@ArseInTheCoOpWindow
It’s not about finding something else to do, or watching another channel.
It’s about the fact that the national tv service has been hijacked by an event that to a lot of people isn’t that important. Yet they are are being subject to something that the BBC believes is important.
It’s mainly irrelevant today. One channel for thise who want to watch it is fine. Every channel and media blackouts is propoganda
You're conflating two points and using emotive language. It's not 'hijacking', it's a change to scheduled programming. 'Hijacking' is an unauthorised takeover. You dislike it, that's clear, and you're entitled to your view, but that is an inaccurate description.
You also argue that it's 'not about finding something else to do' but your objection is that there is a lot of coverage on tv. So why isn't it about finding something else to do? You don't want to watch. Lots of people do. You go and do something else, and the people who want to can watch. Problem solved. Lots of people do want to watch! That's okay, they are allowed to feel differently to you. Your view and theirs are both valid. However, he is only going to die once, so coverage at the time, the one and only time this happens, to suit those who are interested, do care, and want to watch it, is appropriate.
I posted earlier saying how strongly I dislike football. I don't complain to broadcasters that they show it, I find something else to do and accept that in a civilised country, we have to give and take. I may privately roll my eyes at how much national media is devoted to slavish following of a sport best suited to pre school children, but I accept that others like it, and that's fine. I accept that each match is a one off, and live coverage for those who like and want it is appropriate.