the others.

ThinkLabour is Labour Together rebadged. Expect similar blue labour bullshit with McSweeney lurking in the background

https://www.thecanary.co/skwawkbox/2026/05/15/labour-together-rebrand/

OK that's a non-starter. How then do we make our proposal for self-funding provision of IVF on the NHS? What if they reserve a modest quantity of spare stem cells for the production of veal?

Sweet. Wes, it's funding time, bell up Pete Thiel and get it implemented asap

In the vein of encouraging smoking as it costs the NHS for associated diseases earlier on, but kills the patients before the really expensive care for Alzheimers etc is required, could you argue that IVF saves money in the long run by providing a child to care for those who would otherwise require extensive state support in their old age?

Will Rupert complete his grim ritual?