Indeed, the BBC's commercial ventures have distorted various markets for some time, as pointed out by other contributors to this discussion. Particularly the print media (while such things were still an obviously viable line of business) were affected by BBC franchise publications which were actively advertised on the supposedly non-commercial publicly-funded BBC channels.
With various production agreements and a degree of internal privatisation (common in the British public sector and amongst its imitators), one would be forgiven for having the feeling that such commercial activity is a form of looting done for the benefit of various well-connected individuals. Such beneficiaries of BBC commercialisation/privatisation want DRM to maximise their licensing opportunities.
Meanwhile, absurd region-limited content licensing agreements made by the BBC itself mean that, for example, the lazy option of picking music tracks from a catalogue, for whatever production it is that needs a soundtrack, brings with it the "need" to impose DRM in case someone watching a wildlife programme outside Britain gets to hear some music they shouldn't be "allowed" to hear.
Naturally, the BBC could fund genuinely (re)distributable content and spread the wealth around a bit, but then such an exercise wouldn't put money into the pockets of various established beneficiaries of the BBC's kindness (to put it diplomatically).