Political bias at BBC - something has to be done surely
Discussion
TTwiggy said:
B'stard Child said:
However the BBC radio stations are not tax free - it's funded by the TV licence fee - which is a tax (if paid) and myself and 26 million other households do.
The remain tax-free to the user if the user chooses not to pay the tax.As do a lot of things but the fact remains that radio is paid for from tax receipts.
As for whether the government would reduce taxation overall if the taxpayer ceased to fund the BBC, of course not. Only an idiot would think the remotely possible. The odds are that they would find some way to increase taxes in the process.
Atomic12C said:
Licence fee scrapped = no licence fee ...... do I think the government would then drop or lower the licence fee ?
Sorry, I'm not following.
If its scrapped then its scrapped, and would then mean the BBC would have to change its funding model.
The options available would generally be (1) commercial advertising funding or (2) subscription based.
And I would think the only viable option would be option (1).
In the days of recording TV, the inconvenience of having to watch full length commercials is no longer a problem. So option (1) would be a winner.
The BBC could then be as biased as it liked, the important factor being that the public would not be forced to directly fund the agenda.
There is one major flaw in the commercial advertising funding model for the BBC. There are only so many potential sponsors out there with cheque books large enough for TV advertising. Surely this would mean attracting existing advertisers from other TV channels, meaning funding would be lowered across the board. Who would survive? What would be the net effect? I think Sky would walk away with it, given their tried & tested advertising/subscription model.Sorry, I'm not following.
If its scrapped then its scrapped, and would then mean the BBC would have to change its funding model.
The options available would generally be (1) commercial advertising funding or (2) subscription based.
And I would think the only viable option would be option (1).
In the days of recording TV, the inconvenience of having to watch full length commercials is no longer a problem. So option (1) would be a winner.
The BBC could then be as biased as it liked, the important factor being that the public would not be forced to directly fund the agenda.
I fear the BBC may disappear into oblivion, which would be a shame, given its history. Joe Public, including yours truly, is getting very fed up with the constant bias, license fee with ever decreasing stuff to watch (F1, live football, Moto GP......). Is there a model that could rescue Aunty BEEB? Is there leadership of sufficiently high calibre & vision to turn it around?
I wish people would stop suggesting advertising as a means to fund the BBC.
One of the big attractions of BBC programming for me, both on tv and radio, is the lack of commercial adverts.
I'm sick of having my intelligence insulted by 'marketeers' and frankly I'm more than happy to pay the licence fee on that basis alone.
One of the big attractions of BBC programming for me, both on tv and radio, is the lack of commercial adverts.
I'm sick of having my intelligence insulted by 'marketeers' and frankly I'm more than happy to pay the licence fee on that basis alone.
zarjaz1991 said:
I wish people would stop suggesting advertising as a means to fund the BBC.
One of the big attractions of BBC programming for me, both on tv and radio, is the lack of commercial adverts.
I'm sick of having my intelligence insulted by 'marketeers' and frankly I'm more than happy to pay the licence fee on that basis alone.
but they do have advertising, they jus advertise their other programmes.One of the big attractions of BBC programming for me, both on tv and radio, is the lack of commercial adverts.
I'm sick of having my intelligence insulted by 'marketeers' and frankly I'm more than happy to pay the licence fee on that basis alone.
TTwiggy said:
My personal take on it is that the BBC adheres to a 'safe' position that mirrors the status quo of the country, with a bias towards the metropolitan middle-class.
I think that as 'PC' became a mainstay of society (and we could argue whether that's for good or bad), the BBC reflected and embraced it.
I think the BBC is generally pro-government (of any colour) but only so long as the government remains centrist.
NOW. The question would be how many people out there paying the licence fee also adhere to this same position. IF this position represents the position of the majority of licence fee payers then I'd say the BBC was doing its best to keep its customers happy. If, as the suggestion seems to be on these pages, they are not then there might be an argument for change.
All of this however, doesn't detract, for me at least, from the fact that, in terms of quality of output, the BBC is good value for money.
i generally agree with all of this,i also agree true neutrality would be fairly hard to achieve. what i feel could be achieved , certainly on major issues is more balanced reporting. I think that as 'PC' became a mainstay of society (and we could argue whether that's for good or bad), the BBC reflected and embraced it.
I think the BBC is generally pro-government (of any colour) but only so long as the government remains centrist.
NOW. The question would be how many people out there paying the licence fee also adhere to this same position. IF this position represents the position of the majority of licence fee payers then I'd say the BBC was doing its best to keep its customers happy. If, as the suggestion seems to be on these pages, they are not then there might be an argument for change.
All of this however, doesn't detract, for me at least, from the fact that, in terms of quality of output, the BBC is good value for money.
i would also like to see an end to people caught not paying the tv licence jailed .
TTwiggy said:
...I think that as 'PC' became a mainstay of society (and we could argue whether that's for good or bad), the BBC reflected and embraced it...
Sorry to quote you out of context, but this comment is part of the problem, perhaps?PC (political correctness) is a paradox and thus unsustainable, and recent polls (the big ones) have overturned 'received opinion' by providing a tory majority and Brexit in short order. So PC perhaps is not a mainstay of UK society.
The BBC was in the vanguard of pushing PC onto the populace - it's a core principle to them.
The bias is not confined to News and Current Affairs - far from it - but that's where the focus is (unsurprisingly).
By contrast Channel 4 News is almost bats
t mental in it's coverage.Stickyfinger said:
News Night: Will we see the BBC now start their campaign to support one side in the French election and hide the BBC anti-brexit bias behind the analysis ?
They seem very quiet on the continence of the economic migrant influx that is still happening, with Greece/Italy reporting more than ever before attempting crossings.They also seemed suspiciously quiet over the new Greece bail out that Germany is having to fund, signs of a weakening EU.
Their pro-EU stance is as strong as ever seemingly going out of their way to make sure the public are not informed of the ever growing problems.
But yes, I'm fairly sure the BBC's default position will be that of supporting the socialist candidate in France.
I did notice they gave a good amount of coverage to the smear campaign that was targetted at their centre-right candidate a few weeks ago.
And yeah, the BBC do promote their own stuff, and really, I don't mind, as often it alerts me to stuff I might not otherwise have known about.
Similarly when ITV etc run trailers for their own programmes...whilst it's technically advertising, it's also in some ways like a service.
It's the REAL adverts I cannot stand. And I don't want them on the BBC.
This is kind of straying away from the actual subject matter, but the BBC is great value overall...bias or otherwise....and frankly I just don't find their bias anywhere near as bad as some suggest.
Save the BBC!
Without the BBC our wallets would be getting raped even more by Murdoch and his ilk, who would also dictate the news agenda. Bias? You ain't seen nuthin' yet!
I repeat - save the BBC!
Similarly when ITV etc run trailers for their own programmes...whilst it's technically advertising, it's also in some ways like a service.
It's the REAL adverts I cannot stand. And I don't want them on the BBC.
This is kind of straying away from the actual subject matter, but the BBC is great value overall...bias or otherwise....and frankly I just don't find their bias anywhere near as bad as some suggest.
Save the BBC!
Without the BBC our wallets would be getting raped even more by Murdoch and his ilk, who would also dictate the news agenda. Bias? You ain't seen nuthin' yet!
I repeat - save the BBC!
zarjaz1991 said:
And yeah, the BBC do promote their own stuff, and really, I don't mind, as often it alerts me to stuff I might not otherwise have known about.
Similarly when ITV etc run trailers for their own programmes...whilst it's technically advertising, it's also in some ways like a service.
It's the REAL adverts I cannot stand. And I don't want them on the BBC.
This is kind of straying away from the actual subject matter, but the BBC is great value overall...bias or otherwise....and frankly I just don't find their bias anywhere near as bad as some suggest.
Save the BBC!
Without the BBC our wallets would be getting raped even more by Murdoch and his ilk, who would also dictate the news agenda. Bias? You ain't seen nuthin' yet!
I repeat - save the BBC!
The thing is with Murdoch and his ilk is that if we do not like what they are offering, we are not obliged to pay for the crap.Similarly when ITV etc run trailers for their own programmes...whilst it's technically advertising, it's also in some ways like a service.
It's the REAL adverts I cannot stand. And I don't want them on the BBC.
This is kind of straying away from the actual subject matter, but the BBC is great value overall...bias or otherwise....and frankly I just don't find their bias anywhere near as bad as some suggest.
Save the BBC!
Without the BBC our wallets would be getting raped even more by Murdoch and his ilk, who would also dictate the news agenda. Bias? You ain't seen nuthin' yet!
I repeat - save the BBC!
I must say that these days, we hardly ever watch terrestrial TV/live programmes - like having a clunky video recorder in a digital age...
(Wife is going through Orange is the New Black on Netflix at the moment..)
chris watton said:
The thing is with Murdoch and his ilk is that if we do not like what they are offering, we are not obliged to pay for the crap.
Great. And what news output do you watch instead if the BBC has been done away with?The BBC is a publicly funded state broadcaster, just like schools they are funded through taxation (ie the licence fee, which is a tax) even if you don;t use them. I won;t ever have children but I don't object to funding schools through taxation.
They really would be better ditching the name 'TV Licence' and just call it what it is - a tax. It makes much more sense like that. Calling it a licence invites comparisons with voluntary subscription models such as Sky and Netflix, which are commercially driven and need to be self-sustaining.
I don't want yet more commercial greed inflicted on me by changing the BBC to a commercial model.
BIANCO said:
I'm sick of these agenda driven none story's they keep pumping out to try and show how bad and eval any policy they don't agree with are.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-latin-america-3904...
Odiously they are trying to imply how traumatizing it is to be deported so they should stop it. Are they going to do one about someone who kills themselves in prison tomorrow?
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-wales-south-west-wale...
Another none story about a guy stopped from going to the US they highlight the fact that he was a Muslim but with no evidence what so ever if that played any part in why he was stopped from going to the US.
I really don't see much bias in these. They are reporting facts. Would you rather it be hushed up?http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-latin-america-3904...
Odiously they are trying to imply how traumatizing it is to be deported so they should stop it. Are they going to do one about someone who kills themselves in prison tomorrow?
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-wales-south-west-wale...
Another none story about a guy stopped from going to the US they highlight the fact that he was a Muslim but with no evidence what so ever if that played any part in why he was stopped from going to the US.
And as for prison suicides, they've just spent an entire week focusing on precisely that! Both Radio 4 and Radio 5 banged on about all week, plus stories like THIS.
I have to say compared to CH4 news the BBC news output is positively unbiased, CH4 news have out done themselves this week their output on political news is unbelievably biased.
Jon Snow lost the plot on Monday whilst trying in vain to stitch up a Trump advisor (who simply smiled and answered the questions) and started asking questions with half assed cod Trump accent, I mean seriously it's meant to be a national news program.
Jon Snow lost the plot on Monday whilst trying in vain to stitch up a Trump advisor (who simply smiled and answered the questions) and started asking questions with half assed cod Trump accent, I mean seriously it's meant to be a national news program.
zarjaz1991 said:
Great. And what news output do you watch instead if the BBC has been done away with?
The BBC is a publicly funded state broadcaster, just like schools they are funded through taxation (ie the licence fee, which is a tax) even if you don;t use them. I won;t ever have children but I don't object to funding schools through taxation.
They really would be better ditching the name 'TV Licence' and just call it what it is - a tax. It makes much more sense like that. Calling it a licence invites comparisons with voluntary subscription models such as Sky and Netflix, which are commercially driven and need to be self-sustaining.
I don't want yet more commercial greed inflicted on me by changing the BBC to a commercial model.
Just a tax, eh. OK, if that is the case, what about diverting that extra tax not at the BBC, which is quite irrelevant to an increasing number of people, I would think, and divert it to the NHS. After all, the BBC have many programmes and talking heads about how ill-funded the NHS is.The BBC is a publicly funded state broadcaster, just like schools they are funded through taxation (ie the licence fee, which is a tax) even if you don;t use them. I won;t ever have children but I don't object to funding schools through taxation.
They really would be better ditching the name 'TV Licence' and just call it what it is - a tax. It makes much more sense like that. Calling it a licence invites comparisons with voluntary subscription models such as Sky and Netflix, which are commercially driven and need to be self-sustaining.
I don't want yet more commercial greed inflicted on me by changing the BBC to a commercial model.
I'd like to see the BBC talk themselves out of that one.
Oh, and no, I do not get any news from BBC sources any longer. And please, do not compare the BBC licence fee with schools!
chris watton said:
Just a tax, eh. OK, if that is the case, what about diverting that extra tax not at the BBC, which is quite irrelevant to an increasing number of people, I would think, and divert it to the NHS. After all, the BBC have many programmes and talking heads about how ill-funded the NHS is.
I'd like to see the BBC talk themselves out of that one.
Oh, and no, I do not get any news from BBC sources any longer. And please, do not compare the BBC licence fee with schools!
Well obviously I don't expect you to concur with my view.I'd like to see the BBC talk themselves out of that one.
Oh, and no, I do not get any news from BBC sources any longer. And please, do not compare the BBC licence fee with schools!
You don't use the BBC so you want it gone and the money given to the NHS, a bottomless pit for which funding has repeatedly proved not to be the answer - but that's for another thread.
It is funded by a ringfenced tax. Hardly unusual. Councils are about to do the same thing with social care precepts. I don't have any need of social care services. SHould I campaign to have it stopped?
The BBC is not perfect - by a long way - and yes sometimes they do show some bias. However, give me the BBC over Murdoch's empire any day.
The BBC is also renowned the world over. For all it's faults it remains a fine institution.
Gassing Station | News, Politics & Economics | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff