• Any society that would give up liberty to gain security, deserves neither and will lose both. - Benjamin Franklin

The ABC is a leech on the taxpayer

Posted by Eric Smith on 5th October 2010 2:36pm

The Australian have run an article today by an apologist for the ABC, defending its position as a coercive leech on the Australian taxpayer and a pusher of eco-socialist propaganda. This fellow writes:

"what makes [people who bash the ABC] think that taxpayers aren't funding the commercial media? We all pay for the huge cost of commercial radio, television and internet services through the advertising margin added to the price of goods and services we buy. Not only do we pay for these costs, but for the profits of the commercial media as well. Everyone pays those margins, not just taxpayers."

The difference, of course, is that commercial operators are not forced to advertise (and add to costs) nor are consumers forced to buy products that do advertise. Consumers have a choice. With the ABC they have no choice. They pay up, like it or lump it.

The difference could not be more stark. It's like the difference between jumping off a building  or being pushed off.

Wed, 06/10/2010 - 10:55am — Benjamin Marks

Right on.

Furthermore, advertising has the benefit of communicating information about a product. If it was a total waste of money, then those who advertise would lose market share, since their products would be too expensive compared to the competition who did not advertise. And do not forget, whatever the downsides of advertising and the arguments against it, that government, including the ABC, advertises also!

Lastly, check out this spiel from Hayek's interview on ABC TV during his tour of Australia in 1976:

[I]t was argued, not very long ago, that the Government monopoly of broadcasting was necessary because anyone who broadcasts could not confine his services to those who are willing to pay, so you had to put it in the hands of Government. Now we know now that it can either be financed by advertising and it certainly would have let the development of devices which made it possible to confine the reception of particular broadcasting to the people who are willing to pay for it. That has not taken place because in most countries the Government has been given the monopoly and there was no incentive to do it.