Political bias at BBC - something has to be done surely

[andymadmak]

longblackcoat said:

andymadmak said:

So for all that time in the 70s and 80s ( and possibly even the 90s?) when the BBC was saying that it was not in any way biased, when all its supporters were saying it was not biased, and when the left was complaining it was actually biased to the right, it was in fact the case that there was "massive bias" to the left, but this was only admitted to in 2009?
It was clear to any sensible soul during that period that the BBC was biased. Yet those who flagged it up were told it was their imagination, or it was because they themselves were biased, etc etc . Sound familiar?
What credence should we put then to modern day assertions that the BBC is not biased? That Thompson seems to think that the New Statesman somehow represents some sort of middle of the road ( I think he describes it as technocratic rather than left wing?) position politically, and as such is an acceptable comparator for the BBC tells you everything you need to know about the way the BBC views itself.

Again, read the interview properly. He's saying that the New Statesman used to be all of one hue, and now is not, and that the BBC has moved in the same way. He's talking about the movement of political position rather than the position itself.

And why is it that you are willing to accept at face value, from an interview, that the BBC was biased but won't accept (from the same interview!) that it's changed. That's a rather curate's egg way of looking at things, is it not?

I absolutely know that most participants on this thread are resolutely convinced that the BBC is a seething bed of anarcho-syndicalists - your view, you're entitled to it - but it rather grates when wilfully selective quoting is used to 'prove' a point. I just looked at the first one on TB's list. Seems little point in going further if this level of bias is shown; those who are convinced will simply use their prejudice to convince themselves further of the 'facts'.

I'm simply asking you to read more widely and to challenge the source, even of something that appears to support your argument.

I think you have missed my point. He says the New Statesman used to be left wing and is now "technocratic". Most readers would still see the New Statesman as left wing however. He can describe it as he wants to, but the fact that most would still see it as on the left, when Thompson sees it as now "technocratic" (presumably therefore centrist in his view?) and an example for the BBC to follow means that his perception of what it means to be unbiased is, in itself, biased! No wonder the BBC struggles to understand why people accuse it of bias! As Turbo says, the broadcasted evidence and reaction of BBC pundits on election night last year shows where the BBC centre ground is, and it is clearly not aligned with the centre ground of British politics!

And frankly it's you that cannot have it both ways.. Thompson "admission of bias" does not preclude him from being wrong on other things, including the current state of BBC editorial output. I don't have to be selective about what I believe from Thompson, because for the previous 30 years the BBC was telling me that my bias senses were wrong when in fact it (the BBC) knew all along that it was in fact biased. A confession does not change anything, nor does it make the witness any more credible going forward!

Lastly, were I in Thompsons position, faced with trying to find ways to defend the undeniable truth, I might be tempted to think that the easiest and most effective way for the BBC to deflect criticism of its current levels of bias would be to concede that it had been biased in the past, brush over the vehement, historical denials of same, and loftily declare that that was all in the past and that everything is tickety-boo now! I might even point to the odd token right winger on the editorial team now and allude to a "proud tradition".......

[markh1973]

chris watton said:

How the hell can people say it isn't biased towards Labour/the Left when they looked so glum on the morning of the election! Compare that to when Labour won, empty champagne bottles everywhere once the result was known!

Have you got some evidence for the champagne bottles? No idea if it's true but someone on PH saying it is not evidence.

[chris watton]

markh1973 said:

Have you got some evidence for the champagne bottles? No idea if it's true but someone on PH saying it is not evidence.

Quite a few hits from a Google search. For example:

"In an unguarded moment the BBC Radio Five Live's Jane Garvey remembers how the BBC greeted Labour's 1997 victory with champagne. Listen here. And courtesy of Biased BBC, here is the transcript..."

http://conservativehome.blogs.com/torydiary/2007/0...

Source is from a Tory web page, but the quote is from a BBC bod.

[markh1973]

chris watton said:

Quite a few hits from a Google search. For example:

"In an unguarded moment the BBC Radio Five Live's Jane Garvey remembers how the BBC greeted Labour's 1997 victory with champagne. Listen here. And courtesy of Biased BBC, here is the transcript..."

http://conservativehome.blogs.com/torydiary/2007/0...

Source is from a Tory web page, but the quote is from a BBC bod.

Thanks

[The Don of Croy]

Here's a case in point.

BBC News on Monday - covering the in house discussion on 'World on the Move' which featured a broadcast by Mrs. Pitt. In his intro Huw Edwards mentioned 'right-wing' movements gaining support in Europe and a warning from the former head of MI6 (Richard Dearlove)...except Dearlove doesn't mention 'right-wing' in his speech.

He does reference 'populist movements' - same thing?

However, of possibly more interest are his remarks on Turkish visa free travel, the lack of a co-ordinated European reaction to the migrant crisis, and a rebuke to the claim that leaving the EU will make the UK more vulnerable to terrorism. See his 7 min speech here;

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FD_lhmdKCHk

It's such a minor thing - I know - but the use of catch phrases is one way of re-inforcing ideas so as to help some peeps associate certain ideas (hatred of immigrants = right wing). At the same time this speech has enough to fill quite a segment in a normal news day, but as Angelina had to have her time too an opportunity was missed...

[Camoradi]

BBC presenter on Radio 4 Today this morning....

"Austria has escaped, by a hair's breadth, a far right wing president"

Escaped?

[Johnnytheboy]

Camoradi said:

BBC presenter on Radio 4 Today this morning....

"Austria has escaped, by a hair's breadth, a far right wing president"

Escaped?

[bbc]Phew![/bbc]

[DMN]

How dare the BBC not suggest a far right government is a good thing!

[Camoradi]

DMN said:

How dare the BBC not suggest a far right government is a good thing!

President (Head of State), not government. Largely symbolic role in Austria

[andymadmak]

DMN said:

How dare the BBC not suggest a far right government is a good thing!

I would be happy if they didn't suggest anything.

BTW, what is the definition of Far Right?

Would the BBC describe Mr Corbyn (were he ever to win a GE) as Far Left?

[Johnnytheboy]

andymadmak said:

DMN said:

How dare the BBC not suggest a far right government is a good thing!

I would be happy if they didn't suggest anything.

BTW, what is the definition of Far Right?

Would the BBC describe Mr Corbyn (were he ever to win a GE) as Far Left?

Quite. You might argue that they have got a far left president in Austria now, but that's not worthy of comment.

Apparently.

[Harji]

andymadmak said:

Harji said:

andymadmak said:

You are having a giraffe, right? You think that going after Blair and Campbell is an example of the BBC not being biased? Shy-it, not even the BBC could ignore just how far over the line Blair and co had gone with that war. It would have REALLY blown the whistle on BBC bias for even the most blinkered of people had they remained silent.
Did labour interfere with the BBC? Why, yes they did. Here is an example:http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/1434251/Campbell-goes-on-TV-to-deny-BBC-vendetta.html

An attack on BBC is not direct interference though, anyway I asked did Labour interfere in one of the most direct attacks on a govt I can remember?

You honestly think there's a whistle to blow, how funny! thousands of ppl employed by the BBC and all you have is an opinion and no fact.

The fact is that ex BBC employees have blown the whistle on BBC bias on a number of occasions. Even the former head conceded it was biased.
Your denials are fatuous. How long does it take you to get the sand out of your ears?

Still no hard evidence, just opinions, if it is biased, where is the general "order" to be be biased? Who has said that they must sway to the left? If the whistle has been blown why hasn't it been challenged before? There is no hard evidence because there is no hard evidence. There is no direct order, no emails to say swing left. It's an organisation that challenges current views, and what ppl think is left wing bias I find astonishing ,I've heard the following as proof of left wing bias and it's all bks

Environment - why is this left wing bias?
Climate change - Why is this left wing bias?
Refugees - Why is showing the other side of the Daily Mail hysteria left wing bias?
Challenging the current Tory Govt - Face it this govt is completely out of touch and have spent huge amounts of time on policies that they then perform a U-turn on , a fantastic waste of time and money, they deserved to be held accountable, just like Blair and Brown's govt were.

[PRTVR]

Harji said:

Still no hard evidence, just opinions, if it is biased, where is the general "order" to be be biased? Who has said that they must sway to the left? If the whistle has been blown why hasn't it been challenged before? There is no hard evidence because there is no hard evidence. There is no direct order, no emails to say swing left. It's an organisation that challenges current views, and what ppl think is left wing bias I find astonishing ,I've heard the following as proof of left wing bias and it's all bks

Environment - why is this left wing bias?
Climate change - Why is this left wing bias?
Refugees - Why is showing the other side of the Daily Mail hysteria left wing bias?
Challenging the current Tory Govt - Face it this govt is completely out of touch and have spent huge amounts of time on policies that they then perform a U-turn on , a fantastic waste of time and money, they deserved to be held accountable, just like Blair and Brown's govt were.

Bias is leaning towards one point of view, take Refugees, consistently showed on the news pictures of women and children since the start of the crisis, but according to official figures they were predominantly male, then you have the news reporter welcoming illegal immigrants ashore on a Greek island, giving an impression different from what was actually happening, I would call that Bias.

Climate change. I give you

http://www.spectator.co.uk/2012/11/heres-a-bbc-sca...
I could go on but it's obvious you do not want to see.

[markh1973]

PRTVR said:

Harji said:

Still no hard evidence, just opinions, if it is biased, where is the general "order" to be be biased? Who has said that they must sway to the left? If the whistle has been blown why hasn't it been challenged before? There is no hard evidence because there is no hard evidence. There is no direct order, no emails to say swing left. It's an organisation that challenges current views, and what ppl think is left wing bias I find astonishing ,I've heard the following as proof of left wing bias and it's all bks

Environment - why is this left wing bias?
Climate change - Why is this left wing bias?
Refugees - Why is showing the other side of the Daily Mail hysteria left wing bias?
Challenging the current Tory Govt - Face it this govt is completely out of touch and have spent huge amounts of time on policies that they then perform a U-turn on , a fantastic waste of time and money, they deserved to be held accountable, just like Blair and Brown's govt were.

Bias is leaning towards one point of view, take Refugees, consistently showed on the news pictures of women and children since the start of the crisis, but according to official figures they were predominantly male, then you have the news reporter welcoming illegal immigrants ashore on a Greek island, giving an impression different from what was actually happening, I would call that Bias.

Climate change. I give you

http://www.spectator.co.uk/2012/11/heres-a-bbc-sca...
I could go on but it's obvious you do not want to see.

Harji's questin remains - why is climate change left wing bias

[PRTVR]

markh1973 said:

PRTVR said:

Harji said:

Still no hard evidence, just opinions, if it is biased, where is the general "order" to be be biased? Who has said that they must sway to the left? If the whistle has been blown why hasn't it been challenged before? There is no hard evidence because there is no hard evidence. There is no direct order, no emails to say swing left. It's an organisation that challenges current views, and what ppl think is left wing bias I find astonishing ,I've heard the following as proof of left wing bias and it's all bks

Environment - why is this left wing bias?
Climate change - Why is this left wing bias?
Refugees - Why is showing the other side of the Daily Mail hysteria left wing bias?
Challenging the current Tory Govt - Face it this govt is completely out of touch and have spent huge amounts of time on policies that they then perform a U-turn on , a fantastic waste of time and money, they deserved to be held accountable, just like Blair and Brown's govt were.

Bias is leaning towards one point of view, take Refugees, consistently showed on the news pictures of women and children since the start of the crisis, but according to official figures they were predominantly male, then you have the news reporter welcoming illegal immigrants ashore on a Greek island, giving an impression different from what was actually happening, I would call that Bias.

Climate change. I give you

http://www.spectator.co.uk/2012/11/heres-a-bbc-sca...
I could go on but it's obvious you do not want to see.

Harji's questin remains - why is climate change left wing bias

It's bias, something the BBC should avoid should it not ?

[Mr GrimNasty]

markh1973 said:

Harji's questin remains - why is climate change left wing bias

Anti-capitalist, more taxation, more control, wealth redistribution, environmental activists....... How more left-wing could climate change be?

So what is the goal of environmental policy?

“We redistribute de facto the world’s wealth by climate policy,” said Edenhofer.

..........a little more than 5 years ago he also said that “the next world climate summit in Cancun is actually an economy summit during which the distribution of the world’s resources will be negotiated.”

Mad as they are, Edenhofer’s comments are nevertheless consistent with other alarmists who have spilled the movement’s dirty secret. Last year, Christiana Figueres, executive secretary of U.N.’s Framework Convention on Climate Change, made a similar statement.

“This is the first time in the history of mankind that we are setting ourselves the task of intentionally, within a defined period of time, to change the economic development model that has been reigning for at least 150 years, since the Industrial Revolution,” she said in anticipation of last year’s Paris climate summit.

“This is probably the most difficult task we have ever given ourselves, which is to intentionally transform the economic development model for the first time in human history.”

[motco]

Have they never heard of hubris?

[PRTVR]

anonymous said:

[redacted]

I still think they should exclude anything that isn't guaranteed in the rebate,it could all change next year, how do the figures stack up if we include the bill for £1.7 m for hookers ? You know the one Cameron wasn't going to pay.......

[XM5ER]

motco said:

Have they never heard of hubris?

Is that a new boy band?

[blade runner]

Couldn't help but notice the story about how 'Refugee' is apparently the Children's Word of the Year being headline news on BBC TV and radio this morning. Can't help but think that had been 'Star Wars' (which apparently was also a common theme) the story would not be making headline news...