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

Auld-Yin

ADC
Kit Reviewer
Book Reviewer
Reviews Editor
Good post @Cold_Collation and just a few comments.

When the BBC did bring on someone if the intellect and unbiasedness required the presenter couldn't handle it never mind the other panellists! I give you Jordan Peterson as an example. I know he does not live here but he was flavour of the Month on the BBC for a while until they realised he is way out of their league.

The second comment is regarding minorities. I agree with your post and content that the BBC is oanderingbto the very vocal London LGBTetc etc etc groups plus for the outer London area they are pandering to this type of guy
lgfp1552.jpg


Minority ruling the roost at the moment.

Note, these are my views and not those of the site! If you don't like them, while I do have other opinions, I think I will stick with them for now!
 

Cold_Collation

LE
Book Reviewer
Good post @Cold_Collation and just a few comments.

When the BBC did bring on someone if the intellect and unbiasedness required the presenter couldn't handle it never mind the other panellists! I give you Jordan Peterson as an example. I know he does not live here but he was flavour of the Month on the BBC for a while until they realised he is way out of their league.
Peterson is the very antithesis of the BBC's thinking at the moment. If anything, I feel that he was probably dropped because although at first he appeared to be on-message it became increasingly clear that his interpretation of challenging orthodoxies is to challenge many of the current political orthodoxies, and not that to-be-killed-at-all-costs entity which is The Establishment.

If the BBC got that wrong it is, as you say, because collectively it didn't have the wit and intelligence to realise what Peterson is about. Which in itself leads to another question: if those in control at the BBC are so ignorant and intellectually mediocre, why are they there and why are they allowed to have so much control?
The second comment is regarding minorities. I agree with your post and content that the BBC is pandering to the very vocal London LGBTetc etc etc groups plus for the outer London area they are pandering to this type of guy.
[IMAGE DELETED]
Minority ruling the roost at the moment.
Again, the opposite of what a national broadcaster should be. The aim should be to reflect the majority with an acknowledgement and acceptance of the minorities.

The obsession is with bringing the minorities into the 'mainstream'. The reality is that in this digital age we have the potential for a multiplicity of channels and many of those needs could be served by dedicated channels. I'd be quite happy to see selective content from those channels re-broadcast in BBCs 1 and 2, for instance. The BBC had a fine tradition of bringing the unusual and under-acknowledged into the public eye but that has become corrupted. Now it is all-pervading and as I've noted in previous posts it is pushing away the majority audience.

That is emphatically not because the majority of that majority audience is unwilling to learn or listen. It is because it sees the content as irrelevant to them, patronising and, ultimately, critical of their presumed attitudes and beliefs. Again, see my point above about ignorance and intellectual mediocrity at the top of the BBC.
Note, these are my views and not those of the site! If you don't like them, while I do have other opinions, I think I will stick with them for now!
I know that that last comment was made tongue-in-cheek but it's still rather worrying.

There is nothing wrong with anyone having an opinion. What you have just expressed is far from being extremist or even objectionable to a reasonable person. That you've felt the need to say that, even in jest, reflects how cautious some people feel that they need to be.
 
There is nothing wrong with anyone having an opinion. What you have just expressed is far from being extremist or even objectionable to a reasonable person. That you've felt the need to say that, even in jest, reflects how cautious some people feel that they need to be.
And that is how far down the road to media ocracey the bbc has gone and how far it has succeeded in driving down standards in the UK.
 
I think that Peterson's well publicised health problems have probably made him temporarily unavailable for programmes like QT. I suspect that the Caroline Flack case may well be used as an excuse to keep him off QT in future though. After all they don't want him being ill on almost live television. Duty of care and all that.
 
Theres an article in today's DM about the latest discoveries in the relationships between super-archaics, Denisovians and Neanderthals - our family tree.

What rather surprised me was the accompanying illustration; it apparently shows "modern Europeans" and "modern Africans" as different species, not just variations in one branch/species.

(its an informative science article, not slacious DM pap, so here is a link 'Super-archaic' human mated with Denisovan and Neanderthals ancestor)
I'm not sure that it is showing them as a seperate species as much as seperate populations.
Also either its every "modern human" outside Africa being referred to as "Modern Europeans" or they have simplified things by ignoring those who spread into Asia, the Pacific and the Americas.
 

4(T)

LE
I'm not sure that it is showing them as a seperate species as much as seperate populations.
Also either its every "modern human" outside Africa being referred to as "Modern Europeans" or they have simplified things by ignoring those who spread into Asia, the Pacific and the Americas.

The other branches of the "tree" are all species.

The "Modern Europeans" appears to refer to caucasians, which include nearly all humans (inc Asia, Americas, Aussie Aborigines, etc) less for sub-Saharan Africans.
 
The other branches of the "tree" are all species.

The "Modern Europeans" appears to refer to caucasians, which include nearly all humans (inc Asia, Americas, Aussie Aborigines, etc) less for sub-Saharan Africans.
I have to say I'm not up on the modern definition of species which included the inability to succesfully breed with a different species when I was at school. Despite their much longer separation members of the older branches were able to leave a lasting genetic mark in the other branches, unlike when say horses and donkeys interbreed to produce mules (which are generally sterile).
 

BBC are obviously a bit concerned.

Ref TV licence. Haven't had one in 15 years. Sent a letter to the licencing folk saying 'thanks but no thanks' and they just occasionally send a letter to 'confirm' we're still not watching broadcast TV products (live or recorded) or BBC iPlayer.

We just watch prime and Netflix.

The letters always promise a visit from some gimp or other. Never had one. Although we've not bought a TV (on the UK net) in that 15 years either. So that probably helps.
 

BBC are obviously a bit concerned.

Ref TV licence. Haven't had one in 15 years. Sent a letter to the licencing folk saying 'thanks but no thanks' and they just occasionally send a letter to 'confirm' we're still not watching broadcast TV products (live or recorded) or BBC iPlayer.

We just watch prime and Netflix.

The letters always promise a visit from some gimp or other. Never had one. Although we've not bought a TV (on the UK net) in that 15 years either. So that probably helps.
Dimbers on democracy - interesting. How do I vote for what I would like from the BBC on TV and radio? Oh..

I thought Channel 4 was dedicating itself to fringe / alternative interests so that the BBC can deal with mainstream interests?
 

Cold_Collation

LE
Book Reviewer
Dimbers on democracy - interesting. How do I vote for what I would like from the BBC on TV and radio? Oh..

I thought Channel 4 was dedicating itself to fringe / alternative interests so that the BBC can deal with mainstream interests?
The mainstream’s interpretation of mainstream and the BBC’s interpretation of mainstream are very different. :)
 

Blogg

LE
The reason Fiona Bruce is looking so pained (and useless as ever) is that the voice in her ear is screaming:

"FFS Fiona cut him offfffff.......arrrghhh...."

 

Auld-Yin

ADC
Kit Reviewer
Book Reviewer
Reviews Editor
I do like Portillo and that clip shows he is not afraid to speak his mind, even though he pointed out his income mainly comes via the programmes he makes for the BBC. I think that clip could come under the "Speaking truth to power" category.

I like watching his travel (train) programmes where he goes, not to the major tourist areas so much, as in to the local markets and populace. He has the ability to be patronising yet humble with it, which ain't easy to do! :)
 
I don't think Arrse is a very good comparison for general public opinion.
Why not?

We may be (small c conservative) iin our opinions, but we're no more left, or right, wing than any others.

What we do do, is state those opinions, with the acknowledgement that there will be someone here to counter your opinion. Usually without crying about it.

Handbags optional.
 
I do like Portillo and that clip shows he is not afraid to speak his mind, even though he pointed out his income mainly comes via the programmes he makes for the BBC. I think that clip could come under the "Speaking truth to power" category.

I like watching his travel (train) programmes where he goes, not to the major tourist areas so much, as in to the local markets and populace. He has the ability to be patronising yet humble with it, which ain't easy to do! :)
If you get the chance to catch him on his speaking tour, I would recommend it as an excellent way to spend an evening. He is an excellent speaker and was very good in the final half hour when he took (unscripted) questions from the audience.
 
It seems that Boris has, privately at least, confirmed that Channel 4 is to be sold off. "No business being publicly owned", or words to that effect.


Shot across the bows to the BBC?
 
Would be interesting to see Murdoch buying C4, and turn it into a kind of British Fox News. There'd be a lot of current news presenters out on their arrse!
 
A quick search on the Media Bias Fact Check site gives overall bias assessments. It doesn't deal with individual shows such as BBC "comedy" or Question Time or individual reporter or producer bias (e.g Jon "**** the Tories!" Snow) who obviously have an impact on how we view these news sources.

Left-centre / Centre left:

BBC - Media Bias/Fact Check (Factual reporting = High)
Channel 4 News (UK) - Media Bias/Fact Check (Factual reporting = High)
DW News - Media Bias/Fact Check (Factual reporting = High)
Al Jazeera - Media Bias/Fact Check (Factual reporting = MIXED)


Right-centre / Centre right:

ITV News - Media Bias/Fact Check (Factual reporting = High)
RT News (RT.Com) - Media Bias/Fact Check (Factual reporting = Very Low)

Least biased:

Sky News - Media Bias/Fact Check (Factual reporting = High)
France24 - Media Bias/Fact Check (Factual reporting = High)

ETA - I had thought of a thread specific to news sources, although we all have our own opinions on these and live and / or work in different areas. I don't really want to start that discussion on this thread. The above is just for reference.
 
Last edited:
Published: 11 February 2020.

Father Ted creator Graham Linehan on trans rights - BBC Newsnight.



Father Ted writer Graham Linehan says his online campaign against what he calls ‘trans rights activists’ has made him the ‘most hated man on the internet’.

 
Last edited:

Latest Threads

Top