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

Link here to a long article by Laura Kuenssberg on the BBC news website. It isn't 'news' (as in reporting something that's happened that we need to know). It is an essay about the PM, and largely negative. It is four days before the elections - surely this sort of feature is not appropriate? As it isn't 'news' (rather, it is a newspaper-style opinion piece) publication could be delayed until after Wednesday.
The BBC's attempts to help Labour seem pretty blatant at the moment.
 
Last edited:
Link here to a long article by Laura Kuenssberg on the BBC news website. It isn't 'news' (as in reporting something that's happened that we need to know). It is an essay about the PM, and largely negative. It is four days before the elections - surely this sort of feature is not appropriate? As it isn't 'news' (rather, it is a newspaper-style opinion piece) publication could be delayed until after Wednesday.
The BBC's attempts to help Labour seem pretty blatant at the moment.

I gave you a like but I am not reading any article by that harridan. She is poison.
 
I gave you a like but I am not reading any article by that harridan. She is poison.
Understood. It is predictably a not so subtle Grr Boris piece.
I genuinely can't believe the BBC thinks it acceptable to run such an opinion piece this close to elections. They don't give a toss about impartiality.
 

Truxx

LE
Link here to a long article by Laura Kuenssberg on the BBC news website. It isn't 'news' (as in reporting something that's happened that we need to know). It is an essay about the PM, and largely negative. It is four days before the elections - surely this sort of feature is not appropriate? As it isn't 'news' (rather, it is a newspaper-style opinion piece) publication could be delayed until after Wednesday.
The BBC's attempts to help Labour seem pretty blatant at the moment.
"Say sources"

That's how she, and others, get away with sort of thing.
 
Look up 'polemic' in the dictionary: that more than covers the nature of the piece.

:rolleyes:
Thanks. Good tip. Really nails his point for him.
". A controversial argument, especially one refuting or attacking a specific opinion or doctrine."

Not something that should be done by the national broadcaster this close to an election
 
I wonder if that piece breaks the rules on the special impartiality requirements in the Communications Act 2003 during an election period. No doubt the BBC's lawyers will have cast their eyes over it.

It does seem to me of late that, Laura really has an axe to grind with Boris and it does seem to be getting personal.
 
I wonder if that piece breaks the rules on the special impartiality requirements in the Communications Act 2003 during an election period. No doubt the BBC's lawyers will have cast their eyes over it.

It does seem to me of late that, Laura really has an axe to grind with Boris and it does seem to be getting personal.
Is Laura on a staff contract at the Beeb, or an independent ?
 
If she's independent, the BBC are paying her just short of £300K for being independent. As she's the BBC's Chief Political Editor (rather than 'Correspondent') I suspect she's a staffie. Where's @bigeye when you want some accurate info?
 
Understood. It is predictably a not so subtle Grr Boris piece.
I genuinely can't believe the BBC thinks it acceptable to run such an opinion piece this close to elections. They don't give a toss about impartiality.
Because no one ever punishes them for partiality. They learnt a long time ago that Tory governments talk tough but never actually do anything. The one exception was the Blessed Maggon, who took them on and they spent the decade attacking her as a result.
 
I think she is employed by Labour Party HQ!

Seems that some over there mightn't be too happy with her either.

'Does Boris Johnson lie? It would be hard to find many people who would deny he, at the very least, stretches the truth.

'Well Laura Kuenssberg, BBC’s Political Editor, has written an article with the headline “Boris Johnson: What is the PM’s relationship with the truth?”

'She comes under a lot of attacks, especially from the left. Laura is seen by many of that political persuasion as a supporter of the Government or at least biased against the views of people who would consider themselves Corbynites.

'So does this article put all those accusations to bed? Well, no, not really.

'Kuenssberg doesn’t mention any actual examples of the PM lying, but quotes various sources broadly discussing the PM’s general manner.

'It wouldn’t be a stretch to assume people wanted real world examples, perhaps ones we don’t already know.

'For example she writes: “Some of his allies cite this desire to argue things backwards and forwards before reaching a decision as a strength, saying: “He challenges organisations and conventional wisdom.”

“Others have a more straightforward explanation.

“He is just sometimes unable to face the truth because he doesn’t like making hard decisions,” says one insider. Another says: “You are never sure what the real truth of a situation is.”

'At one point she says that he has been compared to Steve Jobs.

“One former colleague compares him to the late Steve Jobs, the hard-driving founder of tech giant Apple,” she writes.

'Another one of the PM’s former workmates also stuck up for him.

“Mr Johnson’s former colleague told me: “Is there wilful lying? I would struggle to point to a direct example.“

She ends the article with…. “But as one of the few people who genuinely knows Boris Johnson once told me, he is a politician who above all, wants to be loved.”


 

Latest Threads

Top