I believe in an active, pluralist and free press.

Simplistically, this should emerge spontaneously from a free market in publications and subscribers. But newspapers are prone to capture by rich folk who can then manipulate political destinies (Heart, Murdoch, Bezos).

Realistically, a state funded media channel such as the BBC is a good balance to that, but it is idiotic cant to pretend that a “neutrality charter” is meaningful since such organs tend to become captured by “dinner party activists” and foster groupthink about what neutral is. So I agree with the top comment that the BBC has a tendency to be a righteous preachy outfit.