Political bias at BBC - something has to be done surely

[mywifeshusband]

Not only is the News Quiz a vehicle for the weekly Jeremy Hardy rant but it insists on having that awful Susan Calman on as often as possible. This week one of her responses on the Labour Party enquiry publication turned into a Party Political Broadcast for the SNP.
The News Quiz is billed as satirical quiz. I think they're just taking the piss now.

[davidball]

Andy Zarse said:

Indeed, on Friday Jeremy Hardy was suggesting Litvinenko may have been killed by rogue British military intelligence operatives. At 8.45 mins:

http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/b06wj7bv

Well you've jumped the shark this time old chap.

This man has suckled the BBC test for the best pert of thirty years. Time for him to go.

Satire is completely lost on some people. So is the ability to construct a lucid sentence by the looks of it.

Judging by the reactions, Jeremy Hardy's withering ridicule really hurts the Tories. Keep it up Jeremy.

[turbobloke]

davidball said:

Satire is completely lost on some people. So is the ability to construct a lucid sentence by the looks of it.

Judging by the reactions, Jeremy Hardy's withering ridicule really hurts the Tories. Keep it up Jeremy.

Was he on an extended holiday last April & early May? The lack of hurt back then would explain a lot, then again the news didn't mention him in Labour's post mortem.

[loafer123]

The trouble is that there is nothing funny about the Labour party or it's policies under Chairman Corbyn, so any political comedy show is naturally biased...

[Smiler.]

loafer123 said:

The trouble is that there is nothing funny about the Labour party or it's policies under Chairman Corbyn, so any political comedy show is naturally biased...

Hardly is a massive fan of Corbyn, his diatribe on one of the final shows hosted by the Sandy Hobbit was more current affairs comment that comedy.

It's not about being left or right, it's about being funny & the inability of the BBC to know, or stick to the difference.

It was never a problem when Coren hosted it, nor in the early days of his successor.

[wolfracesonic]

Smiler. said:

First this:

BBC charter review consultation hijacked by left-wing campaign group


Then this:

BBC Chairmanperson Rona Fairhead said:

BBC allows the UK to come together

Conjures up an image of the left engaging in mass onanism during QT

Just had a look at that link, about the 'campaign' group 38 Degrees: Is that the temperature at which a NP&E contributors piss boils?

[turbobloke]

wolfracesonic said:

Smiler. said:

First this:

BBC charter review consultation hijacked by left-wing campaign group


Then this:

BBC Chairmanperson Rona Fairhead said:

BBC allows the UK to come together

Conjures up an image of the left engaging in mass onanism during QT

Just had a look at that link, about the 'campaign' group 38 Degrees: Is that the temperature at which a NP&E contributors piss boils?

You just contributed to NP&E so that must be a rhetorical question and you already know the answer (no) HTH

[Camoradi]

davidball said:

.... Jeremy Hardy's withering ....

We live in hope

[Andy Zarse]

davidball said:

Andy Zarse said:

Indeed, on Friday Jeremy Hardy was suggesting Litvinenko may have been killed by rogue British military intelligence operatives. At 8.45 mins:

http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/b06wj7bv

Well you've jumped the shark this time old chap.

This man has suckled the BBC test for the best pert of thirty years. Time for him to go.

Satire is completely lost on some people. So is the ability to construct a lucid sentence by the looks of it.

Judging by the reactions, Jeremy Hardy's withering ridicule really hurts the Tories. Keep it up Jeremy.

Well satire is certainly lost on the useless unfunny Hardey. You do realise he was making a serious point right? Actually scrub that, you clearly don't...

Jeremy has had free rein to "really hurt the Tories" on national radio and television for over thirty years. For all bar a few short years the result has been a Tory government (and I include Blair's first two terms as essentially Tory and which Jeremy railed against). My first recollection of him was on Now Something Else. Hardey appeared in the persona of "Jeremy the Socialist Boom Operator", who raged against the hated Thatcher, a woman the entire country despised. This satirical character was so successful it led to the nation voting Thatch into power for a third consecutive term.

I leave you to determine the efficacy of his "hurting the Tories" with his biting satire. Tell us david, since you're a self-proclained expert on quantifying the effect of satire and all that kind of you know like, to what extent do you believe Jeremy Hardon's naked support for Jeremy Loonybyn is going to help lead to a Labour victory in 2020?

Edited by Andy Zarse on Monday 25th January 15:33

[davidball]

I am not at all concerned whether Jeremy Hardy's views and comments help Labour into power. I just delight in hearing him prick the Tory buffoons into further attacks on the best media and news service in the world. I refer of course to the BBC. Go to RT.com or Fox News and marvel at how lucky we are.

[chris watton]

davidball said:

I refer of course to the BBC. Go to RT.com or Fox News and marvel at how lucky we are.

In what respect?

And why include Fox news, that is a subscription only news channel? I don't think many would actually pay to receive that.

I just listen to half an hour of Sky news in the early morning, that's more than enough for me for one day.

[Smiler.]

davidball said:

I am not at all concerned whether Jeremy Hardy's views and comments help Labour into power. I just delight in hearing him prick the Tory buffoons into further attacks on the best media and news service in the world. I refer of course to the BBC. Go to RT.com or Fox News and marvel at how lucky we are.

Yes, "let's badger those holding the strings into forcing a break-up of our empire".

I've always considered that lefties are short-sighted so rabid stupidity is not a great leap away.

[davidball]

Sky News? That is a Murdoch propaganda organ isn't it? Enough said.

[chris watton]

davidball said:

Sky News? That is a Murdoch propaganda organ isn't it? Enough said.

I do not know of any 'normal' people who actually speak/think that way!

I guess the difference is that we do not have to pay for Murdoch's offerings, we can stop anytime we like, unlike the BBC, which is a complete irrelevance to our daily televisual lives.

Still, I guess I have to help pay for 38 degree lovers like you to enjoy what you like, while at the same time, slagging off what I pay for to watch/listen to.

[turbobloke]

chris watton said:

davidball said:

I refer of course to the BBC. Go to RT.com or Fox News and marvel at how lucky we are.

In what respect?

And why include Fox news, that is a subscription only news channel? I don't think many would actually pay to receive that.

I just listen to half an hour of Sky news in the early morning, that's more than enough for me for one day.

Same here approx.

RT.com and the channel itself are far better than the BBC for balance on UK news.

The BBC lost its way and its sense of balance / impartiality long ago.

[chris watton]

turbobloke said:

Same here approx.

RT.com and the channel itself are far better than the BBC for balance on UK news.

The BBC lost its way and its sense of balance / impartiality long ago.

I think we have mentioned a few times now, you only had to look and listen to the reactions at the BBC on the morning of the GE to realise that 'They Lost'

It was quite brilliant entertainment, for once. Although unintentional on their part..

(I must stress that I belong to no political party, nor am I a fan of Cameron's version of the Tories..)

[Andy Zarse]

chris watton said:

davidball said:

Sky News? That is a Murdoch propaganda organ isn't it? Enough said.

I do not know of any 'normal' people who actually speak/think that way!

I guess the difference is that we do not have to pay for Murdoch's offerings, we can stop anytime we like, unlike the BBC, which is a complete irrelevance to our daily televisual lives.

Still, I guess I have to help pay for 38 degree lovers like you to enjoy what you like, while at the same time, slagging off what I pay for to watch/listen to.

Anyone who calls a multi-media portal an "organ" in this day and age is basically, well, an organ.

[turbobloke]

chris watton said:

turbobloke said:

Same here approx.

RT.com and the channel itself are far better than the BBC for balance on UK news.

The BBC lost its way and its sense of balance / impartiality long ago.

I think we have mentioned a few times now, you only had to look and listen to the reactions at the BBC on the morning of the GE to realise that 'They Lost'

It was quite brilliant entertainment, for once. Although unintentional on their part..

(I must stress that I belong to no political party, nor am I a fan of Cameron's version of the Tories..)

Again, very similar here.

I haven't watched or listened to any BBC output for several years but do visit their website for a chuckle at times.

Mrs TB watched most of the BBC coverage of 'their' defeat and told me all about the looks on studio faces when the exit poll was announced, and agreed with comments that as the small hours then the morning rolled on with a Conservative majority becoming more obvious, Huw's face took on the countenance of a man who'd just been informed that his dog had been run over. It would have (almost) been worth watching the biased BBC to see that mass deflation happen in real time.

[chris watton]

Andy Zarse said:

chris watton said:

davidball said:

Sky News? That is a Murdoch propaganda organ isn't it? Enough said.

I do not know of any 'normal' people who actually speak/think that way!

I guess the difference is that we do not have to pay for Murdoch's offerings, we can stop anytime we like, unlike the BBC, which is a complete irrelevance to our daily televisual lives.

Still, I guess I have to help pay for 38 degree lovers like you to enjoy what you like, while at the same time, slagging off what I pay for to watch/listen to.

Anyone who calls a multi-media portal an "organ" in this day and age is basically, well, an organ.

Quite!

Oh, and as I mentioned 38 degrees:

"Survey on future of the BBC hijacked by Left-wingers: 92% of respondents were linked to group which sent leading emails to members"

Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3414953/Su...
Follow us: @MailOnline on Twitter | DailyMail on Facebook

Strange, if they are so sure the BBC is so loved by all, why feel the need to do this?

[andymadmak]

davidball said:

I am not at all concerned whether Jeremy Hardy's views and comments help Labour into power. I just delight in hearing him prick the Tory buffoons into further attacks on the best media and news service in the world. I refer of course to the BBC. Go to RT.com or Fox News and marvel at how lucky we are.

Thats an interesting post. You describe the BBC as the best media and news service in the world. OK, how can you be so certain that the BBC is the best as you describe it? Have you travelled extensively? Have you watched many other media outlets around the globe? I suspect not. It's just another one of the lazy assertions that get made. Oh, of course you select the easy target of Fox news as proof of your point. ( I have never seen RT, so I cannot comment on that one) Except nobody is claiming that Fox is either the best, or even unbiased. Indeed, nobody expects Fox to be unbiased. We do however expect the BBC to be unbiased given that

1. We have no choice but to pay for it regardless of whether or not we watch it. (clue, you don't have to pay for Fox unless you want to)
2. The BBC is supposed to be unbiased, and even, from time to time actually claims to be unbiased (between bouts of admitting that it isn't)

Claiming to be unbiased when it is not is deeply damaging to the BBC and its reputation. The BBC has an agenda, and it is not neutral in its pursuit of it!

Now you may assert that the BBC is less biased than most/all other broadcasters, and you might be right in that. Personally I don't know, despite having travelled very extensively in my life and watched an awful lot of foreign news coverage. But so what if it is less biased? The point is that being less biased than Fox is nothing to crow about. It's still biased!

You find Mr Hardy funny no doubt. I sense that you find him funny not so much for his comedic touch or well turned phrase, but rather because he offends people that you don't like, (Conservative voters) . On what is supposed to be an comedy entertainment program do you not think that deliberately offending over a third of the country with stuff that is REALLY not funny is something that the BBC should be doing week after week? Where is the balance?

The fact is that sensible people expect the BBC to abide by its charter and be unbiased. I criticised the BBC the other week for fielding a largely right wing panel, because you see, I am not a hypocrite. I don't turn a blind eye to (the very rare) leanings to the right that the BBC exhibits just because it aligns with my own political view. I criticise those leanings as vehemently as I criticise the BBC when it exhibits (its all rather too frequent) leanings to the left, precisely because bias is wrong either way!

Sadly, this, in a nutshell is the problem with the left minded voter in this country. Anything and everything is fine, including BBC bias, just so long as it's sticking one to the blue voter. If it suits the left wing agenda then its fine, even if its deliberate lies or denial of basic facts. From "no such thing as society" to "spending on the NHS did not crash the world economy" the deliberate misinterpretations and distortions of the left are faithfully regurgitated by the BBC as gospel, often with no right of reply.
The editorial policy of the BBC is led by The Guardian, and any sense of balance or factual reporting has frequently never entered the building, let alone left it!