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

Auld-Yin

ADC
Kit Reviewer
Book Reviewer
Reviews Editor
Take it from me - the package is pants. Even the 95% is spin - it is not 95% of all self employed apparently, just 95% of those eligible.
You would rather he did nothing then? You are starting to sound like Corbyn/ McDonnell ! Bitter, twisted and all washed up. :)
 

Cold_Collation

LE
Book Reviewer
I wrote to the BBC asking why they did not cover the story in January about Diane Abbot's son who was charged after he assulted police and NHS Staff (Google it) the BBC response:

Senior News staff and editors respond:

“While Diane Abbott is a high profile public figure and Shadow Home Secretary, her son is an independent adult. We needed to consider why it would be justified to report a story about him when the main reason for doing so was his mother’s prominence.

We thought hard about this story and decided not to run it on BBC News because we were not satisfied that there was a sufficient public interest justification for doing so.”

We realise you may disagree, but we hope this explains some of the issues involved when assessing different events for coverage across BBC News. We appreciate the time you’ve taken to share your views too.

Imagine had this been the son of a Forces person or any other Government minister or person in the public domain!!! Not left wing bias by the BBC then?
Be clear. If it had been a Tory minister's child they'd have been on it like rabid dogs.
 

ancienturion

LE
Book Reviewer
One thing I have noticed in BBC News on the TV, whenever there is a life interest story related to the news item it is virtually always from a well off person or family or a middle or upper middle class area.
And usually to involve some sort of immigrant.
 
Half watching BBC earlier during Downing St brief. All these so called journalists criticising Boris and other senior officials for having caught the virus, but these are the same twats that whinge about “special privileges”. When this is all over I hope these journos get the same treatment as profiteering shop keepers and big business bosses that have been cnuts. Anyone fancy some tarring and feathering?
 

Deece

Swinger
And usually to involve some sort of immigrant.
Same as F&C in the Forces who fall foul of the immigration rules, always the forces or Government fault never the fault of the individual (which inavariably it is). Same as Brits who marry non-Brits abraod and shock horror they cannot bring in their new spouse/partners because they cannot meet the immigration rules. BBC always report the fault of the Home Office and never question that the people themselves are at fault by not checking the immigration rules first....arrgghhhh.
 

Auld-Yin

ADC
Kit Reviewer
Book Reviewer
Reviews Editor
Half watching BBC earlier during Downing St brief. All these so called journalists criticising Boris and other senior officials for having caught the virus, but these are the same twats that whinge about “special privileges”. When this is all over I hope these journos get the same treatment as profiteering shop keepers and big business bosses that have been cnuts. Anyone fancy some tarring and feathering?
When one considers that the experts are confident that, over time, all of us will catch Coronavirus in some degree or other, the ones complaining now about BoJo etc will then be complaining that they have caught it!

While I appreciate the government has to be held to account, the past few days has seen the media falling rapidly back in to the "Everything is bad and it is all Boris's fault'.

There are a few posters on here with the same seemingly incurable disease.
 

gung_hobo

Old-Salt
At 322 pages and still going can it be assumed that the jury is still out?

As an "ideas" chap, how about those from both/all sides of the divide as to whether it is left/right/centrist/PC/un-PC etc. getting together and determining a basic way of measuring it. E.g. four/eight mainstream programs aired when "x" number of Arrser's are available consistently to watch?

Criteria could be simple:
1. How many left/right/not clear people on and for how long could they speak? Per programme and then over time.
2. How many times were each group interrupted?
3. Did the interviewer(s) display an overt bias? In which case how?
4. How many non-experts were interviewed/panellists and separately, were any experts interviewed/panellists?
Just a few ideas. I'd like to add a host more categories but they would need to be exactly quantifiable so that they could not be ignored/glossed over, rather that they could be used in a forensic scalpel type way.
5. How many irrelevant tits were on e.g. comedians.

Avoid all the subjective stuff, go for cold hard facts only. IMO the BBC tiptoes past most criticisms because they can argue that the question was subjective.

Probably six to twelve months of cold hard facts that could be proven (perhaps with timings for how long each speaker aired their views and how fast others were interrupted.

It isn't a project I am remotely interested in being a part of as it is very unlikely that I could consistently be available. However, if an Arrser happened to know how to use IT to achieve a lot of stuff that would otherwise be conducted with a stopwatch etc., then It could actually become a public service. There are entire sections of the BBC that I have no idea exist as I simply do not watch or listen to them (THANK GOD!!!!).

At least it might avoid the thread getting to 1,000 pages. Actually I think it could be a very valuable independent piece of research especially if it encompassed a specific area of national concern e.g. COVID. Rather than railing against a "complaints mitigation and absolving department", it is suspected that a few entities might well be interested in utilising independently verifiably gained data.

Just a thought.

GH
 

Auld-Yin

ADC
Kit Reviewer
Book Reviewer
Reviews Editor
At 322 pages and still going can it be assumed that the jury is still out?

As an "ideas" chap, how about those from both/all sides of the divide as to whether it is left/right/centrist/PC/un-PC etc. getting together and determining a basic way of measuring it. E.g. four/eight mainstream programs aired when "x" number of Arrser's are available consistently to watch?

Criteria could be simple:
1. How many left/right/not clear people on and for how long could they speak? Per programme and then over time.
2. How many times were each group interrupted?
3. Did the interviewer(s) display an overt bias? In which case how?
4. How many non-experts were interviewed/panellists and separately, were any experts interviewed/panellists?
Just a few ideas. I'd like to add a host more categories but they would need to be exactly quantifiable so that they could not be ignored/glossed over, rather that they could be used in a forensic scalpel type way.
5. How many irrelevant tits were on e.g. comedians.

Avoid all the subjective stuff, go for cold hard facts only. IMO the BBC tiptoes past most criticisms because they can argue that the question was subjective.

Probably six to twelve months of cold hard facts that could be proven (perhaps with timings for how long each speaker aired their views and how fast others were interrupted.

It isn't a project I am remotely interested in being a part of as it is very unlikely that I could consistently be available. However, if an Arrser happened to know how to use IT to achieve a lot of stuff that would otherwise be conducted with a stopwatch etc., then It could actually become a public service. There are entire sections of the BBC that I have no idea exist as I simply do not watch or listen to them (THANK GOD!!!!).

At least it might avoid the thread getting to 1,000 pages. Actually I think it could be a very valuable independent piece of research especially if it encompassed a specific area of national concern e.g. COVID. Rather than railing against a "complaints mitigation and absolving department", it is suspected that a few entities might well be interested in utilising independently verifiably gained data.

Just a thought.

GH
No! :)
 

gung_hobo

Old-Salt
Dear Auld Yin,

YES!

Tiptoes quietly out before the enormity of trying to terminate a thread becomes apparent!

GH
 

Auld-Yin

ADC
Kit Reviewer
Book Reviewer
Reviews Editor
Dear Auld Yin,

YES!

Tiptoes quietly out before the enormity of trying to terminate a thread becomes apparent!

GH
I look forward, with some trepidation, your findings, especially the interruption count! ;)
 
Be clear. If it had been a Tory minister's child they'd have been on it like rabid dogs.
I seem to remember the BBC running stories on one of the Blair's spawn.

Could you think of any less of public interest...
Tony Blair's son Euan gets married

hmm, why was reporting this in the public interest but reporting a violent assault on police by a senior politician’s son wasn’t? Nothing to do with skin colour...?
BBC News | UK | Blair's son 'drunk and incapable'


Agenda driven double standards writ large throughout the BBC. I fervently hope their public funding is binned at the next renewal. If it (the BBC) is as good as it tells us it is, as important to the nation as it tell us it is, it will have no problem getting itself fully funded on a commercial basis.
 
Last edited:
I seem to remember the BBC running stories on the on one of the Blair's spawn.

Could you think of any less of public interest...
Tony Blair's son Euan gets married

hmm, why was reporting this in the public interest but reporting a violent assault on police by a senior politician’s son wasn’t? Nothing to do with skin colour...?
BBC News | UK | Blair's son 'drunk and incapable'


Agenda driven double standards writ large throughout the BBC. I fervently hope their public funding is binned at the next renewal. If it (the BBC) is as good as it tells us it is, as important to the nation as it tell us it is, it will have no problem getting itself fully funded on a commercial basis.
Frustratingly and annoyingly, I can see the DG and Governors pleading their hot-cheeked case that, as they provided such an important national service during The Great Plaque Of 20, then not only should the licence fee remain but be doubled.


*sigh*
 

Auld-Yin

ADC
Kit Reviewer
Book Reviewer
Reviews Editor
Frustratingly and annoyingly, I can see the DG and Governors pleading their hot-cheeked case that, as they provided such an important national service during The Great Plaque Of 20, then not only should the licence fee remain but be doubled.


*sigh*
As the spreaders of doom, gloom and "We're Doooomed" then they are first class!
 

Cold_Collation

LE
Book Reviewer
I seem to remember the BBC running stories on one of the Blair's spawn.

Could you think of any less of public interest...
Tony Blair's son Euan gets married

hmm, why was reporting this in the public interest but reporting a violent assault on police by a senior politician’s son wasn’t? Nothing to do with skin colour...?
BBC News | UK | Blair's son 'drunk and incapable'


Agenda driven double standards writ large throughout the BBC. I fervently hope their public funding is binned at the next renewal. If it (the BBC) is as good as it tells us it is, as important to the nation as it tell us it is, it will have no problem getting itself fully funded on a commercial basis.
A possible answer is that was 20 years ago and we've seen a continued shift in the BBC since.

These changes happen by creep, they can't happen all at once because the outrage would be too much. So, little by little.
 

Cold_Collation

LE
Book Reviewer
Frustratingly and annoyingly, I can see the DG and Governors pleading their hot-cheeked case that, as they provided such an important national service during The Great Plaque Of 20, then not only should the licence fee remain but be doubled.


*sigh*
So, they did what they were/are supposed to do at times but continue their campaign of ridicule and subversion at others.

Nah, they can sod off.
 

Auld-Yin

ADC
Kit Reviewer
Book Reviewer
Reviews Editor
So, they did what they were/are supposed to do at times but continue their campaign of ridicule and subversion at others.

Nah, they can sod off.
The Beeb only took a couple of days off at the start of the covid-19 outbreak but were soon back at the Boris/Tory bashing. :rolleyes:
 

Joker62

ADC
Book Reviewer
Ok get it all but most users of the London vernacular (given that I have 3 Brother still living there) tend to use the one word for example pony, syrup, boat, gregory, rub............and many more which I have long forgotton!
Which is what I said when I said that it gets shortened to one word. For those not familiar with the vernacular, I'll explain:-
Pony - Pony & Trap - crap
Syrup - Syrup of figs - wigs
Boat - Boat race - face
Gregory - Gregory Peck - neck
Rub - Rub-a-dub - pub
 
Irony alert! Just said by Naga on the BBC sofa a moment ago:
“Don’t listen to the noise, just listen to the experts as much as you can”!
I nearly choked on my coffee - the hypocritical cow!
 
Irony alert! Just said by Naga on the BBC sofa a moment ago:
“Don’t listen to the noise, just listen to the experts as much as you can”!
I nearly choked on my coffee - the hypocritical cow!
Our telly is switched off at the moment. Thanks for telling me what I am not missing.
 

Latest Threads

Top