TV/Radio/news fees: a high court case faq from the large canton in the North

We regularly see rants against Swiss national television/radio//news fees, and the collection company Serafe (to easier trigger people). Germany has a very similiar approach (and a collection company called GEZ as a trigger). So I think this faq Federal Administrative Court. Court sets high hurdles for lawsuits against broadcasting fees gives some nice insight regading a high court view on people calling that media one-sided.

• "The justification for the broadcasting fee only ceases to exist when the entire offering of all public broadcasters on television, radio and the Internet "Recognize evident and regular deficits in terms of diversity of opinions over a longer period of time" let. There has to be one "gross disparity between tax burden and program quality" present. Not just for individual channels, but for all of them."
• "The oral justification for the judgment was based primarily on the Basic Law. First of all, what the contribution payers actually receive in return for the broadcasting contribution "individual advantage"as it is called in legalese. That be the possibility, to use a program that corresponds to the mandate of the public broadcaster. The task is to to ensure diversity and to provide guidance."