BBC bias in question (which way do they lean?)

The BBC has obviously been stung by this thread, hence the disclaimer at the beginning of each Radio 4 outside broadcast that the audience has not been selected by themselves.
And then Charles Moore noticed that:
"Throughout the election campaign, BBC Radio 4’s Today is travelling the country, presenting the programme from university premises. This means that the audience and subject matter are automatically skewed against the Conservatives and (much more important) against any plurality of view on anything."
Couldn't have put it better myself.

 
I think the BBC may be engaged in delay tactics over complaints about the Andrew Marr show bias accusations. Just received this:

Thanks for contacting the BBC.

This is an update to let you know that we had referred your complaint to the relevant people and regret that it may take a little longer before we can reply. Please do not contact us in the meantime.

Although we reply to most complaints within 2 weeks we cannot achieve this every time. It depends on what your complaint was about and how many others we are handling, or may sometimes be due to more practical issues. For example a production team may already be working on another programme or have gone on location.

Please don’t reply to this email because it’s sent from an account which can’t receive replies. If you do need to get in touch, please use our webform instead at www.bbc.co.uk/complaints, quoting your reference number.

For full details of our complaints process please visit: Complaints | Contact the BBC.

In the meantime thank you for contacting us - we appreciate your patience.

Kind regards

BBC Complaints Team
www.bbc.co.uk/complaints

This was my complaint:

I've just watched the Andrew Marr show and am extremely surprised the Prime Minister did not get up and walk out. I've never watched a more hostile and biased intervew on any channel, and Marr has previous for the tactics he uses against his Conservative interviewees.

During a General Election period and at a time of a serious terrorist incident the general public are entitled to hear uninterupted responses to posed topical questions and in his interview, if you can call it that, of the PM he was constantly interupted, talked over, harrassed and treated rudely.

On no interview with any Labour politician in recent times was the interviewee subjected to any remotely similar treatment, absolutely shockingly biased treatment. You should hang your collective heads in shame.

I hope the PM tells you where to go over the Andrew Neil interview. He's much better than anyone else on TV but he would be well within his rights to quote Marrs pathetic excuse for a show for a reason not to appear.

Talk about shooting yourselves in the foot! 
 

Hippohunter

Old-Salt
Definitely anti Scotland and anti SNP in particular, this became very evident in the 2014 Scottish referendum and has got even worse since.
 

Themanwho

LE
Book Reviewer
Definitely anti Scotland and anti SNP in particular, this became very evident in the 2014 Scottish referendum and has got even worse since.
Whilst I can heartily sympathise with being anti SNP, the bbc has a duty to be fair to all parties. Can you evidence your claim?

As for anti Scottish? Nah...
 
Interesting moment there. If the Tories sense there are votes in making the BBC self - funding, the corporation could be in trouble.
It didn't have to be this way. I'm not a big fan of commercial stations with shit shows and riddled with adverts. Paying out massive salaries while pontificating and dumbing down to the masses was never a good plan. Red Andy earns at least 15 times the average wage. That wouldn't happen in a socialist utopia.

I remember when there were three channels and ITV had some informative shows. Lowest common denominator programming is a wasted opportunity. Can't be much good for the environment either. At least pay TV would soon show what the viewers really wanted rather than agendas being forced on the viewers.
 
It didn't have to be this way. I'm not a big fan of commercial stations with shit shows and riddled with adverts. Paying out massive salaries while pontificating and dumbing down to the masses was never a good plan. Red Andy earns at least 15 times the average wage. That wouldn't happen in a socialist utopia.

I remember when there were three channels and ITV had some informative shows. Lowest common denominator programming is a wasted opportunity. Can't be much good for the environment either. At least pay TV would soon show what the viewers really wanted rather than agendas being forced on the viewers.
Unfortunately, with that lowest common denominator, every channel would be showing Big Brother type shite 24/7.
 

Auld-Yin

ADC
Kit Reviewer
Book Reviewer
Reviews Editor
Its the one policy I was desperate to see and the moment Boris secures my vote....
Won't happen though, but it might just tighten enough Sphincters at the Beeb to ensure some substantive changes.
 
He's lucky it was only bread rolls they were throwing at him. Seen a bit of the Mash Report and don't find him funny, but certainly triggered.
I think Melanie Philips immasculated him on QT quite nicely.

 
My opinion- The BBC has form for suddenly "raising above the parapet" some of it's employees who they deem destined for higher roles. It's almost as if they were 'road testing' Andrew Neill to gauge public reaction at his new found "gobbyness". or - miffed at how he disects people of whom the BBC align with politically - have ordered him to "even the balance".

They did similar with Laura Kuennsberg when they "raised her profile".
 
Too busy to post this last week.
Tuesday morning, R5.
Emma Barnett interviews the guy from N.Ireland who is an ex-prison Governor.
He did a report for Government on dealing with terror extremists in gaol when the Gover was Justice Secretary.
Time and again the gobby gal tries - after London Bridge stabby stuff - to get him to say "the Conservatives have f.cked up"; each time, he declines to do so.

Later, Louise Casey is on the same show.
Again, repetitive attempts to persudade her to 'blame the Tories'.
Alas for the biased cow, Dame Louise has been in a few radio rodeos in her day, so another fail.
It was appalling.
But, so regular nowadays, nobody is surprised any more.
 
My opinion- The BBC has form for suddenly "raising above the parapet" some of it's employees who they deem destined for higher roles. It's almost as if they were 'road testing' Andrew Neill to gauge public reaction at his new found "gobbyness". or - miffed at how he disects people of whom the BBC align with politically - have ordered him to "even the balance".

They did similar with Laura Kuennsberg when they "raised her profile".
Marshall McLuhan: 'When the media becomes the message'.
Neil has overplayed his hand.
Ego got in his way.
 
It didn't have to be this way. I'm not a big fan of commercial stations with shit shows and riddled with adverts. Paying out massive salaries while pontificating and dumbing down to the masses was never a good plan. Red Andy earns at least 15 times the average wage. That wouldn't happen in a socialist utopia.

I remember when there were three channels and ITV had some informative shows. Lowest common denominator programming is a wasted opportunity. Can't be much good for the environment either. At least pay TV would soon show what the viewers really wanted rather than agendas being forced on the viewers.
I wouldn't want to lose the BBC but it has gotten itself into a situation where, increasingly, people on the right and left don't trust it. In addition, it is - as we all know - facing stiff competition from commercial rivals in the area of drama; after having already ,long lost a battle with commercial tv for sports programmes. Lastly, the BBC has expanded its number of channels while at the same time asking for more money from the taxpayer and paying high profile staff huge amounts of money.
I don't know where the corporation goes next. Perhaps it needs a new charter and a renewed emphasis on some core values?
 

Tyk

LE
I wouldn't want to lose the BBC but it has gotten itself into a situation where, increasingly, people on the right and left don't trust it. In addition, it is - as we all know - facing stiff competition from commercial rivals in the area of drama; after having already ,long lost a battle with commercial tv for sports programmes. Lastly, the BBC has expanded its number of channels while at the same time asking for more money from the taxpayer and paying high profile staff huge amounts of money.
I don't know where the corporation goes next. Perhaps it needs a new charter and a renewed emphasis on some core values?
I'd be quite happy for the BBC to be deposited in the dustbin of history, I stopped watching it about 10 years ago and I haven't had a licence (despite the licencing people sending me frequent snotograms) for at least 8 years now. I don't watch broadcast TV or BBC catchup services so I don't need one.
The quality of BBC reporting, the quite blatant biases shown (politically and towards climate change especially) and the production and promotion of some sleb dancing type shows are such a turnoff that I did just that.
 
I think Melanie Philips immasculated him on QT quite nicely.

Noticed nodding dog Swinson there and crowd favouring lefty comedian who hadn't read the report he was politicising to attack people who actually care that youths were being murdered. He likes to get angry. He makes me bloody angry.
 

Latest Threads

Top