why I would pay the BBC license fee in the future
To day the BBC, I believe, maintains a high hurdle bar for linear programming and content creation. This is not enough to ensure that I will continue to pay the license fee. Notwithstanding this understanding of quality hurdle, the BBC is a national asset. It is independent of commercial pressures. It is trusted. So what else can it do?
The BBC faces issues on the changes from linear programming to VOD, appointment viewing to time shifting, podcasting and user generated content, editorial pressures and new technologies; but these are just business change as normal. As the consumers adapt and technologies improve, these business as normal decisions are difficult but faced by all payers in the media, telecoms, IT and technology industries.
Given that the BBC is a trusted party, would I pay a license fee to them to become my trusted safe deposit box for my digital identity?
My digital identity and preferences are currently stored at Google, Ebay, Microsoft Live, Amazon, Yahoo, my ISP, Myspaces, etc etc. All those services that I subscribe to. However, I want my preferences, my identity and my history that allows services providers to improve service delivery, to be stored in one place. A place that cannot be commercially exploited. However should I chose, I as a user can sell my data to commercial companies, and it would be open and free for my chosen services to use to improve experiences, that that data that they will use will be all of my data, rather than the subset.
However, if the BBC supported my digital identity with an avatar - would I be happy with the BBCs ownership of that avatar - a sort of digital in loco parentis?
The type of digital identity I am suggesting is not one that the home office would issue; it is not an ID card. This digital identity that the BBC would store for me, would be based on open standard and open API’s, but which ones?
- Posted by tonyfish on 20/07/2006.
- tonyfish's site
Please sign in or join etribes to add comments.
