[Secret Agent Man]

Just because govt-funded tv knocks the current government doesn’t mean that’s not how they get their money.

They may think they are “public tv” like the PBS stations in America. And trust me the shows on PBS are overwhelmingly left leaning. But PBS gets its money from a congressional budget too.

Self-delusion? Self-loathing?

Whether they recognize it or not, their subsidies come from government policies that force people to pay to keep those stations broadcasting. And the other big difference is that in the UK many of the ‘over air’ stations are government run. In America over the air 1-2 stations are PBS, the majority of over the air stations are private.

[Winniesboy]

Not quite sure what you mean by 'over-air' programmes.If you mean stations broadcasting in the traditional way through terrestrial transmitters (as distinct from satellite or cable), then in radio BBC stations are outnumbered by the many samll local commercial stations; while of the five terrestrial TV channels, three are commercial. While it's true that the BBC's income derives from legislation, this is not through an annual budget decision. Indeed the only point at which government exercises any real power over the BBC is when the legislation governing the Royal Charter (and with it the licence fee) is due for renewal, and this only happens every ten years. It's only in the period leading up to that when the BBC takes much notice of whay government thinks of it. At other times the BBC sooner or later falls out with every government, of whatever party, over questions of 'balance' etc. Royal commissions are regularly appointed to review the whole system, with noises being made about radical change: but in the end the ususal verdict is that it's the worst possible system except all the alrenatives. As it happens, the recent Charter renewal was more radical than most.