This probably isn't the place for a non-sensationalist balanced debate, there are far too many silly arguments casually lobbed about.
The BBC news in the run-up to the Brexit referendum was terrible. I remember one presenter with a mic on a shopping street asking people their opinions. A nice smart chap said it was a very good idea to stay in for trade etc. Then a chip-eating moron said we should vote leave to keep the foreigners out. This wasn't an accident, the editing was intended to give an impression in the prescribed direction. Perhaps every remainer was smart and spoke nicely and every leaver was a scruffy moron, but I doubt it. This is the sort of not very subtle direction they take.
Covid was similar. Obviously, despite your clumsy attempts at strawman arguments, I'm not suggesting they should have pushed any conspiracy theories. But they did rubbish and silence lots of attempted debate, e.g. about whether the exact type of lockdown we had was a good idea, whether masks really achieved anything other than a misplaced sense of confidence. The sort of nuanced subtle debate that those of low intelligence (including many here) just can't handle, not rights or wrongs but the detail of how things are done.
The BBC is a state mouthpiece, which tells people what to think for the wellbeing of those in charge. It doesn't represent the people.
Despite your insinuation that there's something somehow immoral about anyone not paying the BBC against their will, it's optional. It's a subscription, and people are completely free to opt out if they choose to do so. The BBC deliberately choose to imply that it's compulsory despite it not being, but more people are working it out every year. It ceased to be a "TV Licence" years ago, it's just a membership fee and I and lots of others are choosing not to buy one.