BBC in Left Wing Bias Shocker
Discussion
:rubschin:
So, to summarise, the Daily Mail publishes extracts from a book soon to be published by a well known celebrity former employee of the BBC.
I'm sure the article, littered with photos sure to tick boxes with the Mail readership, will reinforce entrenched views, help retain readers and, no doubt, help the PR and sales of the soon to be released book.
I'm sure the article, littered with photos sure to tick boxes with the Mail readership, will reinforce entrenched views, help retain readers and, no doubt, help the PR and sales of the soon to be released book.
Excellent article.
"The increasing tendency for the BBC to interview its own reporters on air exacerbates this mindset. Instead of concentrating on interviewing the leading players in a story or spreading the net wide for a range of views, these days the BBC frequently chooses to use the time getting the thoughts of its own correspondents. It is a format intended to help clarify the facts, but which often invites the expression of opinion. When that happens, instead of hearing both sides of a story, the audience at home gets what is, in effect, the BBC’s view presented as fact."
"The increasing tendency for the BBC to interview its own reporters on air exacerbates this mindset. Instead of concentrating on interviewing the leading players in a story or spreading the net wide for a range of views, these days the BBC frequently chooses to use the time getting the thoughts of its own correspondents. It is a format intended to help clarify the facts, but which often invites the expression of opinion. When that happens, instead of hearing both sides of a story, the audience at home gets what is, in effect, the BBC’s view presented as fact."
scenario8 said:
So, to summarise, the Daily Mail publishes extracts from a book soon to be published by a well known celebrity former employee of the BBC.
I'm sure the article, littered with photos sure to tick boxes with the Mail readership, will reinforce entrenched views, help retain readers and, no doubt, help the PR and sales of the soon to be released book.
And at the same time offer a better view of the beeb's self-evident bias than anything available from an external vantage point. That the BBC is biased to the left is not in question, the interesting part of Sissons' reminiscences, and this isn't the first, are the details and the insights into the culture and mindset that leads inevitably to the bias.I'm sure the article, littered with photos sure to tick boxes with the Mail readership, will reinforce entrenched views, help retain readers and, no doubt, help the PR and sales of the soon to be released book.
It's not even subtle. Just before I switched off one of the BBC's radio stations recently, the current leftie-on-air sounded very pleased with the notion that shortly there would be an interview with two great politicians. These turned out to be Denis Healey and Tony Benn. Healey was a joke and quite possibly still is. Benn is venerated a lot including on PH as though having wrong-minded principles makes it OK as long as you have principles. However my view of these relics of the left isn't the point, the notion of having any sort of discussion involving two politicians ought to suggest that having two of the same flavour, which just hapens to be shared by the BBC, is likely to reinforce perceptions of bias. Maybe they don't care any more, or think that everybody in the real world shares the BBC mindset.
It's way past the time when the BBC ought to have been brought to book. CMD probably won't have the balls for it as he's already scared to death of what hacks at the Guardian might write.
Mojocvh said:
Excellent article.
"The increasing tendency for the BBC to interview its own reporters on air exacerbates this mindset. Instead of concentrating on interviewing the leading players in a story or spreading the net wide for a range of views, these days the BBC frequently chooses to use the time getting the thoughts of its own correspondents. It is a format intended to help clarify the facts, but which often invites the expression of opinion. When that happens, instead of hearing both sides of a story, the audience at home gets what is, in effect, the BBC’s view presented as fact."
Agreed, that snip shows what lies at the heart of many failings at the BBC, not only presenting opinion as fact, but presenting only one opinion (theirs)."The increasing tendency for the BBC to interview its own reporters on air exacerbates this mindset. Instead of concentrating on interviewing the leading players in a story or spreading the net wide for a range of views, these days the BBC frequently chooses to use the time getting the thoughts of its own correspondents. It is a format intended to help clarify the facts, but which often invites the expression of opinion. When that happens, instead of hearing both sides of a story, the audience at home gets what is, in effect, the BBC’s view presented as fact."
turbobloke said:
It's not even subtle. Just before I switched off one of the BBC's radio stations recently, the current leftie-on-air sounded very pleased with the notion that shortly there would be an interview with two great politicians. These turned out to be Denis Healey and Tony Benn.
Was thatthe programme I heard about being widowed after many years of marriage?But why does the BBC have this left wing bias?
Surely it is much more deep than just a few people liking left wing policies.
My bet is that the BBC are worried about the rise of Murdoch's News International/News Corporation and Sky.
News International/Sun/News of the World/The Times are all pro-Tory and are hugely powerful.
If anyone saw the repeat of Dispatches last night the allegations are quite interesting. The interesting points to note were that some in the previous Government were worried about the bad publicity someone like News of the World could cause if aggrevated. Prescott was interviewed and said that some Cabinet members were reluctant to speak out about it.
One senior NOTW person was asked to come to a meeting regarding the phone hacking allegations, she did not respond. One of the other MPs warned against persuing her as she could come back and cause potential problems (ie s
t could be dished out against them). She was not persued because of it.
There were also allegations that some sections of the Met Police were also afraid to follow up due to the negative publicity that could be levelled at them.
The allegations were that the parties (and to some extent the Met) were worried about what st could be levelled at them if they were to go against the Media giant.
The point where the Tories are implicated is that Coulson (who was editor of NOTW) and up until yesterday was Press Advisor to Cameron, was quite powerful and knew the way the press worked.
Senior people from News International (and Cameron) live in Chipping Norton and became known as the Chipping Norton Triangle, due to their links to each other.
Having a massive Media Corporation, with huge influence (and up until yesterday) having a senior person with links to News International so close to the PM could be very worrying for the BBC.
Isn't News International trying to buy SKY now?
Could it explain why Vince Cable was so Anti-Murdoch take over, because he knew of the hold they would have over the Government?
I have a feeling the BBC are more left wing due to the threat News International/News Corporation/SKY would have to their ratings, and to the leverage they may have over a Tory Government. Having someone so close to the PM involved with a media company with dubious methods of journalism, must cause them concerns.
I don't think it is anything to do with Socialist Ideals, but more the worry from the people inside for the survival of the BBC.
Journalists know more about what goes on than we do, and more than they are allowed to report on, I am sure.
Not being Pro-Labour/Anti Tory here, but just guessing why the BBC may be more inclined to the left.
Surely it is much more deep than just a few people liking left wing policies.
My bet is that the BBC are worried about the rise of Murdoch's News International/News Corporation and Sky.
News International/Sun/News of the World/The Times are all pro-Tory and are hugely powerful.
If anyone saw the repeat of Dispatches last night the allegations are quite interesting. The interesting points to note were that some in the previous Government were worried about the bad publicity someone like News of the World could cause if aggrevated. Prescott was interviewed and said that some Cabinet members were reluctant to speak out about it.
One senior NOTW person was asked to come to a meeting regarding the phone hacking allegations, she did not respond. One of the other MPs warned against persuing her as she could come back and cause potential problems (ie s
t could be dished out against them). She was not persued because of it.There were also allegations that some sections of the Met Police were also afraid to follow up due to the negative publicity that could be levelled at them.
The allegations were that the parties (and to some extent the Met) were worried about what s
t could be levelled at them if they were to go against the Media giant.The point where the Tories are implicated is that Coulson (who was editor of NOTW) and up until yesterday was Press Advisor to Cameron, was quite powerful and knew the way the press worked.
Senior people from News International (and Cameron) live in Chipping Norton and became known as the Chipping Norton Triangle, due to their links to each other.
Having a massive Media Corporation, with huge influence (and up until yesterday) having a senior person with links to News International so close to the PM could be very worrying for the BBC.
Isn't News International trying to buy SKY now?
Could it explain why Vince Cable was so Anti-Murdoch take over, because he knew of the hold they would have over the Government?
I have a feeling the BBC are more left wing due to the threat News International/News Corporation/SKY would have to their ratings, and to the leverage they may have over a Tory Government. Having someone so close to the PM involved with a media company with dubious methods of journalism, must cause them concerns.
I don't think it is anything to do with Socialist Ideals, but more the worry from the people inside for the survival of the BBC.
Journalists know more about what goes on than we do, and more than they are allowed to report on, I am sure.
Not being Pro-Labour/Anti Tory here, but just guessing why the BBC may be more inclined to the left.
Sticks. said:
turbobloke said:
It's not even subtle. Just before I switched off one of the BBC's radio stations recently, the current leftie-on-air sounded very pleased with the notion that shortly there would be an interview with two great politicians. These turned out to be Denis Healey and Tony Benn.
Was thatthe programme I heard about being widowed after many years of marriage?Certain profession have always had a left-wing bias e.g. academics, journalists, comedians but it was often balanced out by some right-wing elements. I suspect nowadays the idealistic left-wing ones have become predominant and just chatting to some teachers i know it seems to be the case - don't even mention Thatcher in a conversation with one of them!
When i was at school we had a mixture of NUTS (that's the teacher union), some ex-military types (most likely to throw a board rubber at your head), a couple of ex-professions and a few straight-out-of-uni and teacher training who tended to be the most idealistic ones. My history teacher was one of the best - the sort that taught you how to think rather than cramming stuff into your heads.
When i was at school we had a mixture of NUTS (that's the teacher union), some ex-military types (most likely to throw a board rubber at your head), a couple of ex-professions and a few straight-out-of-uni and teacher training who tended to be the most idealistic ones. My history teacher was one of the best - the sort that taught you how to think rather than cramming stuff into your heads.
turbobloke said:
Sticks. said:
turbobloke said:
It's not even subtle. Just before I switched off one of the BBC's radio stations recently, the current leftie-on-air sounded very pleased with the notion that shortly there would be an interview with two great politicians. These turned out to be Denis Healey and Tony Benn.
Was thatthe programme I heard about being widowed after many years of marriage?
Sticks. said:
turbobloke said:
Sticks. said:
turbobloke said:
It's not even subtle. Just before I switched off one of the BBC's radio stations recently, the current leftie-on-air sounded very pleased with the notion that shortly there would be an interview with two great politicians. These turned out to be Denis Healey and Tony Benn.
Was thatthe programme I heard about being widowed after many years of marriage?
Were they not widowered or has the word fallen into disuse?
If their tragic losses happened any time after 1979 I imagine they blamed Thatcher...
turbobloke said:
Sticks. said:
turbobloke said:
Sticks. said:
turbobloke said:
It's not even subtle. Just before I switched off one of the BBC's radio stations recently, the current leftie-on-air sounded very pleased with the notion that shortly there would be an interview with two great politicians. These turned out to be Denis Healey and Tony Benn.
Was thatthe programme I heard about being widowed after many years of marriage?Were they not widowered or has the word fallen into disuse?
If their tragic losses happened any time after 1979 I imagine they blamed Thatcher...
). No mention of Thatcher either. Probably on iPlayer if you'd like a listen.
I'm a member on one of the Leeds Utd fans forums (Waccoe for those that may know of it) and on there its very left wing, maggie being the devil incarnate etc etc.
Yet there was a thread on there recently proclaiming that all those in the top BBC political jobs are all staunch right wingers and hate the communists, sorry labour party.
Yet there was a thread on there recently proclaiming that all those in the top BBC political jobs are all staunch right wingers and hate the communists, sorry labour party.
Mojocvh said:
Excellent article.
"The increasing tendency for the BBC to interview its own reporters on air exacerbates this mindset. Instead of concentrating on interviewing the leading players in a story or spreading the net wide for a range of views, these days the BBC frequently chooses to use the time getting the thoughts of its own correspondents. It is a format intended to help clarify the facts, but which often invites the expression of opinion. When that happens, instead of hearing both sides of a story, the audience at home gets what is, in effect, the BBC’s view presented as fact."
Couldn't agree more with the above."The increasing tendency for the BBC to interview its own reporters on air exacerbates this mindset. Instead of concentrating on interviewing the leading players in a story or spreading the net wide for a range of views, these days the BBC frequently chooses to use the time getting the thoughts of its own correspondents. It is a format intended to help clarify the facts, but which often invites the expression of opinion. When that happens, instead of hearing both sides of a story, the audience at home gets what is, in effect, the BBC’s view presented as fact."
Except I don't think that it is "an increasing tendency" rather it's thair standard reporting procedure. Along with asking leading or closed questions instead of employing Kiplings six honest serving-men.
Rather than interview the actors in a story and let the listener interpret their comments for himself, we get a dialogue between a BBC presenter and a reporter, filtering the story and giving us their views and opinions - lazy and biased journalism.
"Five W's" (and one H)
I keep six honest serving-men
(They taught me all I knew);
Their names are What and Why and When
And How and Where and Who.
Rudyard Kipling, "Just So Stories" (1902)
I can live with papers being politcally bias because at least they are open about it so readers can bear that in mind while reading their reporting.
What really gets my goat about the BBC bias is that they are constantly telling us how amazing and independant/unbiased they are. That and the fact that they are paid with public money. If they were unbiased then I wouldn't mind the license fee, but I'm not pleased with my money being used to fund a massive media machine which promotes a political view I do not support.
What really gets my goat about the BBC bias is that they are constantly telling us how amazing and independant/unbiased they are. That and the fact that they are paid with public money. If they were unbiased then I wouldn't mind the license fee, but I'm not pleased with my money being used to fund a massive media machine which promotes a political view I do not support.
Killer2005 said:
I'm a member on one of the Leeds Utd fans forums (Waccoe for those that may know of it) and on there its very left wing, maggie being the devil incarnate etc etc.
Yet there was a thread on there recently proclaiming that all those in the top BBC political jobs are all staunch right wingers and hate the communists, sorry labour party.
BingoYet there was a thread on there recently proclaiming that all those in the top BBC political jobs are all staunch right wingers and hate the communists, sorry labour party.
The reason you lot see the BBC as lefties is your are in the majority raving loony right wing fanboys and anything other then a 24 hour love fest for maggie is seen as left wing.
The best thing to do about the BBc is to ignore it.
Gassing Station | News, Politics & Economics | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff