Dear ttbn,

The following link may help:

http://theconversation.com/does-the-abc-deliver-australians-good-bang-for-their-buck-25608

Firstly, the quality of ABC content and services according to
many Newspoll surveys have found that most Australians (78%)
thought ABC content was "good." And, in the same polls -
86% regarded online content also as "good."

Not only does ABC content reach broad swathes of the
Australian public in both metropolitan and regional markets
but at 14 cents a day when you get 4 TV channels, national
and local radio and online and mobile services who on earth
can complain that this is excessive.

Let's once and for all scotch the myth that the ABC is too
expensive for an affluent democracy such as Australia.

Outgoing ABC head Mark Scott waited until his last day as boss to criticise the expensive redundancy of B1 & B2, the ABC and SBS.

Scott recommended a merger. However that would mean the leaner, advertising, SBS having to same-sex marry up with the over-stuffed, lard-arsed ABC.
Some quotes from Landline 24/02/2016,

DAVID LIPSON: 'Mark Scott claims it could save $40 million a year, a figure backed by the left-leaning think tank The Australia Institute..'

Bob Hawke previously directed a merger but an election got in the way,
DAVID LIPSON: One former ABC boss thinks a merger is a no-brainer.

DAVID HILL, FORMER ABC CHAIRMAN: I think it's absurd that in country with our population we are only one to try and support two public viable, comprehensive, public broadcasters.

DAVID LIPSON: In fact almost 30 years ago to the day, he was tasked with the amalgamation.

DAVID HILL: I was summoned to Canberra and the government of the day had decided we were to merge. And I was to be the chairman of the new merged organisation and Sir Nicholas Shehadie, the chairman of SBS, was to be the deputy chair and Nick and I were sent away to merge. But of course, a few months later there was an election and the then-Prime Minister Bob Hawke called the merger off.

Foxy,

78/86% of the 25% of Australians who use the ABC, I suppose. Few Australians use it.

Nobody doubts the 'quality' - it should be good at a billion dollars a year!

I have just been sitting on the balcony of a cabin overlooking a bay on Yorke Peninsular, listening to ABC News Radio. I can get Adelaide commercial stations from across the gulf, but they aren't as strong as the ABC. The ABC does a sterling job for the country (apart from the lack of local news). I don't want to lose the ABC! I love it for British and Australian drama (they can stick the so-called comedy).

My point is that it is too big and too costly to taxpayers. It's no 'myth'. A billion dollars is not chicken feed when we have a $500 billion debt. It should be pared down. The SBS is just a an indulgence and sop to multiculturalism, which is divisive enough as it is, without providing foreign TV and radio.

As leoj points out, even Mark Scott thought there economies should be made.

Dear ttbn,

Australia is a wealthy country which once espoused
ideals of justice and integrity. It can afford and
must have a national broadcaster providing news,
enlightened comment and quality entertainment.
The ABC is starved of funding due to the malevolence
of Coalition Governments. What it needs on its Board
and as CEO skilled people who are committed to public
broadcasting. The ABC's independence should be
protected by Parliament and must never be beholden
to advertisers or commercial interests.

The old complaint of left bias has been consistently
refuted by numerous independent inquiries. SBS
serves a particular purpose.

However if you want to complain about the waste of money
how about the billions of dollars in running detention
centres offshore and in Australia when asylum seeker
claims could be considered while they live in the
community? What about the waste of billions in the
ridiculous cuts to company tax rates which Treasury
modelling suggests will have, at best, a marginal
effect on output and employment. What about the potential
$1 billion subsidy of a coal mine and then there's also
politicians claiming very generous rental subsidies
(amongst other rorts) when in Canberra. And the list could
go on.

There's lots of things we should be troubled by - for sure.
But funding for our National Broadcaster should not be
one of them.

Hey Foxy,
Ok I'll go along with it...
But it's not that we need skilled people, we just need well-informed fair and unbaised people who have a committment to investigative journalism and telling the truth.
It's not that hard.

You say that funding for our national broacaster shouldn't be an issue but I'll argue you're wrong on that point, because the second they start failing to report the facts truthfully, and instead report distorted facts, narrative and conjecture based stories, using our own consciences against us to push their agendas, then they've lost the legitimacy to be taxpayer funded national broadcaster.

When Hitler came to power one of his first acts was to appoint Joseph Goebbels, Minister for Propaganda. I am sure Corny Banana will do much the same thing. Then they will expand the national broadcaster to a 24/7 operation, broadcasting the rousing speeches of 'Fearless Leader', party policy, condemnation of undesirables etc etc, it will become compulsory listening for all good citizens. Wunderbar!