Political bias at BBC - something has to be done surely

[eccles]

Stickyfinger said:

eccles said:

Sadly that type of interrupting interview has become the norm because politicians will not answer a simple yes/no question with a yes/no.
It is however, immensely frustrating when they don't even give the politician the chance to give some kind of answer.

And ask VERY complicated questions that should NEVER be answered with a Yes or No. Life is not a Twitter feed mate:

I'll take your word on Twitter.
Are you saying you're happy with the ways politicians answer questions?

[Stickyfinger]

eccles said:

I'll take your word on Twitter.
Are you saying you're happy with the ways politicians answer questions?

Nope, never have been but that is the nature of the beast. I also do not think the real world has any use for a yes/no answer. Life is a little more complicated than the world of children and twitter.

Ask your doctor, a scientist, an engineer, ask anyone if there is a 100% gold plated Yes/No answer...... with the possible exception "should I eat my greens mummy ?"

[eccles]

Stickyfinger said:

eccles said:

I'll take your word on Twitter.
Are you saying you're happy with the ways politicians answer questions?

Nope, never have been but that is the nature of the beast. I also do not think the real world has any use for a yes/no answer. Life is a little more complicated than the world of children and twitter.

Ask your doctor, a scientist, an engineer, ask anyone if there is a 100% gold plated Yes/No answer...... with the possible exception "should I eat my greens mummy ?"

There are plenty of occasions when a yes/no answer is appropriate. Paxman/Howard being just one famous occasion.

[LimaDelta]

rdjohn said:

The BBC's mission is not to represent anyone's personal viewpoint. It is to enrich people's lives with programmes and services that inform, educate and entertain. In the main, they do a fairly good job achieving this objective.

The license fee is peanuts compared to a SKY, Netflix or Amazon subscription. The alternative, prevalent in the USA, of fake, or scare, TV news, is a far more worrying trend than any perceived shortcomings of the BBC.

Despite the fact they may actually accurately represent your viewpoint.

The problem is that what they are informing is frequently factually inaccurate, and as I've stated before I don't want them to reflect my opinions, or the opinion of anyone else. That is the nature of impartiality. At the risk of repeating my self, centrist does not equal impartial.

As for the cost, it is the principle more than anything. Imagine if the government suddenly made subscriptions to the Countryside Alliance compulsory for those wishing to visit the sticks. But But!! I'm a vegetarian! this is an outrage! Why is my money funding these terrible people? Not that hard to see how it works the other way is it? Do you think the cost argument (or that fact that one can choose not to watch any TV, just like one can choose never to see trees and fields in my hypothetical) would work in that scenario? Oh but it's only this much a month, it doesn't really matter. The Pinkos would be vandalising war memorials before you could blink!

[Biker 1]

eccles said:

Sadly that type of interrupting interview has become the norm because politicians will not answer a simple yes/no question with a yes/no.
It is however, immensely frustrating when they don't even give the politician the chance to give some kind of answer.

I think Paxman may have invented the genre of aggressive 'interviewing' some years ago. It seems to have got steadily worse & almost out of hand, to a point where I would rather listen to someone running their fingers down a blackboard than watch many of the news/political shows on TV or radio. I had the misfortune recently of being in a colleague's car with Radio 4 This Morning. I haven't listened to morning commute time radio for years - god it was awful!!! Can people seriously listen to this st in the morning? What a depressing way to start a workday. I suppose Chris Evans would be marginally worse. Thank fk for Google Play Music.....

[rdjohn]

LimaDelta said:

rdjohn said:

The BBC's mission is not to represent anyone's personal viewpoint. It is to enrich people's lives with programmes and services that inform, educate and entertain. In the main, they do a fairly good job achieving this objective.

The license fee is peanuts compared to a SKY, Netflix or Amazon subscription. The alternative, prevalent in the USA, of fake, or scare, TV news, is a far more worrying trend than any perceived shortcomings of the BBC.

Despite the fact they may actually accurately represent your viewpoint.

The problem is that what they are informing is frequently factually inaccurate, and as I've stated before I don't want them to reflect my opinions, or the opinion of anyone else. That is the nature of impartiality. At the risk of repeating my self, centrist does not equal impartial.

As for the cost, it is the principle more than anything. Imagine if the government suddenly made subscriptions to the Countryside Alliance compulsory for those wishing to visit the sticks. But But!! I'm a vegetarian! this is an outrage! Why is my money funding these terrible people? Not that hard to see how it works the other way is it? Do you think the cost argument (or that fact that one can choose not to watch any TV, just like one can choose never to see trees and fields in my hypothetical) would work in that scenario? Oh but it's only this much a month, it doesn't really matter. The Pinkos would be vandalising war memorials before you could blink!

It's a tax - perhaps the only one that is hypothecated.

I pay a fortune in tax for motoring, yet the roads are in a dreadful state. We get a vote every so often to try to change these things, but I do not live my life with any great expectation that they will.

The key word that I think is important is sceptical, rather than impartial. Only this week, the Board have censured the News team for not representing Corbyn fairly. If they are getting flack from both ends of the political spectrum, they may just be getting it about right.

[LimaDelta]

rdjohn said:

It's a tax - perhaps the only one that is hypothecated.

I pay a fortune in tax for motoring, yet the roads are in a dreadful state. We get a vote every so often to try to change these things, but I do not live my life with any great expectation that they will.

The key word that I think is important is sceptical, rather than impartial. Only this week, the Board have censured the News team for not representing Corbyn fairly. If they are getting flack from both ends of the political spectrum, they may just be getting it about right.

Roads are just roads, they don't claim excellence or impartiality.

Corbyn was addressed earlier in the thread:

hidetheelephants said:

he stole the Islington darlings' trainset and won't give it back, so they hate him.

Nail-head.

I'm not saying BBC would, or could change, I don't watch it and my life is non the poorer for it. There are plenty of other (and better) sources out there. I resent paying for an organisation so at odds with my own views on so many things.

[eccles]

Biker 1 said:

eccles said:

Sadly that type of interrupting interview has become the norm because politicians will not answer a simple yes/no question with a yes/no.
It is however, immensely frustrating when they don't even give the politician the chance to give some kind of answer.

I think Paxman may have invented the genre of aggressive 'interviewing' some years ago. It seems to have got steadily worse & almost out of hand, to a point where I would rather listen to someone running their fingers down a blackboard than watch many of the news/political shows on TV or radio. I had the misfortune recently of being in a colleague's car with Radio 4 This Morning. I haven't listened to morning commute time radio for years - god it was awful!!! Can people seriously listen to this st in the morning? What a depressing way to start a workday. I suppose Chris Evans would be marginally worse. Thank fk for Google Play Music.....

But after performances like Teresa Mays on the Andrew Marr show where she wouldn't answer a simple question about Trident you can see why interviewers get frustrated.

[PRTVR]

eccles said:

Biker 1 said:

eccles said:

Sadly that type of interrupting interview has become the norm because politicians will not answer a simple yes/no question with a yes/no.
It is however, immensely frustrating when they don't even give the politician the chance to give some kind of answer.

I think Paxman may have invented the genre of aggressive 'interviewing' some years ago. It seems to have got steadily worse & almost out of hand, to a point where I would rather listen to someone running their fingers down a blackboard than watch many of the news/political shows on TV or radio. I had the misfortune recently of being in a colleague's car with Radio 4 This Morning. I haven't listened to morning commute time radio for years - god it was awful!!! Can people seriously listen to this st in the morning? What a depressing way to start a workday. I suppose Chris Evans would be marginally worse. Thank fk for Google Play Music.....

But after performances like Teresa Mays on the Andrew Marr show where she wouldn't answer a simple question about Trident you can see why interviewers get frustrated.

Let's look at this another way, our nuclear deterrent is perhaps our most top secret, its ability or lack of should not be commonly discussed, if you start talking down the system do you not end up reducing the deterrent part of the weapon ?
I think TM was right in not answering the questions.

[Guybrush]

eccles said:

Biker 1 said:

eccles said:

Sadly that type of interrupting interview has become the norm because politicians will not answer a simple yes/no question with a yes/no.
It is however, immensely frustrating when they don't even give the politician the chance to give some kind of answer.

I think Paxman may have invented the genre of aggressive 'interviewing' some years ago. It seems to have got steadily worse & almost out of hand, to a point where I would rather listen to someone running their fingers down a blackboard than watch many of the news/political shows on TV or radio. I had the misfortune recently of being in a colleague's car with Radio 4 This Morning. I haven't listened to morning commute time radio for years - god it was awful!!! Can people seriously listen to this st in the morning? What a depressing way to start a workday. I suppose Chris Evans would be marginally worse. Thank fk for Google Play Music.....

But after performances like Teresa Mays on the Andrew Marr show where she wouldn't answer a simple question about Trident you can see why interviewers get frustrated.

It was a pointless question, just designed so the big picture could be obscured. As a general point to all who are fascinated by the answer to the question: The country is surely entitled to keep quiet about what happens when military systems are being tested and in any case what could be done if we knew the system has teething troubles? (Hardly a surprise surely.) Abandon it as a result?

[gizlaroc]

eccles said:

But after performances like Teresa Mays on the Andrew Marr show where she wouldn't answer a simple question about Trident you can see why interviewers get frustrated.

That was a question that shouldn't have been asked. Very poor interviewing, and even worse the fact the BBC were all over it for the rest of the day.

[Murph7355]

Strocky said:

It sounds like you don't want any of our elected MP's or Theresa May to be asked any tough questions, snowflake

If you demonstrated that you understood what I wrote I might take your "insult" a little more seriously, flower.

eccles said:

But after performances like Teresa Mays on the Andrew Marr show where she wouldn't answer a simple question about Trident you can see why interviewers get frustrated.

This is what I was referring to. He'd already been badgering her for 5mins before asking that question, so the whole interview was already compromised.

I'd have been much more impressed with her if she'd said something along the lines of "Andrew, the results of weapons testing etc are not something I'm prepared to discuss on a TV show" and kept him in that box. However I suspect if he'd been more sensible in his earlier questioning he might have actually received a better response. She was buying herself time to be rid of his idiocy.

His job is to extract answers on relevant and appropriate (nuclear weapons testing results are not) questions. In being combative and trying to make himself look like a hard nut he effectively killed the interview and we ended up with nothing of substance from it.

He would do well to look at David Frost or, more recently, Andrew Neil. Both were/are far better at knowing when to speak, when to be quiet and being informed on the topics they're asking about. You'll never stop a politician being slippery, especially when they've erred. But techniques like he uses and that seem to be becoming prevalent on the BBC (there's a woman on Look East who tries it and she looks cringeworthy in the process - obviously got the memo but incapable of delivery) just lead to more of the same.

[eccles]

PRTVR said:

eccles said:

Biker 1 said:

eccles said:

Sadly that type of interrupting interview has become the norm because politicians will not answer a simple yes/no question with a yes/no.
It is however, immensely frustrating when they don't even give the politician the chance to give some kind of answer.

I think Paxman may have invented the genre of aggressive 'interviewing' some years ago. It seems to have got steadily worse & almost out of hand, to a point where I would rather listen to someone running their fingers down a blackboard than watch many of the news/political shows on TV or radio. I had the misfortune recently of being in a colleague's car with Radio 4 This Morning. I haven't listened to morning commute time radio for years - god it was awful!!! Can people seriously listen to this st in the morning? What a depressing way to start a workday. I suppose Chris Evans would be marginally worse. Thank fk for Google Play Music.....

So after it's headline news all over the world, you shouldn't ask the prime minister if she knew there was a problem with it when she lobbied for it to be renewed?
But after performances like Teresa Mays on the Andrew Marr show where she wouldn't answer a simple question about Trident you can see why interviewers get frustrated.

Let's look at this another way, our nuclear deterrent is perhaps our most top secret, its ability or lack of should not be commonly discussed, if you start talking down the system do you not end up reducing the deterrent part of the weapon ?
I think TM was right in not answering the questions.

[johnxjsc1985]

"So Donald Trump hasn't delivered massive change yet" says John Soper on the 10 o'clock News. WTF is this its Monday the first Monday of his tenure and they are already being negative?.

[Stickyfinger]

Spot the agenda did not take long did it

[johnxjsc1985]

Stickyfinger said:

Spot the agenda did not take long did it

I had to rewind it and listen again but he said it twice. Its just poor journalism .Surely there is nothing to report until possibly May visits and then stupid questions about Trade Deals and Brexit and Churchill's bust will fly. I think a news Blackout until May would be a good idea I really do.

[Stickyfinger]

see E Davis is brown nosing Mandy....one of the guys who fkED up the UK economy.......he is about to kiss him I think. Sycophantic tt is holding a love in.

[Biker 1]

I don't think this is necessarily a case of bias, but wasn't sure which forum to post it....
Anyway, surely people have better things to do than talk politics with strangers, particularly on a plane:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/video_and_audio/headline...

[chris watton]

Biker 1 said:

I don't think this is necessarily a case of bias, but wasn't sure which forum to post it....
Anyway, surely people have better things to do than talk politics with strangers, particularly on a plane:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/video_and_audio/headline...

Love the claps and cheers from the other passengers as she's escorted off the plane.

[Don]

chris watton said:

Biker 1 said:

I don't think this is necessarily a case of bias, but wasn't sure which forum to post it....
Anyway, surely people have better things to do than talk politics with strangers, particularly on a plane:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/video_and_audio/headline...

Love the claps and cheers from the other passengers as she's escorted off the plane.

I'm astonished that anyone thinks going off on one in public is OK. Gobby cow.

The sort of gobbiness that gets into bad situations, frankly, when they meet the right psycho...