Army Rumour Service

This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!

The BBC: are claims of political bias justified? Part 2.

Chef

LE
The BBC is wounded, badly, but I hope not fatally. Getting rid of the licence fee may be one way but all that would do is make more room for the PC crowd to proliferate and is only a symptom. Get rid of the cause and the BBC might be saved.
Edited for brevity.

I suspect that if the BBC had to rely on subscriptions, to survive financially, that the PC crowd would discover that woke stuff is fine when somebody else is paying but in the commercial world money talks and BS walks.

I'd give them a year maybe two before 'It ain't half hot mum' was dug out from the vaults and Mr Linneker got a 90% pay cut. (he'd still be overpaid).
 
It is because it can’t be linked to Trump, Covid, BREXIT, and Boris Grrr and so cant be used as club to beat the government with.
Also you are not supposed be proud of anything Britain can do.
But waiting for the usual reports asking why is money being wasted on these exercises at a time when the NHS does not have PPE; arts, sports and businesses need government funding to keep them going; the horrendous cost of Covid and BREXIT on the economy blah blah blah...
The BBC is obsessed with Trump and so any news story that is positive for the two countries is a negative for the narrative..... Make no mistake, the BBC has worked out the best way to stop Brexit/Boris is the removal of Trump and that is the corporations current focus and why it was obsessed with BLM when it was undermining the presidents campaign.
 

Cold_Collation

LE
Book Reviewer
I have to say that, although I have been vocal in my views on the BBC, I don't think we need to lose it in its entirety. We do need to lose the culture that has smothered the Beeb in 'wokeness' and the layer of management that perpetuates this.

Where did it all go wrong? Well, IMO, it is when the BBC changed from being a programme maker to a programme buyer. The talent that made programmes and the ethos of the BBC disappeared, almost overnight leaving a vacuum which was filled by the Woke Brigade.

The BBC is wounded, badly, but I hope not fatally. Getting rid of the licence fee may be one way but all that would do is make more room for the PC crowd to proliferate and is only a symptom. Get rid of the cause and the BBC might be saved.
I think you've got that árse-about-face, if I'm honest. Programme-makers will only make that which is commissioned. There's no point in expending time and money on something which isn't going to earn you a living.

'The BBC', for instance, has declared that such as the Monty Python team wouldn't get commissioned today as they went to the 'wrong kind of schools'.

But... programme-makers know that the skewed and patronising will get taken up. So, we get safe/untaxing or Woke nonsense.

The ethos of the organisation - or, at least, its Charter - has been usurped from within, not without.
 
Seems GB News is a Murdoch vehicle so might not be as balanced as one would like. However, also rumoured to be including Nige' in the line-up so...




Seen as a "huge blow" for Auntie, too:-


"Another person commented: “This is brilliant, but sad news for Andrew. He's been so loyal to them, but it was not echoed by them."

"He'll do brilliantly without the crushing wokeness of the BBC."
"

Oh, yes. Yes indeedy...
Oh please God let one of his first guests be the Controller of the BBC.
 
I have to say that, although I have been vocal in my views on the BBC, I don't think we need to lose it in its entirety. We do need to lose the culture that has smothered the Beeb in 'wokeness' and the layer of management that perpetuates this.

Where did it all go wrong? Well, IMO, it is when the BBC changed from being a programme maker to a programme buyer. The talent that made programmes and the ethos of the BBC disappeared, almost overnight leaving a vacuum which was filled by the Woke Brigade.

The BBC is wounded, badly, but I hope not fatally. Getting rid of the licence fee may be one way but all that would do is make more room for the PC crowd to proliferate and is only a symptom. Get rid of the cause and the BBC might be saved.
It's complicated. There was plenty of dross on BBC TV even in the 70s and 80s but at least it didn't spend a vast fortune on it. Some of the better programmes were done on a comparative shoestring budget and were seemingly non the worse for it. Sky at Night, Tomorrow's World, Blake's Seven, Spike Milligan, etc Shoddy sets and makeshift effects were forgivable when stories were good.

Newsround was a genuine attempt to engage youngsters with what was going on in the world around them. It wasn't supposed to be a model for news for 18 to 30s. At least I hope not. There are some journalists who were inspired by it. One would hope they had moved on from it rather than using it as a standard.

Lowering the common denominator too far can lead to a downward spiral in values and credibility. Voice of America had programmes in Special English. Maybe BBC could have done similar rather than progressively dumbing down the material intended for all viewers.

The perceived need to compete with commercial broadcasters for big names set a different standard and not necessarily a good one. There are many people happy to work for a reasonable wage and conditions, to a professional standard, rather than compete for some kind of showbiz mega earnings and stardom. That isn't what the BBC was founded for. "The unique way the BBC is funded" didn't envisage millionaires preaching to the "Working Class".

A desperate attempt to expand and appeal to all sectors mirrors what happens commercially when a business becomes overconfident or desperate and stretches beyond it's marketability. Propping it up artificially like British Leyland (different circumstances, I know) with too many products of insufficient quality and appeal, bad management and a culture of doubling down against reality, maintains the illusion, until reality finally takes hold.

BBC1 and BBC2 have an identity crisis and don't know what they are. I don't watch them. They have become irrelevant to me. Rather than scrapping BBC4 they should be realising that it is something people actually watch and prefer. How is it that BBC4 seems more professionally produced? Scheduling perhaps and an absence of the woke Newsnight etc. News24 and World Service need some of the hard left and anti-British types sifted out. Likewise R4. Maybe, just maybe they can build on those more serious channels as their core, to inform and educate. I think they have lost entertainment as a victim of wokeness and London centricity.
 
I always thought the BBC was supposed to educate and not preach to it’s viewers.
 
I always thought the BBC was supposed to educate and not preach to it’s viewers.
Mission creep and interpretation? From their website:

Reith is identified with the BBC’s public service aims to educate, inform and entertain.
John Reith

Charter and Agreement
Mission, values and public purposes

BBC sets out plan to inform, educate and entertain during unprecedented times
BBC - BBC sets out plan to inform, educate and entertain during unprecedented times - Media Centre
 

Cold_Collation

LE
Book Reviewer
It's complicated. There was plenty of dross on BBC TV even in the 70s and 80s but at least it didn't spend a vast fortune on it. Some of the better programmes were done on a comparative shoestring budget and were seemingly non the worse for it. Sky at Night, Tomorrow's World, Blake's Seven, Spike Milligan, etc Shoddy sets and makeshift effects were forgivable when stories were good.

Newsround was a genuine attempt to engage youngsters with what was going on in the world around them. It wasn't supposed to be a model for news for 18 to 30s. At least I hope not. There are some journalists who were inspired by it. One would hope they had moved on from it rather than using it as a standard.

Lowering the common denominator too far can lead to a downward spiral in values and credibility. Voice of America had programmes in Special English. Maybe BBC could have done similar rather than progressively dumbing down the material intended for all viewers.

The perceived need to compete with commercial broadcasters for big names set a different standard and not necessarily a good one. There are many people happy to work for a reasonable wage and conditions, to a professional standard, rather than compete for some kind of showbiz mega earnings and stardom. That isn't what the BBC was founded for. "The unique way the BBC is funded" didn't envisage millionaires preaching to the "Working Class".

A desperate attempt to expand and appeal to all sectors mirrors what happens commercially when a business becomes overconfident or desperate and stretches beyond it's marketability. Propping it up artificially like British Leyland (different circumstances, I know) with too many products of insufficient quality and appeal, bad management and a culture of doubling down against reality, maintains the illusion, until reality finally takes hold.

BBC1 and BBC2 have an identity crisis and don't know what they are. I don't watch them. They have become irrelevant to me. Rather than scrapping BBC4 they should be realising that it is something people actually watch and prefer. How is it that BBC4 seems more professionally produced? Scheduling perhaps and an absence of the woke Newsnight etc. News24 and World Service need some of the hard left and anti-British types sifted out. Likewise R4. Maybe, just maybe they can build on those more serious channels as their core, to inform and educate. I think they have lost entertainment as a victim of wokeness and London centricity.
Why BBC4? Because it continues to air stuff with some semblance of intellectual rigour.

The problem elsewhere is that stuff has to be inoffensive to everyone (stand fast straight white males - we don't count) and not an intellectual stretch.

Take Blake's Seven and compare it to the current Doctor Who. Actually, you can't. You can't even compare the current Doctor Who to itself just half a dozen years ago.
 

Grownup_Rafbrat

LE
Book Reviewer
Given that The Guardian only still exists on the last shreds of an offshore, tax avoiding trust fund, I don’t see the BBC in its current form lasting any time at all as a subscription offering.
No charge
 
Mission creep and interpretation? From their website:

Reith is identified with the BBC’s public service aims to educate, inform and entertain.
John Reith

Charter and Agreement
Mission, values and public purposes

BBC sets out plan to inform, educate and entertain during unprecedented times
BBC - BBC sets out plan to inform, educate and entertain during unprecedented times - Media Centre

I specifically included the word " Inform " in my Post 2296 as a tribute tp Lord Reith's 1930's and now tarnished statement concerning the original purpose of the BBC .
 
The BBC is obsessed with Trump and so any news story that is positive for the two countries is a negative for the narrative..... Make no mistake, the BBC has worked out the best way to stop Brexit/Boris is the removal of Trump and that is the corporations current focus and why it was obsessed with BLM when it was undermining the presidents campaign.
Cheers Vlad.
 
The freedom smack to the face genuinely made me.laugh out loud.
If you thought that was funny you should see some of the other ones. It's always funny watching a lefty getting some karma.
 
It's complicated. There was plenty of dross on BBC TV even in the 70s and 80s but at least it didn't spend a vast fortune on it. Some of the better programmes were done on a comparative shoestring budget and were seemingly non the worse for it. Sky at Night, Tomorrow's World, Blake's Seven, Spike Milligan, etc Shoddy sets and makeshift effects were forgivable when stories were good.

Newsround was a genuine attempt to engage youngsters with what was going on in the world around them. It wasn't supposed to be a model for news for 18 to 30s. At least I hope not. There are some journalists who were inspired by it. One would hope they had moved on from it rather than using it as a standard.

Lowering the common denominator too far can lead to a downward spiral in values and credibility. Voice of America had programmes in Special English. Maybe BBC could have done similar rather than progressively dumbing down the material intended for all viewers.

The perceived need to compete with commercial broadcasters for big names set a different standard and not necessarily a good one. There are many people happy to work for a reasonable wage and conditions, to a professional standard, rather than compete for some kind of showbiz mega earnings and stardom. That isn't what the BBC was founded for. "The unique way the BBC is funded" didn't envisage millionaires preaching to the "Working Class".

A desperate attempt to expand and appeal to all sectors mirrors what happens commercially when a business becomes overconfident or desperate and stretches beyond it's marketability. Propping it up artificially like British Leyland (different circumstances, I know) with too many products of insufficient quality and appeal, bad management and a culture of doubling down against reality, maintains the illusion, until reality finally takes hold.

BBC1 and BBC2 have an identity crisis and don't know what they are. I don't watch them. They have become irrelevant to me. Rather than scrapping BBC4 they should be realising that it is something people actually watch and prefer. How is it that BBC4 seems more professionally produced? Scheduling perhaps and an absence of the woke Newsnight etc. News24 and World Service need some of the hard left and anti-British types sifted out. Likewise R4. Maybe, just maybe they can build on those more serious channels as their core, to inform and educate. I think they have lost entertainment as a victim of wokeness and London centricity.
I think it was Peter Hitchens who highlighted the BBC changed in the sixties to become activist and that was ok, so long as the broadcast media was balanced by the strong conservative tone of the written press.. As the newspapers have died, the social media world, is largely controlled by he left and so the BBC bias looks worse and become an issue for many, as the process or wish to shut off offensive material becomes a concern for many.
 
BBC reporting that the Police have clashed with anti lockdown protesters in central London as officers tried to close the event down. They were asked to disperse as they weren’t complying with social distancing rules.

I remember when it was reported that the protesters clashed with the Police in situations like this.
 
BBC reporting on the Swiss vote on free movement with the EU which was almost balanced (but did have a bit of Project Fear in it ie. the effect on the economy as 60% of trade is with the EU, effects on Swiss people living and working in the EU etc.) until the end when they linked this to BREXIT talks and a warning to the UK on how the EU expects negotiations to be carried out.
They just can’t help themselves can they.
 

Fat Driver

Old-Salt
I wonder if you receive a radio station on an internet live stream where they also broadcast video from the studio of the presenters yakking (a la LBC and talkRADIO) then does that count as "watching live TV" for the purposes of the licence...?

I've just switched from LBC to talkRADIO as tR is deliciously unwoke and the only unwoke on LBC now is Ferrari (I have switched to sit-down-to-eat-and-watch-movies mode by the time Dale comes on) but can't get it on DAB where I live so stream it via their website, which is just the audio. However, if you listen live via their FB page you get the studio video, too*.




* Nice for JH-B but a bit of a shock of you've got the window unminimised and in front at 10am as you then get Mike Graham's fat mush glaring out at you!
The funny thing is they use a very unflattering still of Mike Graham for the adverts/news:-D
 
Last edited:

NSP

LE
BBC reporting that the Police have clashed with anti lockdown protesters in central London as officers tried to close the event down. They were asked to disperse as they weren’t complying with social distancing rules.

I remember when it was reported that the protesters clashed with the Police in situations like this.
I'd like to see a bit of footage of the police dealing with the covidiots worthy of its own "Friday Night Smackdown" video, really.
 
Last edited:

New Posts

Latest Threads

Top