There's no such thing as an impartial news source. Your best bet is to get a range and understand the biases involved. I'm not saying that bias is a bad thing with the BBC, but understanding it's existence is as important as understanding biases in the Guardian and Telegraph's reporting when it comes to consuming news.
 - http://biasedbbc.org/
 - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Criticism_of_the_BBC
 - http://www.thecommentator.com/article/1953/exclusive_bbc_lef...
 - http://bbcinstitutionalbias.blogspot.co.uk/
 - http://www.adamsmith.org/blog/media-culture/the-problem-of-b...
 - http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2012/oct/11/bbc-libe...
We saw in 2003 what happens when the BBC disagrees with the government. The government wins. A minor mistake by a single reporter was excuse enough to get the entire BBC leadership fired for its criticism of the Iraq war.
Apparently impartiality means to shut up when the Prime Minister lies to parliament and to the nation.
We don't watch live to air anymore, but we do use the heck out of iPlayer.
When it came around to renewing the license a few months ago, we made the conscious decision to renew it, even though we legally didn't need to (no sat receiver, no aerial).
I know a lot of people will call us stupid for doing so, but I'm also convinced that the BBC will lobby (or whatever they need to do) for changes to the licensing laws once the UK officially is out of the economic danger zone.
I'm not entirely sure where you've got this idea from, but you do realise that the bulk of the BBC's funding comes from the licence fee, and that TVL (the organisation that sends nasty letters through the post if you don't have TV) is part of the BBC, right?
 - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Television_licensing_in_the_Uni...
 - http://www.bbctvlicence.com/
 - http://www.televisionlicence.info/tvl/who