BBC must become more impartial.

#1
According to an internal report. Clicky.

Does this mean going back to critically analysing government pronouncements rather than just meekly accepting them in the hopethe DG gets to keep his job?
 
#2
smartascarrots said:
According to an internal report. Clicky.

Does this mean going back to critically analysing government pronouncements rather than just meekly accepting them in the hopethe DG gets to keep his job?


Oh thats made my day :D :D

NO.
 
#3
Impartial, apolitical and independant of view. BBC used to hold up to all of these terms.

Does this mean going back to critically analysing government pronouncements rather than just meekly accepting them in the hopethe DG gets to keep his job?
Yes but it also means that the politicians relax some of the control they have grabbed using the argument of oversight on public money spends. They now have too much influence, IMHO.
 
#4
BBC America is about as partisan and biased as a station can get so it's hillarious to me that they are seen as being a government mouthpiece by you folks...

Heck, they just ran a made for television movie about Tblair being put on trial... made him look like a rather nasty individual who'd be a suitable opponent for Bond in the next 007 flick. :D
 
#5
Here's the internal BBC memo.

Today the BBC is publishing a new report about safeguarding the BBC’s impartiality in a world where the media and social landscapes are changing rapidly and where technology is giving rise to a range of voices and opinions not always heard through traditional media. The report is also accompanied by extensive new research of what our audiences expect and believe impartiality to be. They say they understand that impartiality is often difficult to achieve but the message to us is loud and clear: impartiality matters.

One of the key findings from the report and research is that the BBC should not think about impartiality only in relation to news and current affairs but across all content areas. It means giving the broadest range of views and opinions in order to support impartiality. It is an immense responsibility and presents all areas of programme-making with significant, creative challenges. Whilst our audiences want us to do better on impartiality, both they and the BBC are clear that this should not, and must not, lead to political correctness – which is why the report contains 12 Guiding Principles to inform our approach. These principles are complementary to the BBC’s Editorial Guidelines to impartiality and do not replace them.

The report has been approved by the BBC Trust and the BBC Executive Board. The steering group on this project was chaired by Trust member Richard Tait (formerly Editor in Chief at ITN and Editor Newsnight) and myself, Alan Yentob, the BBC’s Creative Director and Helen Boaden, Director BBC News were all members of the group.

Safeguarding impartiality is a big and challenging topic and the publication of the report should be the catalyst to a wide conversation and debate across the BBC. The report does not set out a definitive process or prescribe the solutions - it is up to us inside the BBC to interpret what it means for each genre and to ensure that impartiality is as core to other content as it is to news.

We all have a role to play in this. Throughout the rest of the year we will be running a programme of training, seminars and debates through the College of Journalism and in conjunction with Editorial Policy, available to all programme makers, so please look out for further information in the coming weeks. We will also be liaising closely with PACT - the independent programme-makers professional body – to raise awareness amongst those who contribute from outside the BBC.

In the meantime, please take the time to read this important and thought provoking report or, at the least, the 12 Guiding Principles.

I would welcome any feedback or initial thoughts/ideas you may have and look forward to what I know will be rich and stimulating conversations on the subject.
My problem with this is that Producer Guidelines have been in place for years, developed by Editoral Policy and setting out all the rules that are necessary. So what's new here?

Furthermore the so-called 'new' "12 Guiding Principles" are only there for programme makers to "interpret" rather than 'obey' in the way that, say, military orders are.

Guess what? It's all bollix and another total waste of time.

One of the most serious charges in the report was brought against the Beeb's coverage of "single issue politics", like climate change. This is where a large element of bias was detected.

And who would have thought it? BBC bigwigs are having a big climate change 'conference' very shortly, featuring Al Gore and a bunch of other academics and pseuds, all of whom are being flown into the UK so that "impartial" Corporation chods can grovel and scrape to them.

Doesn't sound very impartial to me....

End of rant.
 
#6
Khyros said:
BBC America is about as partisan and biased as a station can get so it's hillarious to me that they are seen as being a government mouthpiece by you folks...

Heck, they just ran a made for television movie about Tblair being put on trial... made him look like a rather nasty individual who'd be a suitable opponent for Bond in the next 007 flick. :D
"The Trial of Tony Blair"? Wasn't that a Channel 4 production?
 
#7
CutLunchCommando said:
Khyros said:
BBC America is about as partisan and biased as a station can get so it's hillarious to me that they are seen as being a government mouthpiece by you folks...

Heck, they just ran a made for television movie about Tblair being put on trial... made him look like a rather nasty individual who'd be a suitable opponent for Bond in the next 007 flick. :D
"The Trial of Tony Blair"? Wasn't that a Channel 4 production?
Probably, BBC America broadcats a surprising lack of BBC programmes. It likes to show Benny Hill, the Avengers, and other old shows made by Thames, ITC, and Channel Four. The few programmes that were originally commissioned by the beeb are all the dross daytime fare.

The regular half hour newsbroadcast is, however, taken from BBC World.
 
#8
Many have been saying this for a long time now, as of yet they have stopped short of playing the imperial march from star wars when showing British, American or isreali troops, but they carry out there bias in a subtle way, missing out key parts of the story, giving unwarrented airtime to unelected lobby groups (shami chakrabati must have clocked up a few days worth of airtime, ditto gareth pierce) chosing an audience make up of a certain religion for question time, finding words other than terrorist to describe those who plant bombs in public places with the aim of killing and maiming as many innocent people as possible etc etc

It is made much worse by the fact that they are trusted throughout the world, and one of the most popular news chanels worldwide, and the fact that they are funded by the British taxpayer.
 
#9
On the politics show last Sunday, the presenter grilled a Conservative politician (I can't remember who) about the party's domestic policies as if the Conservatives were in power with the same policies failing. it wasn't just devil's advocate stuff, it was outright hostility.

I have never seen a Labour politician (let's not forget that they are in power and many of their policies are failing) grilled in the same manner about domestic policy, nor a Liberal Democrator green party politician treated with anything other than kid gloves.
 
F

fozzy

Guest
#10
mark1234 said:
Many have been saying this for a long time now, as of yet they have stopped short of playing the imperial march from star wars when showing British, American or isreali troops, but they carry out there bias in a subtle way, missing out key parts of the story, giving unwarrented airtime to unelected lobby groups (shami chakrabati must have clocked up a few days worth of airtime, ditto gareth pierce) chosing an audience make up of a certain religion for question time, finding words other than terrorist to describe those who plant bombs in public places with the aim of killing and maiming as many innocent people as possible etc etc

It is made much worse by the fact that they are trusted throughout the world, and one of the most popular news chanels worldwide, and the fact that they are funded by the British taxpayer.
I'm not one to usually BBC bash, but it has got painful over the last couple of years. It has become institutionally anti-American, anti nuclear and anti forces. I also am uneasy about what has become a regular "Muslim opinion of the day" slot on the Today Programme.

Compare and contrast the archive Falklands War BBC news footage broadcast on Sunday on BBC Parlament Channel, with the style of contempoary news. It was light years better than what passes for informed news coverage today.

Libby Purves makes some interesting reading on this, in todays edition of the Times - especially about the lack of coverage for Trafalgar 200:
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/comment/columnists/libby_purves/article1951185.ece

I'm beginning to think that a licence fee strike could send a message.
 
#12
I'm not too sure what more impartial might actually mean. It's either impartial or it's not. You can't have degrees of impartiality.

In any event, the word simply does not appear in the BBC dictionary.
 
#13
mark1234 said:
Many have been saying this for a long time now, as of yet they have stopped short of playing the imperial march from star wars when showing British, American or isreali troops, but they carry out there bias in a subtle way, missing out key parts of the story, giving unwarrented airtime to unelected lobby groups (shami chakrabati must have clocked up a few days worth of airtime, ditto gareth pierce) chosing an audience make up of a certain religion for question time, finding words other than terrorist to describe those who plant bombs in public places with the aim of killing and maiming as many innocent people as possible etc etc
quote]

That Shami Chakrabati gets on my nerves; I actually thought she was a BBC reporter at first because she was on nearly every news item. Doesn't LIBERTY have any other people working for them? And when she's not on the news she's on Have I got News For You...
 
#14
Try to compare BBC with other main-stream Western mass-media and you would find that BBC is the most impartial one.

This call 'be more impartial' is clearly Orwellian and really means 'be more biased'.
 
#15
KGB_resident said:
Try to compare BBC with other main-stream Western mass-media and you would find that BBC is the most impartial one.

This call 'be more impartial' is clearly Orwellian and really means 'be more biased'.
HEY.

Do you watch all our tv? Like the local ITV etc? Why do you frequent these forums? Maybe you think the BBC is impartial compared to what you have?
 
#16
EX_REME said:
KGB_resident said:
Try to compare BBC with other main-stream Western mass-media and you would find that BBC is the most impartial one.

This call 'be more impartial' is clearly Orwellian and really means 'be more biased'.
HEY.

Do you watch all our tv? Like the local ITV etc? Why do you frequent these forums? Maybe you think the BBC is impartial compared to what you have?
I compare BBC radio (it is available in Russian on FM in Moscow) with Radio Russia (strong fro-Kremlin bias) and with Radio Echo of Moscow (strong pro-American, pro-Israel bias). On this background BBC looks well.

Alos I read freaquently BBC, The Daily Telegraph, Washington Post, other newspapers and new. From my point of view BBC is the most unbiased.

Can't comment about TV. However, unlikely BBC on TV is differ from BBC on the WEB.

Last year or two quality of BBC is rather lowering but anyway BBC remains likely the most impartial news-source in Western media-space.

I like to visit the great ARRSE because it is great. There are so many intelligent, well informed, polite and funny contributors.
 
#17
KGB_resident said:
EX_REME said:
KGB_resident said:
Try to compare BBC with other main-stream Western mass-media and you would find that BBC is the most impartial one.

This call 'be more impartial' is clearly Orwellian and really means 'be more biased'.
HEY.

Do you watch all our tv? Like the local ITV etc? Why do you frequent these forums? Maybe you think the BBC is impartial compared to what you have?
I compare BBC radio (it is available in Russian on FM in Moscow) with Radio Russia (strong fro-Kremlin bias) and with Radio Echo of Moscow (strong pro-American, pro-Israel bias). On this background BBC looks well.

Alos I read freaquently BBC, The Daily Telegraph, Washington Post, other newspapers and new. From my point of view BBC is the most unbiased.

Can't comment about TV. However, unlikely BBC on TV is differ from BBC on the WEB.

Last year or two quality of BBC is rather lowering but anyway BBC remains likely the most impartial news-source in Western media-space.

I like to visit the great ARRSE because it is great. There are so many intelligent, well informed, polite and funny contributors.
Ahh, Sergey, how kind. Obviously none of that's aimed at me ! :D

I agree that the BBC remains one of the better news sources. You only need to look at Fox to see a true horror but that is not really the point.

What is sad is that the standards have been allowed to slip at all. Standards are easy to keep if you keep on top of them and difficult to recovery to once they are breached.

I only hope the BBC listens to the self critism and acts on it.
 
#18
KGB_resident said:
EX_REME said:
KGB_resident said:
Try to compare BBC with other main-stream Western mass-media and you would find that BBC is the most impartial one.

This call 'be more impartial' is clearly Orwellian and really means 'be more biased'.
HEY.

Do you watch all our tv? Like the local ITV etc? Why do you frequent these forums? Maybe you think the BBC is impartial compared to what you have?
I compare BBC radio (it is available in Russian on FM in Moscow) with Radio Russia (strong fro-Kremlin bias) and with Radio Echo of Moscow (strong pro-American, pro-Israel bias). On this background BBC looks well.

Alos I read freaquently BBC, The Daily Telegraph, Washington Post, other newspapers and new. From my point of view BBC is the most unbiased.

Can't comment about TV. However, unlikely BBC on TV is differ from BBC on the WEB.

Last year or two quality of BBC is rather lowering but anyway BBC remains likely the most impartial news-source in Western media-space.

I like to visit the great ARRSE because it is great. There are so many intelligent, well informed, polite and funny contributors.
Exactly my point. We in the UK are used to impartialiality, WE can see when it is going down the tube.
 
#19
KGB_resident said:
EX_REME said:
KGB_resident said:
Try to compare BBC with other main-stream Western mass-media and you would find that BBC is the most impartial one.

This call 'be more impartial' is clearly Orwellian and really means 'be more biased'.
HEY.

Do you watch all our tv? Like the local ITV etc? Why do you frequent these forums? Maybe you think the BBC is impartial compared to what you have?
I compare BBC radio (it is available in Russian on FM in Moscow) with Radio Russia (strong fro-Kremlin bias) and with Radio Echo of Moscow (strong pro-American, pro-Israel bias). On this background BBC looks well.

Alos I read freaquently BBC, The Daily Telegraph, Washington Post, other newspapers and new. From my point of view BBC is the most unbiased.

Can't comment about TV. However, unlikely BBC on TV is differ from BBC on the WEB.

Last year or two quality of BBC is rather lowering but anyway BBC remains likely the most impartial news-source in Western media-space.

I like to visit the great ARRSE because it is great. There are so many intelligent, well informed, polite and funny contributors.
Maybe you should listen to few (posts on here spring to mind).
 
#20
PsyWar.Org said:
CutLunchCommando said:
Khyros said:
BBC America is about as partisan and biased as a station can get so it's hillarious to me that they are seen as being a government mouthpiece by you folks...

Heck, they just ran a made for television movie about Tblair being put on trial... made him look like a rather nasty individual who'd be a suitable opponent for Bond in the next 007 flick. :D
"The Trial of Tony Blair"? Wasn't that a Channel 4 production?
Probably, BBC America broadcats a surprising lack of BBC programmes. It likes to show Benny Hill, the Avengers, and other old shows made by Thames, ITC, and Channel Four. The few programmes that were originally commissioned by the beeb are all the dross daytime fare.

The regular half hour newsbroadcast is, however, taken from BBC World.
Don't forget Keeping Up Appearances. :roll: God, I hate that programme. It seems that every time I turn to that channel it's that, Bargain Hunt, Mr Bean or Benny Cnuting Hill.

On the upside you can catch Father Ted every now and then if you're very lucky.

PBS News (esp. The News Hour with Jim Lehrer), which is probably the only place on spam TV where you can get "real" news and quality analysis, tends to pick up a lot of their reports from ITV News these days, even though they rebro the BBC World Service news.
 

Similar threads

Latest Threads

Top