Political bias at BBC - something has to be done surely

[Digga]

Bluebarge said:

Really?? She was economics correspondent - nobody paid a blind bit of notice to economics reporters until it all went tits up in 2008, by which time Flanders was on maternity leave.

If it is not the remit of economics correspondents to commentate on and critique the polices and actions of both governments and shadow cabinets then I don't know what is?

Bluebarge said:

And if it's a condition of employment that you mustn't be friendly with any politicians then every news organisation in the country would see their newsroom re-deployed to the traffic department. It's a reporter's job to get friendly with politicians so that they find stuff out FFS.

I think there is a line and I'd say it's been crossed here. As I say, Paxman was pretty clear on his opinions.

[Esseesse]

La Liga said:

Esseesse said:

AnotherClarkey said:

Gargamel said:

The news that the BBC economics correspondent used to date Ed Miliband in 2004 whilst he was at the Treasury hardly helps to dispel the allegations of ingrained political bias.

Milliband used to date Robert Peston? Or are you referring to ex-economics editor Stephanie Flanders who moved from the BBC to that bastion of uber-leftiness JP Morgan Asset Management a couple of years ago?

Didn't the Fed bail out JP Morgan a few years back? Doing such a thing could only be described as being left wing surely?

Which would have what to do with someone working for an organisation that has rather 'right-leaning' economic values?

The Emergency Economic Stabilization Act of 2008, proposed by the Republican Henry Paulson (ex-investment banker), and enacted under a Conservative Government...

Left-wing liberal Bush Government!

Wouldn't the right-wing/capitalist opinion be to allow them to go to the wall? Just because someone is an ex-investment banker does not make them right wing. Corporatism isn't right wing. I'm no expert on the details of the 2008 act, but would it be correct to assume that the government intervened to cover their losses?

[anonymous-user]

Esseesse said:

Wouldn't the right-wing/capitalist opinion be to allow them to go to the wall? Just because someone is an ex-investment banker does not make them right wing. Corporatism isn't right wing. I'm no expert on the details of the 2008 act, but would it be correct to assume that the government intervened to cover their losses?

Hardly. Of all the major US banks JPM was in probably the best financial shape. When Bear failed the Fed approached the only bank with the means to help (like they did previously when JPM bailed out the Fed a hundred years prior!). JPM swallowed Bear whole with treasury backing in a bid to avert the chaos that Lehman eventually precipitated. The Fed backing was due to the purchase of Bear at the Feds request. Later on when TARP was announced, it's a matter of record that Dimon did not want to participate but everyone in that meeting was made to, so that the weakest were not singled out by the markets... 'Too big to fail' by Sorkin is a good read if you're interested.

Interesting list of who took what and how much money the Government made off them...

https://projects.propublica.org/bailout/list

[anonymous-user]

Esseesse said:

La Liga said:

Esseesse said:

AnotherClarkey said:

Gargamel said:

The news that the BBC economics correspondent used to date Ed Miliband in 2004 whilst he was at the Treasury hardly helps to dispel the allegations of ingrained political bias.

Milliband used to date Robert Peston? Or are you referring to ex-economics editor Stephanie Flanders who moved from the BBC to that bastion of uber-leftiness JP Morgan Asset Management a couple of years ago?

Didn't the Fed bail out JP Morgan a few years back? Doing such a thing could only be described as being left wing surely?

Which would have what to do with someone working for an organisation that has rather 'right-leaning' economic values?

The Emergency Economic Stabilization Act of 2008, proposed by the Republican Henry Paulson (ex-investment banker), and enacted under a Conservative Government...

Left-wing liberal Bush Government!

Wouldn't the right-wing/capitalist opinion be to allow them to go to the wall? Just because someone is an ex-investment banker does not make them right wing. Corporatism isn't right wing. I'm no expert on the details of the 2008 act, but would it be correct to assume that the government intervened to cover their losses?

What the Government did went well beyond 'left / right' politics. They stopped an economic disaster from occurring because of the excessive exposure the banking / insurance sectors had. They 'bailed' all the banks out so the individual ones that really needed it weren't indirectly killed off by being seen as the ones which needed help (IIRC).

I can see why you would consider centralised use of tax money to prop up private firms as being 'left', but I don't think there was practically any choice, regardless of how it could be classed.

[NoNeed]

So for the second time in a few days Andrew Neil has had a Labour politician on the ropes and the film link has gone down.

[0000]

^
Here's one, I think, for anyone else interested: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Wqlog7_u3XI

And another, circa 15 mins in: http://www.bbc.co.uk/iplayer/episode/b05s80jr/dail...

Edited by 0000 on Thursday 23 April 16:36

[550M]

No mention today on the BBC of the dismissed Tower Hamlets mayor being ex Labour. I would bet my mortgage that if he was ex Conservative, it would be lead story, rather than 5th or 6th at the moment, and along the lines of 'Disgraced Ex Tory Mayor...'

Jeremy Vines hand holding of Ed Milliband the other lunchtime was cringe worthy. He let Milliband off so obviously after getting him to conceed that his house was worth over £2m. Vine further got him to roughly conceed and that his proposed tax would be in the order of £39,000 per year (after tax income), but he singularly failed to enquire how he would be able to afford it on a PM's salary!!! Afterall he will tax his $142,500 salary at 50%, leaving around £78,000 net of tax. After his 'Millionaires Mansion' tax, he will be left with something short of £40k per year. I guess he must be counting on some sort of Blair type windfall after office.... Absolute BBC fail, but I suppose journalists have never run businesses.

Don't even start me Evan Davis' attempt the other evening. With regard to Davis, his zero interuption approach was blatant compared to hardly letting Cameron or Farage get a word in edgeways. Maitlis' attempts at impartiality on Newsnight last night was just laughable.

I've always held the BBC in high regard, but I am certainly seeing some incredible bias of late.

[0000]

UKIP: BBC licence fee should be cut by two thirds.

[Uncle John]

So how do we get this changed? The bias adjusted????

It is quite appaling at the moment. Impartiality has gone out the window.

[550M]

0000 said:

^
Here's one, I think, for anyone else interested: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Wqlog7_u3XI

And another, circa 15 mins in: http://www.bbc.co.uk/iplayer/episode/b05s80jr/dail...

He does add some balance to the bias! Shame his programme is only watched by three people in the middle of the day. I may start recording it and watch it instead of Newsnight.

[BlackLabel]

Earlier this week Newsnight had a discussion about the government's welfare reforms and the panel consisted of Fraser Nelson, the Spectator journalist, who spoke in favour of the reforms, one chap who was fairly neutral and 4 others who were vehemently against the reforms.

Constant talk of part time jobs, zero hour contract jobs etc went unchallenged even though all the data suggests that the new jobs created under the coalition are full time and permanent jobs.

[rudecherub]

It's fruitcake loon-ery to keep the BBC as it is.

Funded by a regressive tax, the BBC then uses this tax revenue to compete against private business.

There's no way Radio 1 et al can be justified. Even more so the local stations who directly compete against small independent radio.

Privatise the BBC almost entirely.

There is a place for BBC2 and Radio 4/World Service, everything else should be sold.

[steveT350C]

0000 said:

^
Here's one, I think, for anyone else interested: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Wqlog7_u3XI

And another, circa 15 mins in: http://www.bbc.co.uk/iplayer/episode/b05s80jr/dail...

Edited by 0000 on Thursday 23 April 16:36

This is beyond bias, it is total censorship by the BBC.

[McWigglebum4th]

rudecherub said:

It's fruitcake loon-ery to keep the BBC as it is.

Funded by a regressive tax, the BBC then uses this tax revenue to compete against private business.

There's no way Radio 1 et al can be justified. Even more so the local stations who directly compete against small independent radio.

Privatise the BBC almost entirely.

There is a place for BBC2 and Radio 4/World Service, everything else should be sold.

Before i start i will say radio 1 is fking dreadful

But why should the government fund radio 2 and radio 4 but not radio 1?

[JensenA]

andymadmak said:

Bizarrely Flanders is also reported to be an ex squeeze of Mr Balls.
Which makes it all the more curious as to why she was EVER given the job that she had at the BEEB, especially as most of her "Stephanomics" pieces had more bias than a left handed corkscrew.

Still, at least she's not there now. Peston seems slightly more balanced in his output, albeit with a decidedly strange mode of delivery!

That's because he has suffered from quite a severe stammer since childhood, so the way he 'delivers' is his way of dealing with it.

[NoNeed]

0000 said:

^
Here's one, I think, for anyone else interested: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Wqlog7_u3XI

And another, circa 15 mins in: http://www.bbc.co.uk/iplayer/episode/b05s80jr/dail...

Edited by 0000 on Thursday 23 April 16:36

He is possibly the only person at the beeb that gives everyvody a hard time yet he is also the only political interviewer that keeps experiencing technical difficulties.

[McWigglebum4th]

NoNeed said:

He is possibly the only person at the beeb that gives everyvody a hard time yet he is also the only political interviewer that keeps experiencing technical difficulties.

So why don't they fire the right wing tory scumbag if he gives labour a hard time?

[iphonedyou]

McWigglebum4th said:

So why don't they fire the right wing tory scumbag if he gives labour a hard time?

It wasn't even a hard time. They were basic questions that he couldn't answer. I thought Neil was exceptionally restrained until the final minute or two.

Great interviewer, though.

[Emeye]

I have been avoiding any of the Election coverage deliberately, but I accidentally caught the end of the Farage interview last night and then watched Newsnight.

The madness is that the BBC bias goes against common sense.

[anonymous-user]

iphonedyou said:

It wasn't even a hard time. They were basic questions that he couldn't answer. I thought Neil was exceptionally restrained until the final minute or two.

Great interviewer, though.

This.

550M said:

He does add some balance to the bias! Shame his programme is only watched by three people in the middle of the day. I may start recording it and watch it instead of Newsnight.

That's basically what I do. "This Week" is also significantly more interesting than Question Time, which I find completely unwatchable these days.