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

Trans-sane

LE
Book Reviewer
The point I keep on making, you have your own bias at work. All of the complaints I've seen from left, right and centre have been because the presenter/program in question hasn't reflected the complainants bias. Obviously the left and centre complaints are from elsewhere.

It's a good example of social media echo chamber amplification. Anyone on here complained about AFNs grilling of Jezza?
I'm going to counter-point that. While there is a lot of whinging on this thread that fits your model, it doesn't address the BBC's actual bias.

That bias is not pro any particular party (though I suspect in the mid-late 90s it was very pro Labour, I was a kid then so wouldn't have been able to make a valid judgement and probably wouldn't remember it now). The bias is internationalist/globalist, liberal metropolitan elite.

To shoot down your Andrew Neill's execution of Corbyn, Neill also did a number of Farage (the polar opposite of Corbyn) as well as Wee Nicki and her from the Lib Dems. He would very likely have done the same to Johnson too (hence the discretion being the better part of valour) and I'd have applauded- doing over politicians is his job! The charges of bias do have grounding however in how certain high profile interviewers treat politicians from different parties differently. Marr being the worst offender for me (though Naga Muchetty is only a hair's breadth behind mostly due to her smug superiority) frequently giving an easy ride to the SNP or Labour talking heads, letting them speak at length while only peripherally (or not at all) answering the question that had been asked. Compare with the typical Conservative minister turning up on his show, and if their answer is longer than three words they are going to be interrupted. That is not "ensuring a satisfactory answer" and it is certainly not balanced.
 
I don't mind the regional accents, it is after all quite natural. The accents I do detest and actually turn off from are the two women foreign reporters Orla Guerin (Irish) and Lyse Doucet (Canuk I think). Their voices really annoy me greatly!
And, both really feckin ugly
(Lyse a Newfi, I think)
 

Themanwho

LE
Book Reviewer
I'm going to counter-point that. While there is a lot of whinging on this thread that fits your model, it doesn't address the BBC's actual bias.

That bias is not pro any particular party (though I suspect in the mid-late 90s it was very pro Labour, I was a kid then so wouldn't have been able to make a valid judgement and probably wouldn't remember it now). The bias is internationalist/globalist, liberal metropolitan elite.

To shoot down your Andrew Neill's execution of Corbyn, Neill also did a number of Farage (the polar opposite of Corbyn) as well as Wee Nicki and her from the Lib Dems. He would very likely have done the same to Johnson too (hence the discretion being the better part of valour) and I'd have applauded- doing over politicians is his job! The charges of bias do have grounding however in how certain high profile interviewers treat politicians from different parties differently. Marr being the worst offender for me (though Naga Muchetty is only a hair's breadth behind mostly due to her smug superiority) frequently giving an easy ride to the SNP or Labour talking heads, letting them speak at length while only peripherally (or not at all) answering the question that had been asked. Compare with the typical Conservative minister turning up on his show, and if their answer is longer than three words they are going to be interrupted. That is not "ensuring a satisfactory answer" and it is certainly not balanced.
The good thing about Neil is that he plays no favourites - he interviews them all to within an inch of their life. Whilst there was a double standard from some Arrsers in relation to Neil and his annoyance with being unable to interview the sitting PM, there were also many who took his side (and not just the usual suspects).

I agree that Munchetty and Marr are uniformly biased against the right in their interviews; one would have to be blind, stupid or ideologically sound to believe otherwise.

As for @Graculus asserting that we're all suffering from groupthink, I believe that I can speak for the whole of Arrse in saying we're in 100% agreement that we're not.
 

Grownup_Rafbrat

LE
Book Reviewer
Listened to Today this morning for the first time in three years.

First loads of whingeing about the cost of immigration to EU Citizens who will now be treated the same as the rest of the world. Various Cancer doctors, care home owners, dragged out to say how bad it is.

Then a Bishop wheeled out to say we shouldn't ring Church bells to celebrate Independence Day as it's 'political'.

Then IDS pressed and pressed about who should cover the cost of returning the Clapper to Big Ben to fulfil that duty. Who paid when it was rung at New Year?

I really despair.
 
The good thing about Neil is that he plays no favourites - he interviews them all to within an inch of their life. Whilst there was a double standard from some Arrsers in relation to Neil and his annoyance with being unable to interview the sitting PM, there were also many who took his side (and not just the usual suspects).

I agree that Munchetty and Marr are uniformly biased against the right in their interviews; one would have to be blind, stupid or ideologically sound to believe otherwise.

As for @Graculus asserting that we're all suffering from groupthink, I believe that I can speak for the whole of Arrse in saying we're in 100% agreement that we're not.
The echo chamber gets ever more restricted for each group as well.

I saw a "Biased Blagging Conservatives" tag on the pavement today. Certainly wasn't an arrser who did it I'm sure.
 
Last edited:
Listened to Today this morning for the first time in three years.

First loads of whingeing about the cost of immigration to EU Citizens who will now be treated the same as the rest of the world. Various Cancer doctors, care home owners, dragged out to say how bad it is.

Then a Bishop wheeled out to say we shouldn't ring Church bells to celebrate Independence Day as it's 'political'.

Then IDS pressed and pressed about who should cover the cost of returning the Clapper to Big Ben to fulfil that duty. Who paid when it was rung at New Year?

I really despair.
Not as much as I do reading hysterical propaganda posted as fact. We're independent already, if we weren't we wouldn't have been able to hold a referendum and then leave.
 

Themanwho

LE
Book Reviewer
The echo chamber gets ever more restricted for each group as well.

I saw a "Biased Blagging Conservatives" tag on the pavement today. Certainly wasn't an arrser who did it I'm sure.
I don't think Arrse counts as an echo chamber as any thread can be guaranteed to have at least three opinions for any binary question.
 
I'm going to counter-point that. While there is a lot of whinging on this thread that fits your model, it doesn't address the BBC's actual bias.

That bias is not pro any particular party (though I suspect in the mid-late 90s it was very pro Labour, I was a kid then so wouldn't have been able to make a valid judgement and probably wouldn't remember it now). The bias is internationalist/globalist, liberal metropolitan elite.

To shoot down your Andrew Neill's execution of Corbyn, Neill also did a number of Farage (the polar opposite of Corbyn) as well as Wee Nicki and her from the Lib Dems. He would very likely have done the same to Johnson too (hence the discretion being the better part of valour) and I'd have applauded- doing over politicians is his job! The charges of bias do have grounding however in how certain high profile interviewers treat politicians from different parties differently. Marr being the worst offender for me (though Naga Muchetty is only a hair's breadth behind mostly due to her smug superiority) frequently giving an easy ride to the SNP or Labour talking heads, letting them speak at length while only peripherally (or not at all) answering the question that had been asked. Compare with the typical Conservative minister turning up on his show, and if their answer is longer than three words they are going to be interrupted. That is not "ensuring a satisfactory answer" and it is certainly not balanced.
Your perception of the BBC's actual bias, perception being the important word. Who are these globalist, liberal metropolitan elites? Is Liam Fox one?

Liam Fox – 2019 Speech on Global Britain

Liberal metropolitan elites is a lazy stereotype, much like saying Labour voters are all miners, even though we hardly have any miners left.

Neil's bias leaks in interviews but is much more open on twitter after he's had a few.

The presenter's thoughts on BBC comedy came in a flurry of late night tweets in which he also referred to Carole Cadwalladr, the journalist who exposed the Cambridge Analytica data scandal, as the "mad cat woman" "Karol Kodswallop".

It's very visible, what you'd expect from someone of his background. He still follows exactly the same rules of impartiality that the others do though. Even though some Corbynistas proclaim loudly that he's biased. But they're unable to acknowledge their own bias.....

Ask any SNP supporters if their politicians are given an easy ride by anyone, go back and look through the Scottish referendum threads to see accusations of bias against the SNP. Same for Labour.

As I've already said, the BBC tends to show bias towards the government of the day, quite sensibly. It doesn't bite the hand that feeds it but still has to report negative news about the government/PM. Quite hard.
 
I don't think Arrse counts as an echo chamber as any thread can be guaranteed to have at least three opinions for any binary question.
It's become a bit of a whineathon, I saw the Dr Who thread and thought "FFS, it's for kids."
 

Awol

LE
Your perception of the BBC's actual bias, perception being the important word. Who are these globalist, liberal metropolitan elites? Is Liam Fox one?

Liam Fox – 2019 Speech on Global Britain

Liberal metropolitan elites is a lazy stereotype, much like saying Labour voters are all miners, even though we hardly have any miners left.

Neil's bias leaks in interviews but is much more open on twitter after he's had a few.

The presenter's thoughts on BBC comedy came in a flurry of late night tweets in which he also referred to Carole Cadwalladr, the journalist who exposed the Cambridge Analytica data scandal, as the "mad cat woman" "Karol Kodswallop".

It's very visible, what you'd expect from someone of his background. He still follows exactly the same rules of impartiality that the others do though. Even though some Corbynistas proclaim loudly that he's biased. But they're unable to acknowledge their own bias.....

Ask any SNP supporters if their politicians are given an easy ride by anyone, go back and look through the Scottish referendum threads to see accusations of bias against the SNP. Same for Labour.

As I've already said, the BBC tends to show bias towards the government of the day, quite sensibly. It doesn't bite the hand that feeds it but still has to report negative news about the government/PM. Quite hard.
It isn't a matter of perception that there were hundreds of anti-Brexit stories and no pro-Brexit stories on the BBC. It's a matter of record.
 
Yet time and time again you log in here to show us that you don't GAF about anything posted on here. How confusing for you
Not me that's confused champ. Someone tagged me, I responded. HTH.
 
It isn't a matter of perception that there were hundreds of anti-Brexit stories and no pro-Brexit stories on the BBC. It's a matter of record.
That bias has been reflected in the framing, content and balance of BBC reporting during the campaign. We have recorded numerous examples of more negative treatment, harsher scrutiny and slanted editorial comment about Labour’s leadership, policies and record, as compared with those of the Conservative Party, and submitted them to the BBC.

Up to this point, there has been no substantive response, even though the time to address the evidence of bias is fast running out.


Labour complains to BBC Director General over ‘slanted and biased’ election coverage - The Labour Party

It's almost as if people are unable to see that their own bias makes them poor judges of BBC bias isn't it?
 
That bias has been reflected in the framing, content and balance of BBC reporting during the campaign. We have recorded numerous examples of more negative treatment, harsher scrutiny and slanted editorial comment about Labour’s leadership, policies and record, as compared with those of the Conservative Party, and submitted them to the BBC.

Up to this point, there has been no substantive response, even though the time to address the evidence of bias is fast running out.


Labour complains to BBC Director General over ‘slanted and biased’ election coverage - The Labour Party

It's almost as if people are unable to see that their own bias makes them poor judges of BBC bias isn't it?
Cheers 'don't need to reply' guy.
 

Latest Threads

Top