Recommendation 2

The BBC struggles to articulate how the World Service provides value for money to UK taxpayers and why it should therefore continue receiving government funding. The Committee recognises the World Service’s importance amid volatile geopolitics and the rapid growth of state-backed competitors that do not present impartial views, alongside the US government’s closure in March 2025 of the US Agency for Global Media, an independent federal agency that provided similar content globally to the World Service. As the World Service is paid for by UK taxpayers, through the licence fee and FCDO grant-in-aid, it must show more clearly the value this investment buys. The BBC cites compelling efficiency of the World Service costing around 87p per user per year. But a single cost-per-user figure cannot capture strategic impact or soft-power benefits. Some language services will always look ‘expensive’ on a narrow audience-per-pound basis because they operate where free media is repressed and trusted news is scarce. For example, in Afghanistan radio and education output can be the only reliable source. At present there is no single, transparent suite of value-for-money measures across TV, radio and digital that brings costs together with outcomes such as reach, trust, audience need and strategic benefit. recommendation The BBC should report back to the Committee within six months on measures it can use to quantify the value for money of the World Service, both overall and at language-service level, to support a clear, evidence-based case for continued government funding.