2) Make sure your point is so incredibly rightwing that ‘neutral’ is dragged significantly right of centre.
3) The ‘new centre’ is shown to the people, UK becomes more right wing.
4) Profit.
>BBC to get tougher scrutiny amid bias concerns
To be welcomed, let’s start with the Tories getting appointed to top jobs at the BBC and an investigation into how the political editor became a talking head for the Johnson government.
No rest until the BBC is as unbiased and neutral as The Telegraph, eh?
(Yes, I know the BBC is publicly owned and The Telegraph isn’t, but the lack of self-awareness is comical…)
I’m interested to hear what a ‘neutral’ position on racism, homophobia etc looks like exactly
Every day I can’t quite work out which way the BBC is meant to be biased.
The BBC has always been somewhat pro-government (whatever the party in charge). OFCOM oversight will only exacerbate such natural bias…
I mean there’s been enough of these incidents that the BBC even commissioned [a report into anti-Israel bias](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Balen_Report). They subsequently blocked its publication all the way to the Supreme Court, allegedly because it was so damning of the BBC.
So when they say “we’ve investigated ourselves and found nothing wrong”, it’s because they’ve locked what they found wrong out of sight in the basement archive, literally. Even someone on the BBC board had to fight to be allowed to read it, and was patted down for recording equipment before being allowed entry.
Do I want political interference in the BBC? No. Do I want a truly independent monitor? Yes.
I thought from the headline…that’s good, as Laura kuensburg has been cited last two elections for breaching rules in pro-Tory rant, and literally concluded an interview with a shadow cabinet minister this week with “thank you for coming today, I doubt many people will believe you”
However it seems the rules are getting tougher to target Lineker and make 3 on 1 ambush panels a 4 or 5 on 1!
I know, let’s set a precedent for BBC interference when we’re about to badly lose an election!
What could go wrong?
By bias do they mean having corbyn potrayed as stalin whilst having sunak in a superman costume? Or giving climate deniers the same platform as scientists? Or how their political top dogs (Laura K and formerly Andren Neil) were rabid tories? Or how management is heavily conservative due to the tories getting to pick the chairman?
Or do they mean having a black dude on Dr.who and not executing Lineker via firing squad for retweeting stuff on his personal twitter account?
>>The BBC was last month accused of offering a “steady diet of woke bias”, with a review of its output suggesting prejudice in coverage of debates over race and gender
fucking embarassing. Actual bottom of the barrel outrage peddling from the govt.
I wrote to the bbc in 2014 and asked them why they kept giving Nigel Farage a platform on Question Time? His party had no MP’s in contrast to the LibDems, Greens, SNP. The BBC told me it was in important topic for discussion their journalists and editors had determined was happening in some communities.
A completely unsatisfactory and lame response as they effectively created, fed and amplified this monstrous and damaging far right movement in this country. With the fag packet of Brexit its cost the country £billions..
Currently Farage and Reform still don’t have any MP’s yet the BeeB still give them disproportionate air time compared to other minority parties and opinions ..
I recently read James O’Brien’s book which explains in detail what’s really going on, I can’t recommend it highly enough- a shocking hijacking of institutions by the far right, business interests and xenophobes in this country… with a bit of Russian interference thrown in for good measure..
We really will rue the day when the BBC are not allowed to call out the whacko’s and crackpots.. just look at Murdoch’s appeasement of Donald Trump on Fox in the US, the ‘anti-woke, othering’ shit the Mail and Express publish day after day, this really is the slippery slope to fascism we’re watching here..
I wish the discussion around this would move from bias to balance. If you have to find an opinion that represents only 1% of expert on a topic, then it would be appropriate to at least acknowledge that in the coverage of a topic. This is precisely what happened with Brexit. You don’t give the 1% of economists 50 % of the air-time to air their views.
This is a good thing, regardless of opinions about the BBCs recent track record on impartiality it should still be the case that a publicly funded service is independently regulated/monitored.
Bias towards the left?
Just look at the BBC interviews of Johnson and Corbyn before the last election (when it mattered) and if you think they were pro-Corbyn you’re senile.
Bias according to the tories (probably):
– If a conservative gets asked any non-softball question at all about anything in any context whatsoever, that’s bias
– If a non conservative doesn’t get called a piece of shit commie live on air, that’s bias
I watched the Culture Secretary being interviewed on Sky News about this this morning.
She was asked repeatedly what evidence they are basing the claim of BBC bias on.
The evidence is apparently some people in the public *feel* like the BBC is biased. That’s it. That’s the entirety of the evidence she could present.
Fucking bullshit as usual. Claiming they represent some kind of silent majority who know all the facts, but we’ll never get to meet them because they go to a different school.
Not being biased is subjective to whoever is watching. News organisations shouldn’t be unbiased or impartial or objective for the sake of being so. Their role is to report the truth. The viewpoint they should report from is a view point of fact.
Everyone knows the sky is blue. Objectivity (as an extreme) would mean having to adopt ‘view from nowhere approach’ have someone with a counterpoint that the sky is green.
What’s ironic are news orgs such as GB News or Fox or OANN that also claim to be unbiased and tben report from a borderline unhinged right-wing POV or just have right-wing grifters doing talking head vids and ranting about something.
Christianne Amanpour put it clearly as “neutrality can mean you are an accomplice to all sorts of evil”
Would these be the bias concerns which the Secretary of State for Culture was unable to name during an interview on Sky News earlier today?
From the states and I always read BBC news page. I do like it, but when the BBC posted a pic of Jeffrey Epstein pictured with Clinton on the front page, it pissed me off. Yes, I know Clinton and Epstein were a thing, but no fucking Trump and Epstein on the front page. Trump is running for president for fucks sake. Makes me rethink the BBC may not be neutral.
How dare it voice opinions of kindness and decency.
Where’s the voice of a complete utter fascist C#nt? y’know , for balance.
Not sure how anyone on any side of the political spectrum can have any justification whatsoever for not labelling Hamas a terrorist organisation. The only reason I can possibly think is if you are so blinded by hatred for Israel you think that their actions (terrorism) were justified. However supporters of ISIS would say their aggression is justified…should we stop labelling them a terrorist organisation? Absolutely spineless disgusting conduct from the BBC. We all know why they won’t call them what they are, and it stinks.
The BBC is obviously biased – the Tories can shut off the money at any time and Johnson appointed his cronies to run it.
To Anyone in this thread who thinks the BBc is ” right wing” you need to go outside and put your feet on the grass and breathe. Just stop it, get some help.
Is the BBC perfect no…..I happen to think its pretty left wing tbh but blimey ol mighty it is not “right wing”
26 comments
1) Say the BBC has to be politically neutral
2) Make sure your point is so incredibly rightwing that ‘neutral’ is dragged significantly right of centre.
3) The ‘new centre’ is shown to the people, UK becomes more right wing.
4) Profit.
>BBC to get tougher scrutiny amid bias concerns
To be welcomed, let’s start with the Tories getting appointed to top jobs at the BBC and an investigation into how the political editor became a talking head for the Johnson government.
No rest until the BBC is as unbiased and neutral as The Telegraph, eh?
(Yes, I know the BBC is publicly owned and The Telegraph isn’t, but the lack of self-awareness is comical…)
I’m interested to hear what a ‘neutral’ position on racism, homophobia etc looks like exactly
Every day I can’t quite work out which way the BBC is meant to be biased.
The BBC has always been somewhat pro-government (whatever the party in charge). OFCOM oversight will only exacerbate such natural bias…
[BBC’s Jeremy Bowen admits he ‘got it wrong’ in Gaza hospital report but has ‘no regrets’ – International editor says he doesn’t ‘feel particularly bad about’ his inaccuracies](https://www.telegraph.co.uk/world-news/2023/11/25/bbc-bowen-wrong-gaza-hospital-no-regrets/)
I mean there’s been enough of these incidents that the BBC even commissioned [a report into anti-Israel bias](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Balen_Report). They subsequently blocked its publication all the way to the Supreme Court, allegedly because it was so damning of the BBC.
So when they say “we’ve investigated ourselves and found nothing wrong”, it’s because they’ve locked what they found wrong out of sight in the basement archive, literally. Even someone on the BBC board had to fight to be allowed to read it, and was patted down for recording equipment before being allowed entry.
Do I want political interference in the BBC? No. Do I want a truly independent monitor? Yes.
I thought from the headline…that’s good, as Laura kuensburg has been cited last two elections for breaching rules in pro-Tory rant, and literally concluded an interview with a shadow cabinet minister this week with “thank you for coming today, I doubt many people will believe you”
However it seems the rules are getting tougher to target Lineker and make 3 on 1 ambush panels a 4 or 5 on 1!
I know, let’s set a precedent for BBC interference when we’re about to badly lose an election!
What could go wrong?
By bias do they mean having corbyn potrayed as stalin whilst having sunak in a superman costume? Or giving climate deniers the same platform as scientists? Or how their political top dogs (Laura K and formerly Andren Neil) were rabid tories? Or how management is heavily conservative due to the tories getting to pick the chairman?
Or do they mean having a black dude on Dr.who and not executing Lineker via firing squad for retweeting stuff on his personal twitter account?
>>The BBC was last month accused of offering a “steady diet of woke bias”, with a review of its output suggesting prejudice in coverage of debates over race and gender
fucking embarassing. Actual bottom of the barrel outrage peddling from the govt.
Just in time for election season.
I’m all for scrutinising the BBC, but let’s hold off until 2025 before the party that [pretended to be a fact checking service](https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2019/nov/19/tories-tweet-anti-labour-posts-under-factcheckuk-brand) during a live debate tightens their hold on the national broadcaster.
I wrote to the bbc in 2014 and asked them why they kept giving Nigel Farage a platform on Question Time? His party had no MP’s in contrast to the LibDems, Greens, SNP. The BBC told me it was in important topic for discussion their journalists and editors had determined was happening in some communities.
A completely unsatisfactory and lame response as they effectively created, fed and amplified this monstrous and damaging far right movement in this country. With the fag packet of Brexit its cost the country £billions..
Currently Farage and Reform still don’t have any MP’s yet the BeeB still give them disproportionate air time compared to other minority parties and opinions ..
I recently read James O’Brien’s book which explains in detail what’s really going on, I can’t recommend it highly enough- a shocking hijacking of institutions by the far right, business interests and xenophobes in this country… with a bit of Russian interference thrown in for good measure..
We really will rue the day when the BBC are not allowed to call out the whacko’s and crackpots.. just look at Murdoch’s appeasement of Donald Trump on Fox in the US, the ‘anti-woke, othering’ shit the Mail and Express publish day after day, this really is the slippery slope to fascism we’re watching here..
Worth a watch on this subject: culture secretary struggles to substantiate bias claims https://twitter.com/KayBurley/status/1749345716999536950
I wish the discussion around this would move from bias to balance. If you have to find an opinion that represents only 1% of expert on a topic, then it would be appropriate to at least acknowledge that in the coverage of a topic. This is precisely what happened with Brexit. You don’t give the 1% of economists 50 % of the air-time to air their views.
This is a good thing, regardless of opinions about the BBCs recent track record on impartiality it should still be the case that a publicly funded service is independently regulated/monitored.
Bias towards the left?
Just look at the BBC interviews of Johnson and Corbyn before the last election (when it mattered) and if you think they were pro-Corbyn you’re senile.
Bias according to the tories (probably):
– If a conservative gets asked any non-softball question at all about anything in any context whatsoever, that’s bias
– If a non conservative doesn’t get called a piece of shit commie live on air, that’s bias
I watched the Culture Secretary being interviewed on Sky News about this this morning.
She was asked repeatedly what evidence they are basing the claim of BBC bias on.
The evidence is apparently some people in the public *feel* like the BBC is biased. That’s it. That’s the entirety of the evidence she could present.
Fucking bullshit as usual. Claiming they represent some kind of silent majority who know all the facts, but we’ll never get to meet them because they go to a different school.
Not being biased is subjective to whoever is watching. News organisations shouldn’t be unbiased or impartial or objective for the sake of being so. Their role is to report the truth. The viewpoint they should report from is a view point of fact.
Everyone knows the sky is blue. Objectivity (as an extreme) would mean having to adopt ‘view from nowhere approach’ have someone with a counterpoint that the sky is green.
What’s ironic are news orgs such as GB News or Fox or OANN that also claim to be unbiased and tben report from a borderline unhinged right-wing POV or just have right-wing grifters doing talking head vids and ranting about something.
Christianne Amanpour put it clearly as “neutrality can mean you are an accomplice to all sorts of evil”
Would these be the bias concerns which the Secretary of State for Culture was unable to name during an interview on Sky News earlier today?
From the states and I always read BBC news page. I do like it, but when the BBC posted a pic of Jeffrey Epstein pictured with Clinton on the front page, it pissed me off. Yes, I know Clinton and Epstein were a thing, but no fucking Trump and Epstein on the front page. Trump is running for president for fucks sake. Makes me rethink the BBC may not be neutral.
How dare it voice opinions of kindness and decency.
Where’s the voice of a complete utter fascist C#nt? y’know , for balance.
Not sure how anyone on any side of the political spectrum can have any justification whatsoever for not labelling Hamas a terrorist organisation. The only reason I can possibly think is if you are so blinded by hatred for Israel you think that their actions (terrorism) were justified. However supporters of ISIS would say their aggression is justified…should we stop labelling them a terrorist organisation? Absolutely spineless disgusting conduct from the BBC. We all know why they won’t call them what they are, and it stinks.
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2024/jan/22/the-tories-send-in-the-clowns-and-bashing-the-bbc-has-never-been-so-laughable
The BBC is obviously biased – the Tories can shut off the money at any time and Johnson appointed his cronies to run it.
To Anyone in this thread who thinks the BBc is ” right wing” you need to go outside and put your feet on the grass and breathe. Just stop it, get some help.
Is the BBC perfect no…..I happen to think its pretty left wing tbh but blimey ol mighty it is not “right wing”