Political bias at BBC - something has to be done surely
Discussion
don4l said:
Smiler. said:
TV programming is worse than dire. The latest offerings, Cuffs & the Coroner are as weak as piss.
I watched Cuffs last night. What an unusual police station. There only seems to be one straight white male officer.This is social engineering. It's a pity, because it is so far from reality that it affects one's ability to enjoy the programme.
Piece by Ed West around the experience of and examples from Dennis Sewell, the author of "A Question of Attitude: The BBC and Bias Beyond News". Sewell, like Sissons, spent more than 20 years working for the biased BBC including News.
Pothole said:
don4l said:
Smiler. said:
TV programming is worse than dire. The latest offerings, Cuffs & the Coroner are as weak as piss.
I watched Cuffs last night. What an unusual police station. There only seems to be one straight white male officer.This is social engineering. It's a pity, because it is so far from reality that it affects one's ability to enjoy the programme.
don4l said:
Pothole said:
don4l said:
Smiler. said:
TV programming is worse than dire. The latest offerings, Cuffs & the Coroner are as weak as piss.
I watched Cuffs last night. What an unusual police station. There only seems to be one straight white male officer.This is social engineering. It's a pity, because it is so far from reality that it affects one's ability to enjoy the programme.
WinstonWolf said:
Either I had LSD on my cornflakes or Labour took a bashing on BBC Breakfast this morning 
Gordon Brown took a bashing or two. Where the wider interests of Labour aren't being served, including by Labour, a bashing is always possible. The sample size remains small.In other rumours a Conservative politician appeared on QT.
AstonZagato said:
WinstonWolf said:
Either I had LSD on my cornflakes or Labour took a bashing on BBC Breakfast this morning
I think the BBC has a problem with Corbyn and his acolytes. If it were Andy Burnham or Yvette Cooper running things, the coverage would have been different I suspect.WinstonWolf said:
Either I had LSD on my cornflakes or Labour took a bashing on BBC Breakfast this morning
I think the BBC are more moderate left and Blairite. As said, Brown and even little Ed took a bashing on the BBC. They liked David and had massive boners when Dan Jarvis and Chuka Umunna were in the slot as leadership candidates. They don't seem to like poor old Corbyn. 
motco said:
don4l said:
Pothole said:
don4l said:
Smiler. said:
TV programming is worse than dire. The latest offerings, Cuffs & the Coroner are as weak as piss.
I watched Cuffs last night. What an unusual police station. There only seems to be one straight white male officer.This is social engineering. It's a pity, because it is so far from reality that it affects one's ability to enjoy the programme.
regards,
Jet
turbobloke said:
BBC left wing bias is not just in news coverage but in everything else that it does
Piece by Ed West around the experience of and examples from Dennis Sewell, the author of "A Question of Attitude: The BBC and Bias Beyond News". Sewell, like Sissons, spent more than 20 years working for the biased BBC including News.
I think the comment by Dennis Sewell at the end of that article sums it up nicely, “While the BBC has a natural and instinctive understanding of liberal ideas and values, its grasp of conservative ideas and values is far less assured.”Piece by Ed West around the experience of and examples from Dennis Sewell, the author of "A Question of Attitude: The BBC and Bias Beyond News". Sewell, like Sissons, spent more than 20 years working for the biased BBC including News.
Precisely.
AstonZagato said:
WinstonWolf said:
Either I had LSD on my cornflakes or Labour took a bashing on BBC Breakfast this morning
I think the BBC has a problem with Corbyn and his acolytes. If it were Andy Burnham or Yvette Cooper running things, the coverage would have been different I suspect.2hoots said:
Johnnytheboy said:
I'm not forced to pay for Fox News in order to be allowed to watch TV.
Just how do you think commercial media receive income and where, ultimately, do you think that money comes from?It may not be as direct a route but it's the same ultimate payee, you and I.
R4 this morning at 8am we heard about Any Questions and how John McDonnell would be on, then we heard about the interview coming up after the news with Hilary Benn, then we heard the news headlines which were Jeremy Corbyn something and Ken livingstone said something about Tony Blair being a scoundrel.
Smiler. said:
Gandahar said:
Biased people bashing the BBC for being biased
Next post
Next post
Next post
Feel free to continue, I am sure you will. Airbrush this post out in your minds so it does upset your crusade
You know how well crusades do ?
Erm, OK. Next post
Next post
Next post
Feel free to continue, I am sure you will. Airbrush this post out in your minds so it does upset your crusade
You know how well crusades do ?
Posts like that should come with a nutter alert.
I suggest a repeat prescription before they run out next time,
😃
Totally.
Sissons and Sewell were BBC people for over 20 years each and even as whistleblowers on the bias they clearly had to deliver the propaganda when paid to do so but are not biased simply because they could see what was going on and let the outside world know at some point.
Not that we needed to be told, but it represents additional and totally credible evidence that remains impossible to ignore.
People are not biased themselves who can see bias in both the Daily Mail and The Guardian. Which is easy to do. According to Gandahar such people must be biased in both political directions at the same time...reductio ad absurdum applies.
A key point remains that those newspapers do not have a duty to remain impartial, the BBC does.
The only time that such a nonsensical claim arises is when certain people's desperate apologism over the massively left-wing biased BBC runs out of steam and heads off into Alice territory.
The rest know it's so from use of the human senses and from the admission of senior experienced beeb staffers.
Sissons and Sewell were BBC people for over 20 years each and even as whistleblowers on the bias they clearly had to deliver the propaganda when paid to do so but are not biased simply because they could see what was going on and let the outside world know at some point.
Not that we needed to be told, but it represents additional and totally credible evidence that remains impossible to ignore.
People are not biased themselves who can see bias in both the Daily Mail and The Guardian. Which is easy to do. According to Gandahar such people must be biased in both political directions at the same time...reductio ad absurdum applies.
A key point remains that those newspapers do not have a duty to remain impartial, the BBC does.
The only time that such a nonsensical claim arises is when certain people's desperate apologism over the massively left-wing biased BBC runs out of steam and heads off into Alice territory.
The rest know it's so from use of the human senses and from the admission of senior experienced beeb staffers.
Aside from the way that much of the current affairs is concentrated in telling the viewer/listener what to think, what really narks me is that BBC comedy on R4 used to be better than 1st class.
The Friday evening 18.30 slot used to be a listening highlight.
Now it's based around a ubiquitous bunch of politically one-side types with not concern for topicality.
I happened across a programme from 1998 which I'd not heard before ( Bussmann & Quantick Kingsize It's the sort of thing that comics used to do really well & was frequent on the BBC.
Now, it's either Susan "take my wife" Calman, Marcus "who pant's an I trying to get inside" this week" Brigstocke or Jeremy "Tory, Tory, Tory, benefit yawn yawn" Hardly spouting the same old right-on lefty popularist mind-bite b
ks.
Bunch of arse!
The Friday evening 18.30 slot used to be a listening highlight.
Now it's based around a ubiquitous bunch of politically one-side types with not concern for topicality.
I happened across a programme from 1998 which I'd not heard before ( Bussmann & Quantick Kingsize It's the sort of thing that comics used to do really well & was frequent on the BBC.
Now, it's either Susan "take my wife" Calman, Marcus "who pant's an I trying to get inside" this week" Brigstocke or Jeremy "Tory, Tory, Tory, benefit yawn yawn" Hardly spouting the same old right-on lefty popularist mind-bite b
ks.Bunch of arse!
turbobloke said:
Totally.
Sissons and Sewell were BBC people for over 20 years each and even as whistleblowers on the bias they clearly had to deliver the propaganda when paid to do so but are not biased simply because they could see what was going on and let the outside world know at some point.
So they're hypocrites then? Taking the money whilst doing something they now profess is wrong? Alternatively, perhaps they're bitter that they have been replaced by shiny new reporters?Sissons and Sewell were BBC people for over 20 years each and even as whistleblowers on the bias they clearly had to deliver the propaganda when paid to do so but are not biased simply because they could see what was going on and let the outside world know at some point.
turbobloke said:
Not that we needed to be told, but it represents additional and totally credible evidence that remains impossible to ignore.
What have the other hundreds of BBC reporters got to say about it. Surely if it was endemic then every retired ex journo would be claiming it?turbobloke said:
A key point remains that those newspapers do not have a duty to remain impartial, the BBC does.
The only time that such a nonsensical claim arises is when certain people's desperate apologism over the massively left-wing biased BBC runs out of steam and heads off into Alice territory.
And the BBC attempts impartiality broadly across its output but it has to represent and incorporate a wide range of opinions and viewpoints.The only time that such a nonsensical claim arises is when certain people's desperate apologism over the massively left-wing biased BBC runs out of steam and heads off into Alice territory.
Please point me to any other media organisation which manages to be suitably impartial. Perhaps its something which is really difficult to do? You can't please all the people all the time ( therefore you can always find examples that fit your argument).
turbobloke said:
The rest know it's so from use of the human senses and from the admission of senior experienced beeb staffers.
To paraphrase : because you say so, supported by some grumpy old hypocrites who have been moved on...2hoots said:
Johnnytheboy said:
I'm not forced to pay for Fox News in order to be allowed to watch TV.
Just how do you think commercial media receive income and where, ultimately, do you think that money comes from?It may not be as direct a route but it's the same ultimate payee, you and I.
tangerine_sedge said:
turbobloke said:
Totally.
Sissons and Sewell were BBC people for over 20 years each and even as whistleblowers on the bias they clearly had to deliver the propaganda when paid to do so but are not biased simply because they could see what was going on and let the outside world know at some point.
So they're hypocrites then? Taking the money whilst doing something they now profess is wrong? Alternatively, perhaps they're bitter that they have been replaced by shiny new reporters?Sissons and Sewell were BBC people for over 20 years each and even as whistleblowers on the bias they clearly had to deliver the propaganda when paid to do so but are not biased simply because they could see what was going on and let the outside world know at some point.
Moira Stuart and BBC Ageism (female flavour):
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/1564966/Moi...
http://blogs.new.spectator.co.uk/2013/05/its-not-j...
Both Sissons and Sewell had highly successful careers. So did many others on the other side of the cameras, many with shiny pants from sitting in offices wasting tens of millions of licence fee money. Canned IT project anyone?
Whistleblowing is welcome at any time, those who take that step are doing everyone else a favour - except from a perverse viewpoint in which they can't work in a role long enough to know what's going on and gain several examples over time, they should just make some instant arbitrary claim as per those who think the BBC isn't massively biased in the face of overwhelming evidence that it is.
tangerine_sedge said:
turbobloke said:
Not that we needed to be told, but it represents additional and totally credible evidence that remains impossible to ignore.
What have the other hundreds of BBC reporters got to say about it. Surely if it was endemic then every retired ex journo would be claiming it?That said, a fair number of BBC staffers have 'confessed'.
We are biased, say stars of BBC news:
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-411846/We-...
BBC bias is a national disgrace and a global menace:
http://www.thecommentator.com/article/32/bbc_bias_...
The BBC is biased,and it is a bias that seriously distorts public debate:
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-436794/Wha...
Former Director General Mark Thomson "massive left-wing bias at the BBC":
http://www.newstatesman.com/uk-politics/2010/09/le...
Note that the primary sources for the above articles are BBC people, not the mix of outlets covering their accounts of massive left-wing BBC bias.
If anyone thinks Thompson being up-front with the 'historical' defence, they should take a look at the BBC website now, Science pages, where from a count by another PHer earlier today the first 7 or 8 stories and 11 altogether are pro-climate change propaganda, a topic which as confessed by a member of one of the BBC's favourite organsisations (UN, Ottmar Edenhofer) has nothing to do with environmentalism any more and is about international redistribution of the world's wealth via climate policy. Leftism at its best.
tangerine_sedge said:
turbobloke said:
A key point remains that those newspapers do not have a duty to remain impartial, the BBC does.
The only time that such a nonsensical claim arises is when certain people's desperate apologism over the massively left-wing biased BBC runs out of steam and heads off into Alice territory.
And the BBC attempts impartiality broadly across its output but it has to represent and incorporate a wide range of opinions and viewpoints.The only time that such a nonsensical claim arises is when certain people's desperate apologism over the massively left-wing biased BBC runs out of steam and heads off into Alice territory.
tangerine_sedge said:
Please point me to any other media organisation which manages to be suitably impartial.
Is that an acknowledgement of left-wing BBC bias? The above point, often punted by BBC apologists, is of course wholly irrelevant.
Since no other UK media outlet is a national broadcaster soaking up licence fees while carrying a duty to remain impartial (fail) no other media organisation needs to be 'suitably impartial'.
Gassing Station | News, Politics & Economics | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff