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

Meanwhile Antiques Roadshow has been shifted from 8 pm to 7 pm presumably in order to cut audience numbers. The catch for Auntie with this enormously successful and informative programme is that, if you look at the (usually huge) crowd, they are pretty well all white (although the Beeb has found some very well-informed experts who are not).
Yes, it must really puss them off. So much so that the producers make a point of hiring experts who up the diversity quota. The audience will be invitation only before long.
 
Nige of planet Farage has dug up some information on grants the BBC receives from the Eu. Again it's a premium article on the DT but here's the gist of it

Now consider this. Today, I have been passed some documents by an EU source which prove that the BBC is currently in receipt of a seven-figure sum from the EU. I can reveal that under something called Horizon, the EU framework programme which provides grants for research and development, the BBC is involved in six projects guaranteeing it 1,502,663 euros.
Two of these grants were awarded as recently as 2018. Last May, the EU agreed to pay the BBC 546,575 euros to participate in the sinister sounding ‘Harnessing Data and Technology for Journalism’. This project will run until May 2020. And last October, the EU signed off 549,462 euros for the BBC to take part in a project called Global Under-Resourced Media Translation. This runs until April 2020.
The BBC claims that none of the millions it has received from the EU over the last decade find their way into its editorial budget. Whether that’s true or not (and who would ever know?) is irrelevant. The fact is that the British state broadcaster applies for this EU money and is happy to accept it. I have searched through the latest set of BBC accounts and can find no mention in them of the BBC receiving EU funds. Not a word, in fact. So, that makes the link between the BBC and the EU a secret one in this context.
Yet if this is all so innocent, why doesn’t the BBC just come clean and tell the people about its cosy relationship with the EU? The answer to that question is that the BBC’s chiefs don’t want you – the people who bankroll their sky-high salaries and gold-plated pensions – to know its dirty secret. Why not? Look no further than the example I’ve quoted above, in which a UK politician’s contribution to an EU debate is ignored, and a foreign politician’s critical view of Brexit is trumpeted as loudly as possible. In short, editorial bias.
 
I am horrified to learn that the BBC despite all the justified criticism of it's alleged slanted output, is supposed to be the "National Voice" yet receives money from the EU. Little wonder there is very little comment against that organisation and it is so very partisan in favour of the "Remainers." Surely government should step in and decline this tainted cash now and for the future?
 
Nige of planet Farage has dug up some information on grants the BBC receives from the Eu. Again it's a premium article on the DT but here's the gist of it

Now consider this. Today, I have been passed some documents by an EU source which prove that the BBC is currently in receipt of a seven-figure sum from the EU. I can reveal that under something called Horizon, the EU framework programme which provides grants for research and development, the BBC is involved in six projects guaranteeing it 1,502,663 euros.
Two of these grants were awarded as recently as 2018. Last May, the EU agreed to pay the BBC 546,575 euros to participate in the sinister sounding ‘Harnessing Data and Technology for Journalism’. This project will run until May 2020. And last October, the EU signed off 549,462 euros for the BBC to take part in a project called Global Under-Resourced Media Translation. This runs until April 2020.
The BBC claims that none of the millions it has received from the EU over the last decade find their way into its editorial budget. Whether that’s true or not (and who would ever know?) is irrelevant. The fact is that the British state broadcaster applies for this EU money and is happy to accept it. I have searched through the latest set of BBC accounts and can find no mention in them of the BBC receiving EU funds. Not a word, in fact. So, that makes the link between the BBC and the EU a secret one in this context.
Yet if this is all so innocent, why doesn’t the BBC just come clean and tell the people about its cosy relationship with the EU? The answer to that question is that the BBC’s chiefs don’t want you – the people who bankroll their sky-high salaries and gold-plated pensions – to know its dirty secret. Why not? Look no further than the example I’ve quoted above, in which a UK politician’s contribution to an EU debate is ignored, and a foreign politician’s critical view of Brexit is trumpeted as loudly as possible. In short, editorial bias.
Taking the EU's coin while at the same time lobbying HMG to end the free licence for over 75s.
 
Taking the EU's coin while at the same time lobbying HMG to end the free licence for over 75s.
Sorry but I can't get my nickers in a twist over this. If someone was handing you money to do something legal, you're going to do it even if your main income comes from someone else.

That the BBC is a biased organisation is I believe without doubt, but if it was breaking the law or seen to be working against the government of the UK I'm pretty sure Scotland Yard and the government would have been turfing out drawers at BBC HQ by now.
 
Sorry but I can't get my nickers in a twist over this. If someone was handing you money to do something legal, you're going to do it even if your main income comes from someone else.

That the BBC is a biased organisation is I believe without doubt, but if it was breaking the law or seen to be working against the government of the UK I'm pretty sure Scotland Yard and the government would have been turfing out drawers at BBC HQ by now.
I agree as it happens. I think the BBC is pro EU despite the money angle. Plenty of people think the BBC is pro Leave so they may even be more or less neutral. However, taking money from an EU body might impact on the way the BBC is perceived.
 
Sorry but I can't get my nickers in a twist over this. If someone was handing you money to do something legal, you're going to do it even if your main income comes from someone else.
Aye but if Nigel is correct, why hide the fact they are taking EU money? Should it not appear in their accounts? or somewhere on one of their websites?
 

Sadurian

LE
Book Reviewer
Not exactly hiding it, but they are certainly coy about revealing the fact. I did laugh at the tone of this 'Reality Check' piece they published.

Is the BBC funded by the European Union?

I don't rate the 'Reality Check' pieces very highly, they are usually trying to be a cross between More or Less and Snopes, and actually coming across as an opinionated and highly dismissive man in a pub who has a lot to say but little to back it up.

In this case, the article squirms and wriggles about the fact that yes, the BBC does indeed receive a lot of EU money. The line, as always, is that the money is not spent on news programme so does not influence them. This is a little like saying that the aspirin you took for the headache does not influence the pain in your hand, or the money you spend on cigarettes is 'cigarette money' and not 'food money' so giving up smoking would not increase the amount available to buy food with.
 

seaweed

LE
Book Reviewer
James Purnell - Wikipedia


Read it and weep.

I think there was another failed Labour politician who was given what sounded like a non-job at the Beeb with a 6 figure salary but I only found Purnell so far.
 

Sadurian

LE
Book Reviewer
The Honourable Sarah Smith, daughter of the late John Smith of leader of the Labour Party fame, was appointed host of Sunday Politics. I don't know if that was the appointment you were thinking of.

She wasn't a Labour politician or MP, but it would be remarkable to believe that she doesn't bring a certain bias to the job.
 
I've just had the misfortune to sit through a port called "Back in Time" , which put kids through "the experience" of schooling in the 80s. What a load of absolute horse dung. Biased and inaccurate to the point of hilarity, the presenter Sara Cox couldn't go through 30 seconds of continuity without bewailing the effects of "Thatcher" and the evil Tories.

I don't usually go down the route of gnashing my teeth at the licence fee etc, but for God's sake, to know that I'm paying for crud like this to be foisted on the nation as factual really does go against the grain.
 
I've just had the misfortune to sit through a port called "Back in Time" , which put kids through "the experience" of schooling in the 80s. What a load of absolute horse dung. Biased and inaccurate to the point of hilarity, the presenter Sara Cox couldn't go through 30 seconds of continuity without bewailing the effects of "Thatcher" and the evil Tories.

I don't usually go down the route of gnashing my teeth at the licence fee etc, but for God's sake, to know that I'm paying for crud like this to be foisted on the nation as factual really does go against the grain.
She did steal my fresh milk. We only had St Ives 5 pint at home
 
Sad to hear that one of the shows which makes the license fee bearable, Andrew Neill's "This Week", is being axed. The political review programme has a reputation for not taking itself at all seriously whilst regularly providing the presenter and his panelists to skewer opinionated talking heads, brainless and soulless politicians, and the great and good in general. And who can forget the many, many beatings handed out by Neill to the fragrant Diane Abbot?

Not content with putting it on so late in the evening only night workers, insomniacs and somnambulists watch it regularly, now the Beeb has decided that with the departure of Neill, the programme will no longer be "viable". Not exactly surprising, it was so off message, it was only a matter of time. Sad though.

I will be raising a glass of Blue Nun to toast the farewell of this outstanding collection of passed over politicos, appalling in-jokes and the opportunities for Quentin Letts to wear a boater. Without Andrew Neill appearing regularly on the BBC, as far as I can see there will be no political journalist of real stature and grit left to challenge received wisdom.

Here's last night's introductory monologue to give us a taste of what we're going to be missing...
Andrew Neil Nails It On Churchill as BBC Announce End of This Week -
 
BBC in news analysis appears to prefer negative spin; little reporting of positive aspects of, not just Brexit, but any British achievement. And certainly not any comparisons with other countries showing a better British position. Todays headline in Daily Telegraph Business 'UK grows faster than Germany as EU falters' ; BBC Business News online: 'RBS warns of Brexit harm as profits double '. Any implied negative comment needs to be examined against '....and how does that compare to elsewhere?'
 
BBC in news analysis appears to prefer negative spin; little reporting of positive aspects of, not just Brexit, but any British achievement. And certainly not any comparisons with other countries showing a better British position. Todays headline in Daily Telegraph Business 'UK grows faster than Germany as EU falters' ; BBC Business News online: 'RBS warns of Brexit harm as profits double '. Any implied negative comment needs to be examined against '....and how does that compare to elsewhere?'
I think this is (in part) because of the mantra of "balance" to the exclusion of common sense. For any point of view an opposite point of view must at least be mentioned, regardless of the nature of that view, and that shows the BBC's "fairness" and balance. For instance, recently there was an article on the cost of living rises being outstripped by wage rises, which the majority of we normal peasants will consider to be A Good Thing. So half the article was stressing the potential negatives from earning more, and so the Beeb can say it shows "Balance".

Unless it's an article referring to one of the sacred cows of the new establishment (eg: climate change?), in which case up yours, Balance.
 
At my parents this weekend so being exposed to a lot of Radio 4's output. The News Quiz opened with a long segment about the age and stupidity of pro-Brexit voters, and then moved onto the host, Miles Jupp, saying the programme could not be balanced as there were no pro-Brexit comedians. It was an open p*** take of the concept of even-handedness. These people have no idea that, outside of their world, much of the country supports Brexit.
 
At my parents this weekend so being exposed to a lot of Radio 4's output. The News Quiz opened with a long segment about the age and stupidity of pro-Brexit voters, and then moved onto the host, Miles Jupp, saying the programme could not be balanced as there were no pro-Brexit comedians. It was an open p*** take of the concept of even-handedness. These people have no idea that, outside of their world, much of the country supports Brexit.
Miles Jupp, saying the programme could not be balanced as there were no pro-Brexit comedians made to feel welcome appearing on the BBC.

Just a slight adjustment.
 
At my parents this weekend so being exposed to a lot of Radio 4's output. The News Quiz opened with a long segment about the age and stupidity of pro-Brexit voters, and then moved onto the host, Miles Jupp, saying the programme could not be balanced as there were no pro-Brexit comedians. It was an open p*** take of the concept of even-handedness. These people have no idea that, outside of their world, much of the country supports Brexit.
Miles Jupp?
Which interchangeable, white,middle class,university educated ,unfunny,left wing 'comedian' is he/she/undecided?
 
Last edited:
Miles Jupp, saying the programme could not be balanced as there were no pro-Brexit comedians made to feel welcome appearing on the BBC.

Just a slight adjustment.
A good point. There are some pro-Brexit comedians as you imply. Bob Mills and Lee Hurst spring to mind. Simon Evans is right wing but not a frequent guest. Even the 'Tories' who appear - Finkelstein and Ridkind - are wets. Politics aside, the opinions expressed are very samey.
 
At my parents this weekend so being exposed to a lot of Radio 4's output. These people have no idea that, outside of their world, much of the country supports Brexit.
I think they do realise that many support Brexit, they probably just smugly dismiss that as ignorance and stupidity. It’s typical of the arrogance of the metropolitan liberals, particularly in London. Us provincial proles exist solely to be indulged grudgingly in elections and referendums and divested of tax.
 

Similar threads


Latest Threads

Top