https://www.bakom.admin.ch/bakom/en/homepage/electronic-medi...
BBC has a more centralized structure, ARD is still the most expensive public broadcaster in the world.
ARD (the channel) has by far the biggest market share of all the channels in its union. As a viewer, I do not care whether the administration of those individual channels (in Germany called "third channels") is sitting in the same office or not. They are producing the same program.
For exmaple there is a popular crime show (Tatort), which episodes are produced by different members of ARD, so they take place in different parts of Germany. It is still fundamentally the same show, much like crime shows in the US with a city attached to their name.
Anecdotally, the slogan of ARD is "Wir sind eins" (we are one), hinting that they are the first program, but also want to be seen as one program.
What is specific about ARD is, that it's divisions are organized geographically at the top. But then again, BBC also has regional channels. So my argument is: It does not really matter for the viewer. Except when he is paying, then ARD is clearly worse.
So instead of serving the nation, radio and TV becomes the servant of local and presidential powers.
This is not fun at all, this is dangerous, as the media is used mainly for propaganda.
In Spain everybody pays TV3 that sponsors secessionism and RTVE that does promote socialism-comunism because those in charge are secessionist or socialist communist.
This year RTVE's budget has increased 25%. For communists propaganda is essential.
Well, in the United States we have Fox News and OAN. They're entirely commercial and serve a single party's interests. (Or rather, the interests of the management.) These channels are profitable because people want to watch it.
It works the same as everywhere. The state is reliably broadcasting a constant stream of press releases and other information. If you're a journalist, that's a good source in your day to day work.
GEZ does not change that
And there's definitely an argument that the BBC is at least somewhat partisan, despite being funded from the public and optional fee.
There's a concept called "church tax" that is handled, for those who are members in one of the "qualified" confessional church orgs (in this car, "qualification" basically boils down to Napoleonic age precedent but this is orthogonal to the topic at hand) by the tax collection authorities in a proxy role for the church orgs, but which is very clearly outside of government budget scope. Exactly the same setup could be used to collect income-based broadcast contributions without subjecting broadcasters to budgetary government influence.
It's a controversial issue sometimes but I like the quality of the public broadcasting that this enables. Link [1] has a list of broadcasters, both TV and radio.
[0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Beitragsservice_von_ARD,_ZDF_u...
[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Public_broadcasting#Germany
The statement equally holds true for German public broadcasting, which over the decades seems to have shifted focus on copying private broadcasters segments.
It looks as if some of the money goes toward Arte, as well.
Arte is payed for by France and Germany directly. No money of OP's fee goes to Arte
(Quoting a research director doesn't make an opinion true)
The existence hasn't stopped the German broadcasters from showing culture programming on their other channels. They e.g. even own 16 orchestras to provide content.
High-quality privately-run television like an HBO, a Netflix or even a hey-day NBC never emerged in German broadcasting. In part because well-funded public broadcasting would immediatly outcompete private broadcasters in verticals that are "acceptable" for a public broadcaster to engage in. Thus the incentive to "go low" in quality for private broadcasters.
We still have several good private alternatives.
Right now it's in some kind of limbo state between a tax and racketeering and I don't lik it. If it's a mandatory tax take it from my salary like the dozen other taxes I pay. I don't get monthly letters asking me to pay for my social security or my retirement...
[1] https://www.morgenpost.de/politik/inland/article231206434/Ka...
It has some funnny side-effects: If you manage to land a job there, you'll get paid under the same scheme as public servants, which means that e.g. if you're a camera man you earn as much as a doctor at a public clinic as long as you have a university degree.
The fun part comes when public broadcasters produce segments with a political slant towards anti-capitalism or towards poor people voting populist – and you know that each member of the film crew makes more than 90% of German households.
That is most definitely not true. This is not how the system works. There is a fixed table with different tiers. But not everyone with a university degree is in the same tier. It still very much depends on the job you are working.
[1] https://oeffentlicher-dienst.info/c/t/rechner/tvoed/bund?id=...
[2] https://oeffentlicher-dienst.info/c/t/rechner/aerzte/kommuna...
The WDR for example has a median pay of 130.000 Euros / year (+ pensions) across their 4.500 employees. That's not only * a lot* more than any public servant gets, it's more than you can earn at top DAX companies.
The GP was wrong in claiming they're being paid under the same scheme as public servants, but they weren't wrong in calling them out for earning insane amounts of money.
Now if only we'd actually get decent stuff in return, instead of 15 different talk shows that all have to be broadcast at the exact same time.
Some of the stuff they produce is absolutely useful and of great quality, but that's maybe 5% of their entire program (across TV and radio) at best. I'd much rather pay for quality content like the BBC puts out, than Tom Buhrow's 400k Euro salary and "journalists" that ignore and fabricate facts just to have a sensationalized story[0] and then don't even face any repercussions for it.
[0] German: https://www.mitteldeutsches-journal.com/2020/02/28/recherche...
Camera operators are group 5 and make between 3600 and 5100 Euro. (There are higher level position they can achieve up to 1. camera operator, which tops out at 7000€)
The payment scheme (as others have noted) is not the same. In addition, none of the payment schemes gives you a certain salary level just because you hold a university degree. The get to a certain level you have to in addition perform duties designated for that level, which a camera operator is not.