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

You seem to be under the misapprehension that Countryfile is concerned with agriculture, as it used to be decades ago. As far as I can see in the short time between it appearing on my screen and me finding the remote, it has nothing to do with all those rude mechanicals actually working on the land and is all about fluffy bunnies, organically sourced and sustainable bull excrement, and vegan tofu knitting of climate change banners.

To a lesser extent the same is also true of Radio 4's Farming Today, which I have the misfortune to be awake for 15 minutes of (early rise to get to work, and my SOP is to slap the radio on as I brew my coffee and tie my shoelaces) before the Today Programme kicks off. It's all about earnest types stopping evil farmers doing BAD THINGS (badger culls, using tractors, using fertiliser, using insecticides, not supporting the mediaeval ecosystem that some mung bean chewer seems to feel is what we really need, and so on). Very little about actual farming needs, mostly special interest environmentalists riding ethically reared hobbyhorses across the sunlit airwave uplands of cloud cuckoo land.

.....and rest. That feels better.
Trying to remember the name of the farming programme I used to watch on ITV, Sunday lunchtimes in the 70's/80's. That was fairly comprehensive and totally focused on the farming industry.
 
Maybe, but at least the content would have some decent banter and witty repartee in it without all of the woke, SJW aggrandising, which is the BBC's current content. Banter Broadcasting Corporation anyone?
The real problem with the BBC is that in a polarising world, the BBC believes it speaks for a silent majority and it simply does not come close to reflecting modern Britain and your right, that is reflected most obviously in the massive absence of a sense of humour.

The BBC is essentially an idealist dream and the whole thing should be binned. The voices in opposition to binning it are those who are signed up to the creation of a new utopia and sadly for us, they may not have the numbers but have the power to decide.
 
At first glance it appears to be part of an orchestrated campaign to change everyone into mini-me ex graduates, who are right on progressive, with a penchant for climbing mt Kilimanjaro and finding themselves in a sunny place as far away from the UK as they can get. Whilst still porting around all the tech in their bags.

The truth is, much of this bias is entirely unintentional. If the BBC was ran by a load of ex squaddies then the content would be similarly unrepresentative.
Wrong!!!

It's intentional, carefully planned & pervades everything the BBC produces.
The liberal left have learnt their lesson & have switched to a long term strategy aimed at those below voting age & it's working because we have too little in the way of channels for demonstrating the conservative viewpoint top the same audience (or any audience for that matter).

Dr Who is one of their more blatant propaganda pieces & demonstrates how they're achieving their aims.
 
Wrong!!!

It's intentional, carefully planned & pervades everything the BBC produces.
The liberal left have learnt their lesson & have switched to a long term strategy aimed at those below voting age & it's working because we have too little in the way of channels for demonstrating the conservative viewpoint top the same audience (or any audience for that matter).

Dr Who is one of their more blatant propaganda pieces & demonstrates how they're achieving their aims.
Your chosen username is very, very, well chosen...........
 
It has been the outdoor version of the One Show for some time now. With the honourable exception of farmer Adam, it is full of identikit modern presenters, with very little knowledge or affinity to farming or the countryside. Such a shame, as it used to be an excellent way to pass an hour on Sunday afternoon.
We still buy the calendar though!
Most of the BBC current affairs programs are slowly morphing into a modern day version of Blue Peter;
  • The One Show - Blue Peter on a couch
  • BBC Breakfast - Blue Peter on a couch in the morning
  • Countryfile - Blue Peter in a field
  • etc etc etc
To a lesser extent the same is also true of Radio 4's Farming Today, which I have the misfortune to be awake for 15 minutes of (early rise to get to work, and my SOP is to slap the radio on as I brew my coffee and tie my shoelaces) before the Today Programme kicks off. It's all about earnest types stopping evil farmers doing BAD THINGS (badger culls, using tractors, using fertiliser, using insecticides, not supporting the mediaeval ecosystem that some mung bean chewer seems to feel is what we really need, and so on). Very little about actual farming needs, mostly special interest environmentalists riding ethically reared hobbyhorses across the sunlit airwave uplands of cloud cuckoo land.
I too am up at stupid o'clock and catch FT at 05:45. I find that it actually has a reasonable amount of balance and quite often poses difficult questions back at the lentil chewing, hair shirt, sandal wearers., and gives a reasonable amount of time to actual farmers.
 
Wrong!!!

It's intentional, carefully planned & pervades everything the BBC produces.
The liberal left have learnt their lesson & have switched to a long term strategy aimed at those below voting age & it's working because we have too little in the way of channels for demonstrating the conservative viewpoint top the same audience (or any audience for that matter).

Dr Who is one of their more blatant propaganda pieces & demonstrates how they're achieving their aims.
I was really talking about the news...
If we're talking about fiction, then commissioning editors, independent TV writers and such. Then your perfectly correct we are bombarded with propaganda all day long, then presented a news item which were expected to cheer or hate dependent on how effective our conditioning is going.

In your case, not at all.
 
You seem to be under the misapprehension that Countryfile is concerned with agriculture, as it used to be decades ago. As far as I can see in the short time between it appearing on my screen and me finding the remote, it has nothing to do with all those rude mechanicals actually working on the land and is all about fluffy bunnies, organically sourced and sustainable bull excrement, and vegan tofu knitting of climate change banners.

To a lesser extent the same is also true of Radio 4's Farming Today, which I have the misfortune to be awake for 15 minutes of (early rise to get to work, and my SOP is to slap the radio on as I brew my coffee and tie my shoelaces) before the Today Programme kicks off. It's all about earnest types stopping evil farmers doing BAD THINGS (badger culls, using tractors, using fertiliser, using insecticides, not supporting the mediaeval ecosystem that some mung bean chewer seems to feel is what we really need, and so on). Very little about actual farming needs, mostly special interest environmentalists riding ethically reared hobbyhorses across the sunlit airwave uplands of cloud cuckoo land.

.....and rest. That feels better.
It always reminded me of a Blue Peter for twee adult types. Stopped watching aged ago.
 
I was really talking about the news...
If we're talking about fiction, then commissioning editors, independent TV writers and such. Then your perfectly correct we are bombarded with propaganda all day long, then presented a news item which were expected to cheer or hate dependent on how effective our conditioning is going.

In your case, not at all.
Have you looked closely at the BBC's online "news" of late.
Every article is slanted to embrace or expound the liberal/"progressive" agenda.
One beaut last week was about a woman abandoned as a child by her father, except that was only the first half. The second (& thus remembered) part was all about her "mid life crisis" leading to her becoming a volunteer working in the Calais illegal immigrant camps & with the same parasites back in the UK.

Unintentional?

I think not.
 
Have you looked closely at the BBC's online "news" of late.
Every article is slanted to embrace or expound the liberal/"progressive" agenda.
One beaut last week was about a woman abandoned as a child by her father, except that was only the first half. The second (& thus remembered) part was all about her "mid life crisis" leading to her becoming a volunteer working in the Calais illegal immigrant camps & with the same parasites back in the UK.

Unintentional?

I think not.
I accept the BBC is biased, but how intentional can something be if the BBC, Government, Journalists and institutions in general support and agree with that agenda ?...

To prove intentional bias, you need to have a loser in this equation and be actively trying to undercut the other side of a story. The BBC is far too subtle in the news cycle to fall completely into that trap, though they sometimes use others to suggest bad behaviour in the case of their deeper enemies like trump, farage et al.

What they do is feed into the fictional universe a host of parables which frame a truth, then present your story and leave you to draw the expected conclusion.
 
Ah, so you're trolling & not capable of giving a sensible answer.
I feel kind of sorry for you, if i'm honest. you are a man of advancing age. Who routinely uses dehumanising, stereotyping language and whose posts reek of bitterness. The world has moved on from your limited viewpoint, and the TV, reflecting the zeitgeist (because, lets face it, that's what television does) offends you, and you are tilting against windmills because of that.

Good luck, don't forget to keep your door locked and bolted incase a liberal, with a social conscience (or other 'parasites' of 'their ilk') should try and infect you with *modern* (or even *reasonable*)

You buffoon.
 
At first glance it appears to be part of an orchestrated campaign to change everyone into mini-me ex graduates, who are right on progressive, with a penchant for climbing mt Kilimanjaro and finding themselves in a sunny place as far away from the UK as they can get. Whilst still porting around all the tech in their bags.

The truth is, much of this bias is entirely unintentional. If the BBC was ran by a load of ex squaddies then the content would be similarly unrepresentative.
Unintentional bias is still bias, just as unintentional racism is still racism. Oh that's not just my view, let's ask Sue Lawley, Alan Yentob, Mark Thompson, Roger Mosey and Helen Boden
We are biased, admit the stars of BBC News | Daily Mail Online
Mark Thompson: “There was massive left-wing bias at the BBC”
BBC dogged by liberal bias, former chief admits
BBC had 'deep liberal bias' over immigration, says former news chief

If The Guardian and New Statesman are reporting it, alongside The Telegraph and The Mail, it can't all be the right wing media that's looking a bit further.
 

Similar threads


Latest Threads

Top