2005 BBC strike
Background
Background
----------

The BBC was fragile, facing competition from other digital and cable broadcasting companies. The BBC is funded primarily by a [television license](/wiki/Television_licence%23United_Kingdom "Television licence#United Kingdom") and must convince the government to keep the license. At the time it needed to also convince the government to renew its government charter, which would expire the following year. The BBC was also facing conflict with the [government at the time](/wiki/Premiership_of_Tony_Blair "Premiership of Tony Blair"), after the BBC's unfavourable coverage of the [Iraq War](/wiki/Iraq_War "Iraq War") in 2003\. An investigation led by [Lord Hutton](/wiki/Brian_Hutton%2C_Baron_Hutton "Brian Hutton, Baron Hutton"), a former judge, found that the BBC misrepresented the government's position on the war and engaged in sloppy reporting. Despite containing valid criticism of the BBC, the report was viewed by other sections of the media as an "establishment whitewash" – caused the BBC's chairman and director general to resign.

Mark Thompson was appointed as the new BBC director to replace those who resigned. In order to restore the BBC's reputation and reform it for the digital age, he cut budgets by 15% across the board and removed 3,780 jobs. This would have saved about £355 million (US$642 million) to reinvest in new programmes. This caused anger across the BBC, and many workers went on strike.


What are some alternative solutions to cutting budgets and removing jobs that could have restored the BBC's reputation?