In doing so, they are impressively proving that, unlike all other media, these entities, artificially created by the state and financed with millions, do not depend on performance data at all because subsidies are their main source of income.
And this could be at risk if it is proven that their programs are hardly used, as the new data shows. But this development is simply not a problem for them because regional advertising saudi arabia rcs data is sold without data anyway, and the loss of the few national spots is compensated for by the saved Mediapulse costs. But this makes the insanity of the Federal Council's media policy particularly clear. Firstly, expensive, bulky television is not suitable for sparsely populated peripheral regions.
This is therefore a fundamental political error. accurately record the number of viewers of these channels with any useful effort, because they only achieve microscopic market shares in their sparsely populated broadcasting areas, as most of these uninspired offerings are steadily losing importance in an increasingly diverse range of programs. So is there hope that exposing these contradictions will launch a thorough discussion about the sensible use of compulsory fees for private broadcasters? I doubt it.
The lucrative feeding grounds are in the hands of regional media bosses who would categorically oppose any correction, because with this senseless squandering of state money they are not only cementing their monopolies, but are also elegantly puffing up their personal egos at the expense of others. This is why complaints about increasing media concentration ring hollow when the state has completely failed in the only area where it can intervene not only with laws but also with many millions.