I argued some years ago that the strategy of those who oppose the BBC does not hold water.
Those with an axe to grind against the BBC attack it when it has popular programmes for appealing to populism and comprting with commercial broadcasters but when the BBC commits itself to minority interestests it gets attacked for not justifying its license fee due to lack of viewers.
This hollow line of reasoning has been shown in its full colours by the ever excellent Liberal Burblings who points out the total hypocrisy of the Tory spokesman at the Royal television Society's Conference.
As I wrote in my original article
"the best way for the BBC to justify its existence is to ensure that they have high viewing figures, popular shows, relevant content, and hit shows. In order to do this the BBC needs to invest lots of money in facilities, creative people and top presenters. But this is where the problems start. If the BBC pays too much for top stars, they are criticised by the Tories/Daily Mail. But as soon as the BBC fails to have top shows, lacks the stars to get viewers watching you know that the Daily Mail will be the very first to jump in and demand the axing of the licence fee because the BBC no longer has any top stars that anyone wants to watch."
And for anyone who believes that commercial broadcaster can make the sort of programmes the BBC makes, can I refer you to THIS article I wrote a long time ago which deals with original BBC shows and ITV derivitive copies which are useless in comparison.