BBC bias

I imagine BBC people like to have the 'Daily Mail' delivered to their offices so they won't be seen buying such 'top shelf' material in the newsagent. No, a large news organisation has to keep abreast of all sources of news and comment.

Back in 2005, I was interested to read the Lib Dem submission to the panel looking at BBC news coverage of the EU:

The evidence from the Lib Dem European Parliamentary Party notes that “EU affairs do not reflect the pace, schedule or salience of British news stories. We have no debate on fox hunting here, or on casinos. But we do debate and pass laws that impact directly upon British domestic life at national, regional and local level. A large part of the Westminster agenda already flows from UK membership of the European Union. This trend will be accentuated under the constitution. If BBC coverage fails to reflect this phenomenon, it will only serve to reinforce a general British ignorance about the importance of the European dimension to national life.”

So, LIb Dems were complaining that the BBC didn't reflect how much influence the EU was having whereas, these days, we old Leavers are told the EU doesn't have much influence at all!

In 2015 the BBC bought 75,114 copies of the Guardian and 56,678 copies of the Mirror, adding up to 131,792 copies of newspapers which tend to support Labour.

They also bought 73,596 copies of the Times, 69,627 copies of the Telegraph, 68,553 copies of the Daily Mail, 59,961 copies of the Sun, 38,106 copies of the Financial Times and 36,948 copies of the Daily Express, adding up to 346,791 copies of Tory supporting daily papers.

I believe the Daily Mail topped the list in 2014.

Actually, I believe they now buy more copies of the Daily Mail than the Gruniad - they obviously like to keep an eye on what the right is thinking!

No idea! You lefties have a strange view of things.

Is it just a coincidence then that the BBC spends £2,500 a week on the Gaudian newspaper?
This startling figure is nearly 45% higher than its bill for any other title, despite the Gaudian accounting for a tiny fraction of Britains newspaper sales.
Why/ how could anyone think they're biased

Interesting, cunco

In January 2005, an independent panel report into BBC news coverage of the EU concluded, among other things, that:

'In short, we think that the BBC's coverage of EU news needs to be improved and to be made more demonstrably impartial.'

The fact that the BBC Governors requested an independent report means that there was a question to answer. It took a long time before there was any noticeable change and many are still waiting for genuine impartiality.

Don't expect the BBC to report the positives of brexit -there are none

The media and the BBC in particular seem to view UKIP as good 'copy' - Farage certainly had more than his fair share of exposure.

In the last week Paul Nuttall has been interviewed on many news items but I have no idea who the other candidates are in the forthcoming Stoke by-election.

It's all a matter of your start point isn't it?

Of course the BBC is biased to the left and anti Brexit. They never reports the positives only negatives.

I tended to think they had Farage on a lot, thinking and hoping that he would damn himself with his own mouth.

However it's entirely possible that the Beeb, along with so many more of the metropolitan comfortably-off elite, hadn't much of a clue about how a lot of non metropolitan, non comfortably off non elite, would take to Farage and his ideas.

If anything, to me the Beeb has always seemed to me to be biased to the left. I think it goes with that sort of media/arty territory.

Varian

I was using the words in the link to the Guardian to show why the 38 degrees petition was taken down.

You are being overtly transparent in making this a personal attack on a poster you consider has an opposing political view to yourself.

I will tell you once again ' You said it was left wing trolls' not I.

It's stating the bleeding obvious there will be left and right wing trolls and some who are neither, just purely hate filled.

POGS you were clearly trying to make some sort of point that left wing trolls had attacked Laura Kuenssberg, but it was not necessary to quote them. We all know what vile language they use.

When you say "hmm, nice people out there" you don't seem to acknowledge that there are right wing trolls as well.

I like Laura Kuensberg and I think that after being found to have breached the impartiality guidelines she is likely to be even more careful in future.
.

(not to mention pompous)

who is this 'we' you talk about varian? How presumptuous!

'Do not quote them. It is below the standard we expect on Gransnet.'

Have you the same opinion of posts on other threads Varian?

PS

You called them left wing trolls Varian, I did not!

Varian

"Having said that, it was reported in the Telegraph,the online trolling is quite clearly inexcusable and I find it offensive to see it quoted here on Gransnet by someone with a right wing agenda pointing to the worst type of left wing trolls."

That accusation against me is a bit sardonic coming from you! If we were all to be 'offended', as you say you were by my post, because of our politics then Gransnet might as well shut up shop. What the hell do you want , a cosy chat between you and yours. Yes I found your post trying to belittle me extremely unpleasant.

It is the case I found the 38 degrees petition a crock of at the time and to be honest I still believe the whole story is trivial.

I would remind people this is also quoted by the BBC

"It also said: "The breach of due accuracy on such a highly contentious political issue meant that the output had not achieved due impartiality."

"But the Trust found no evidence that there was a deliberate attempt to mislead audiences and noted that the full interview had been published on the BBC website."

"James Harding, director of BBC News said: "While we respect the Trust and the people who work there, we disagree with this finding.

"Laura is an outstanding journalist and political editor with the utmost integrity and professionalism. BBC News reported on the leader of the opposition in the same way it would any other politician.

"It is striking that the Trust itself said there was 'no evidence of bias'. Indeed, it also said the news report was 'compiled in good faith'.

"The process is now concluded and BBC News formally notes the Trust's finding."

The BBC said the complaint had been looked at on four other occasions and each time had been rejected.

Laura Kuenssberg was found to have breached BBC guidelines on impartiality when she reported on Jeremy Corbyn.

Having said that, it was reported in the Telegraph,the online trolling is quite clearly inexcusable and I find it offensive to see it quoted here on Gransnet by someone with a right wing agenda pointing to the worst type of left wing trolls.

I am quite sure we all know that this type of offensive trolling on the internet is in no way confined to one political view or another. There are legions of offensive right wing trolls out there. Any woman who dares put her head above the parapet and express her opinion in public is likely to be targeted by these vicious trolls, whether of the right or left.

I will not quote any examples but I am sure I do not need to - we all know very well that they are out there - vile, inadequate creatures whose own lives must be very pathetic. Do not quote them. It is below the standard we expect on Gransnet.

I actually do think that Kuenssberg shows bias, but I wish people wouldn't go over the top with all the nasty stuff, because it just undermines the argument. It happens to (mainly female) politicians too and I really wish Facebook and Twitter would do something about it. Some sites moderate their comments better than others. It's why I don't believe in absolute free speech.

POGS: Sadly, such abuse is one of the downsides to the internet. It would be good if all conributions were moderated but I suspect that it isn't going to happen.

Returning to the original post, I suspect that the BBC is responding to its Charter which includes:

'...using the highest calibre presenters and journalists, and championing freedom of expression, so that all audiences can engage fully with major local, regional, national, United Kingdom and global issues and participate in the democratic process, at all levels, as active and informed citizens.'

The BBC has to respond to all audiences which, for better or worse, includes UKIP and should include UKIP because it has a significant following. I suspect that any programme including UKIP (other than election broadcasts) will include people differing opinions.

I also suspect that the BBC knows and will abide by the rules applying to by-elections.

The Laura Kuenssberg 'episode' to my mind was ridiculous from the start. Snowflake Corbyn and his followers.

Didn't a political activist GN poster put up one of her 'petition to sign ' posts to 38 degrees wanting to get rid of Laura Kuenssberg some time ago? (Can't be bothered to find it).

Looking at the date of your link DD , 7th Jan 2017, is this yet another attempt to 'get' Kuenssberg?

www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2016/may/11/the-laura-kuenssberg-petition-should-be-condemned-not-just-removed

"Posts calling Kuenssberg a bitch, a whore and a slag are not hard to spot on social media. Others refer to her as a cow and a cunt. Some people write that they’d like to kill her. One post included a picture of a scene from Return of the Jedi with Kuenssberg’s face Photoshopped on to that of Princess Leia in the famous gold-bikini scene and David Cameron’s face superimposed on Jabba the Hutt. It describes her as “Cameron’s slave girl”.

Hmm, nice people out there.

Accusations of bias at the BBC are certainly not new and have been very varied including politics (often the EU), regional bias (including weather maps!) and religion.

The accusations have inevitably often come from people committed to the opposite viewpoint. There have been independent enquiries, not always conclusive, perhaps because deliberate bias is difficult to prove.

It was said in Parliament in 2002 that the BBC has subsequently admitted bias in the 1975 Referendum but I have not seen the evidence. I also remember bias in the BBC's coverage of the euro debate from 1996 but again, I cannot provide a link here.

I think this is an interesting article from the blessed Guardian (not the nasty old Telegraph). It is John Humphrys thoughts about the immigration debate in 2014. I also remember him writing about bias in the euro debate when he was on The Today Programme but that may have been in the Daily Wail (so even if I could find a link, I wouldn't dare say so).

www.theguardian.com/media/2014/mar/11/john-humphrys-bbc-immigration-debate-today-programme

Fair enough! It just happened to appear as I was logged into GN and I thought iw was relevant. Just asying that complaints about the left-wing bias of the BBC aren't new.

I assume you know that Laura Kuenssberg has recently been accused by the BBC Trust of breaching impartiality over Corbyn.

www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2017/01/07/bbc-editor-breached-impartiality-jeremy-corbyn-report-reveals/

Above link is from the Torygraph (not the lefty Guardian).