Political bias at BBC - something has to be done surely
Discussion
Dindoit said:
Indeed. Conspiracy nutjobs on either side know 'the truth' and 'see' the obvious bias. I appreciate the pension changes will be the top news story but I wonder how far down the listings will this good news be buried
(ironically taken from BBC Web pages)
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-40644850
(ironically taken from BBC Web pages)
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-40644850
jjlynn27 said:
Dindoit said:
Indeed. Conspiracy nutjobs on either side know 'the truth' and 'see' the obvious bias. A significant portion of my friends see the BBC as a disgusting right wing organisation who aren't happy unless they are bad mouthing the Labour Party or Jeremy Corbyn, and packed with Conservative supporting presenters such as Nick Robinson and Andrew Neil.
I suppose the good news is that if they are receiving criticism from both sides, they must be fairly neutral...
turbobloke said:
andymadmak said:
Mr. White said:
Radio 4 this morning, around 7:55am, interview with the chap from Euratom (German). He was very critical of the EU's negotiating stance. BBC were then desperate to spin it that he was basically the German Nigel Farage. Give it a listen - absolutely blatant.
Yes, they bumped him off air pretty quickly, just so that they could have one of the their own correspondents put the "right spin" on the story. The thing that came out of that piece quite strongly was that the interviewee wanted us to stay in Euratom, which is something that I suspect most people in the UK think is sensible, but it's our government trying to take us out. BBC spin? I don't think so.
dro
said:
said: Absolutely correct TB, the big question is what can be done about it?. I would love to see a programme being made and broadcast on one of the other big channels... BBC Bias and rampant propaganda, or a title to that effect, the BBC really need called to book.
I can't quite see Channel 4 doing it - they're managing to appear even less neutral than the BBC at the moment. 
Some of the problem is that it's not just a BBC bias, but a quite entrenched 'media luvvie' bubble.
jjlynn27 said:
Dindoit said:
Indeed. Conspiracy nutjobs on either side know 'the truth' and 'see' the obvious bias. Lord Marylebone said:
I suppose the good news is that if they are receiving criticism from both sides, they must be fairly neutral...
Although they aren't, they are not neutral by a long way.One of my personal opinions on how to demonstrate neutrality is balance of reporting. It can be accepted that polarised opinions can be put forward, in attempts to draw in the viewer numbers. It is well known that if you get people angry then you get them involved etc.
They can also have content that is very unpatriotic and which can potentially harm such things as the EU negotiations. (This has been argued as being part of democracy - something which we must accept).
BUT if they do not give equal weight of balance to the counter arguments of either right or left.... then neutrality is thrown out of the window.
Something which the BBC demonstrate on a daily basis.
When I ever watch BBC opinion news channel on the work TV, I do not receive an equal left-vs-right weighting of reporting and opinion that is pushed out to the viewer.
The tone of the reporters and opinionists are such that it is obvious it is the left wing angle that is being pushed. When the right wing "balance" is added it is often much shorter time allowed and then often enough the message is spun to leave it open to attack from further BBC opinion.
turbobloke said:
jjlynn27 said:
Dindoit said:
Indeed. Conspiracy nutjobs on either side know 'the truth' and 'see' the obvious bias. Atomic12C said:
Although they aren't, they are not neutral by a long way.
One of my personal opinions on how to demonstrate neutrality is balance of reporting. It can be accepted that polarised opinions can be put forward, in attempts to draw in the viewer numbers. It is well known that if you get people angry then you get them involved etc.
They can also have content that is very unpatriotic and which can potentially harm such things as the EU negotiations. (This has been argued as being part of democracy - something which we must accept).
BUT if they do not give equal weight of balance to the counter arguments of either right or left.... then neutrality is thrown out of the window.
Something which the BBC demonstrate on a daily basis.
When I ever watch BBC opinion news channel on the work TV, I do not receive an equal left-vs-right weighting of reporting and opinion that is pushed out to the viewer.
The tone of the reporters and opinionists are such that it is obvious it is the left wing angle that is being pushed. When the right wing "balance" is added it is often much shorter time allowed and then often enough the message is spun to leave it open to attack from further BBC opinion.
So, in short, BBC isn't balanced, because you feel that it's not balanced?One of my personal opinions on how to demonstrate neutrality is balance of reporting. It can be accepted that polarised opinions can be put forward, in attempts to draw in the viewer numbers. It is well known that if you get people angry then you get them involved etc.
They can also have content that is very unpatriotic and which can potentially harm such things as the EU negotiations. (This has been argued as being part of democracy - something which we must accept).
BUT if they do not give equal weight of balance to the counter arguments of either right or left.... then neutrality is thrown out of the window.
Something which the BBC demonstrate on a daily basis.
When I ever watch BBC opinion news channel on the work TV, I do not receive an equal left-vs-right weighting of reporting and opinion that is pushed out to the viewer.
The tone of the reporters and opinionists are such that it is obvious it is the left wing angle that is being pushed. When the right wing "balance" is added it is often much shorter time allowed and then often enough the message is spun to leave it open to attack from further BBC opinion.
jjlynn27 said:
turbobloke said:
jjlynn27 said:
Dindoit said:
Indeed. Conspiracy nutjobs on either side know 'the truth' and 'see' the obvious bias. The people concerned are listed at various points in this and other similar threads and represent broadcasters at the top of their game after 20+ years in the job who, having retired, are no longer subject to workplace peer pressure or more material threats to their role. The duty of loyalty to a current employer, and self-preservation, no longer stifle their expressions of distate at the bias that surrounded them.
Peter Sissons, BBC news presenter - indicated that when he and other presenters sought guidance they were (are) routinely given copies of The Guardian and told to shape their take on a story that way, "it's all in there".
Dennis Sewell, Radio 4 presenter and Newsnight reporter - demonstrated that the BBC's left-liberal bias extends well beyond news and current affairs into other progamming, via insider information from numerous examples over many years
Robin Aitken, worked inter alia on TV Breakfast News and R4 Today - pointed out that BBC productions originated from journalists for whom neutral means centre left, leading to a false belief in their own impartiality,
Former BBC business editor Jeff Randall commented to BBC News management that the BBC had (has) a clear multicutural agenda and corresponding
pro-multicultural stance but was given the reply: 'The BBC is not neutral in multiculturalism: it believes in it and it promotes it.'
Andrew Marr said:
The BBC is not impartial or neutral.
At a meeting of BBC executives hosted by veteran broadcaster Sue Lawley, the gathered executives admitted the corporation is dominated by left-liberals and people from ethnic minorities, deliberately promotes multiculturalism, is anti-American, anti-countryside and more sensitive to the feelings of Muslims than Christians. At the meeting one veteran BBC executive said: 'There was widespread acknowledgement that we may have gone too far...unfortunately, much of it is so deeply embedded in the BBC's culture, that it is very hard to change it.'This and much more in the same vein is in various BBC Bias threads on PH, together with evidence from output such as the famous moment when R4's James Naughtie let the bias mask slip when interviewing Ed Balls live.
""If we win the election, does Gordon Brown remain Chancellor?"
Interesting read from earlier this year. (Might be a repost).
http://johnredwoodsdiary.com/2017/04/20/the-bbc-wa...
http://johnredwoodsdiary.com/2017/04/20/the-bbc-wa...
turbobloke said:
Usual random ranting.
It didn't miss at all. You just can't see it as your blinkers are on way too tight, unsurprisingly. Take your first example. Peter Sissons; for 20 years happy at BBC milking it for all that's worth, then when the time came for him to be replaced by someone better, he whines about bias.
Ah, what do you know, not only whining about left-wing bias but also ageism, the poor lil lamb.
http://www.walesonline.co.uk/lifestyle/showbiz/age...
Here's a question or three for you.
Does the BBC have political bias?
Is it against your own bias?
If you had the same bias would you think they were politically biased?
The answers are YES, YES and NO or NO, NO and N/A
The thing is that this question actually points to the PH poster own bias much more so than the BBC.
Not going to stop you posting though is it. Dear Points of view ......
If you don't want to watch it or pay for it try the radio. No tv licence and you can pay for that lovely Chris Evans to go down the pub.
Does the BBC have political bias?
Is it against your own bias?
If you had the same bias would you think they were politically biased?
The answers are YES, YES and NO or NO, NO and N/A
The thing is that this question actually points to the PH poster own bias much more so than the BBC.
Not going to stop you posting though is it. Dear Points of view ......
If you don't want to watch it or pay for it try the radio. No tv licence and you can pay for that lovely Chris Evans to go down the pub.
Edited by Gandahar on Thursday 20th July 12:37
turbobloke said:
Criticism from any source, and the relative amounts of it from wherever, aren't evidence for or against bias as criticism like complaints can be tactical or vexatious.
This non-point keeps cropping up for some strange reason.
Evidence is in the output and the way it's produced.
Your criticism is noted This non-point keeps cropping up for some strange reason.
Evidence is in the output and the way it's produced.
chow pan toon said:
turbobloke said:
Criticism from any source, and the relative amounts of it from wherever, aren't evidence for or against bias as criticism like complaints can be tactical or vexatious.
This non-point keeps cropping up for some strange reason.
Evidence is in the output and the way it's produced.
Your criticism is noted This non-point keeps cropping up for some strange reason.
Evidence is in the output and the way it's produced.
jjlynn27 said:
So, in short, BBC isn't balanced, because you feel that it's not balanced?
I did state it was my personal opinion didn't I?So, yes your reply is 100%.
But as TB points out, personal opinion counts for jack schmidt, and as always the crux of the issue is evidence. Which I agree with.
Gandahar said:
Here's a question or three for you.
Does the BBC have political bias?
Is it against your own bias?
If you had the same bias would you think they were politically biased?
Another old chestnut worth zilch.Does the BBC have political bias?
Is it against your own bias?
If you had the same bias would you think they were politically biased?
Personal bias is irrelevant.
I can see there are newspapers which tend to publish material with either a left-liberal bias or a right-libertarian bias. I'm not biased both ways. The ability to identify bias is part of possessing basic independent-minded critical faculties, it works for newspapers and doesn't stop working with the BBC.
If the BBC's output was biased to a centre-right libertarian perspective which would put it closer to my own politics it would be just as objectionable and I would still object, they have a duty to be impartial and moving away in any political direction contravenes this duty. It would also be equally culpable that a national broadcaster thinks they have to ramp any political perspective to make it more accessible, palatable or acceptable. Certainly embarrassing in its own way should it happen, but the liberal left may be more difficult to embarrass.
The licence fee fiasco is also objectionable regardless of the evident and self-confessed liberal-left bias at the BBC.
jjlynn27 said:
It didn't miss at all. You just can't see it as your blinkers are on way too tight, unsurprisingly.
Take your first example. Peter Sissons; for 20 years happy at BBC milking it for all that's worth, then when the time came for him to be replaced by someone better, he whines about bias.
So how about addressing his last point, you know the one where BBC executives actually admitted their left wing bias? Was that just an elaborate practical joke?Take your first example. Peter Sissons; for 20 years happy at BBC milking it for all that's worth, then when the time came for him to be replaced by someone better, he whines about bias.
Gassing Station | News, Politics & Economics | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff