BBC bias

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.

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.

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

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

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.

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

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.

Interesting, cunco

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

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

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!

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.

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!

The point was that the influence of the EU on British life was positive, and the BBC did not get that message across.

I have complained about bias on the BBC. It was about a One Show report on the (then) proposed drivers strike on Southern Rail. The report showed clips from theTUC conference and tried to make out that the strike was part of a policy to bring down the government. Although they gave some of the facts they failed to give the most practical side of the driver's case. i.e. that the route has some long curved platforms that can't be viewed properly by the driver. Definitely not left-wing bias.

Laura K asked the Donald some fairly tough questions yesterday. Opinions in the US were split of course. Some saw her as rude and others were delighted that British reporters asked tough questions.

Varian: I think the point being made by the Lib Dems [and me] was that the influence of the EU on the UK was significant in 2005, and would become more so. Hence, Lib Dems argued EU affairs needed wider BBC coverage.

EU influence has become greater although less than the Lib Dems would have liked since they were still urging Tony Blair to join the eurozone in 2005.

My point was made because, since I have been on Gransnet, several contributors have been at pains to tell me that EU influence on laws, rules and regulations is not large; and accordingly, how little sovereignty has been lost.

It is interesting that the Panel in 2005 made reference to the need for BBC impartiality in a future Referendum on the EU Constitution. Presumably that one went into the 'too difficult' pile.

The point was that the influence of the EU on British life was positive, and the BBC did not get that message across

LOL Varian thats your opinion, not an objective fact.

The truth is it has some positive and some negative effects. The majority of British voters consider the negatives outweigh the positives.

The BBC managed to provide reasonably balanced coverage of the referendum which was probably not what the pro EU pro mass immigration globalists perhaps expected, knowing the BBC to be normally heavilly biased in their favour.

Like it or not Varian it was not the job of the BBC to act as a pro EU propaganda machine.
.

I am not a "pro EU mass immigration globalist" any more than I am part of the "metropolotan liberal elite" or the "hard left"

These are perjorative terms coined by the right wing press for their readers to throw at anyone who disagrees with their agenda. It should be possible to discuss politics on GN without name calling.

I am not a "pro EU mass immigration globalist"

I did not say you were, Varian. Why so defensive?

It should be possible to discuss politics on GN without name calling

I agree, and without patronising suggestions that posters are simply parroting terms "coined by the right wing press". I have been using that descriptive for a very long time Varian long before the term 'globalist' became common parlance, and when the press were all still using your preferred choice of self description, "progressives" or even "liberals" (never was a word more improperly applied!) However I would add that ''globalist' is no more "perjorative" than the term 'nationalist', and 'pro mass immigration' is a statement of fact, comparable to 'anti mass immigration', again NOT "perjorative".

If youre keen to improve the etiquette of GNs debate Varian, and I am with you on that, then you need to be as sharply self critical, and critical of some very belligerent and aggressive postings that come from a few GNetters whose views you share, as you are towards those of us who challenge them.

To Good Manners!

What a pity Mair that in the middle of telling us how you want to improve good manners on GN, you could not resist having a sideswipe at Liberals(never was a word mor improperly applied, according to you)

Liberal ideas are based on freedom and equality and are advocated by the Liberal Democrats who champion human rights, freedom of speech and religion, open, tolerant and fair democratic societies and international co-operation. That does not make Liberals "globalists"

Liberalism should not be confused with Neoliberalism which is an ultra-right wing economic theory promoting unfettered capitalism.

Nor should it be confused with the use of the word "Liberal" by self-described "Conservatives" in America to insultingly describe just about anyone to the left of the KKK. This entry in "conservapedia" is an object lesson in alternative facts.

www.conservapedia.com/Liberal

To get back to the discussion about BBC bias, I was pleased to see that Nuttall's invitation to appear on this week's Any Questions was withdrawn as he is a candidate in the Stoke by election.

I was also pleased that Laura Kuenssberg was not afraid to ask Trump some probing questions when he appeared with Theresa May, and has been widely praised in the US, at least by the "liberal" media.

Varian

I'm still utterly bemused as to what a "pro EU mass immigration globalist" actually is.

Also, what that all purpose word 'elite' means.

Perhaps another reason many people don't post on these threads is that they really don't know what is being talked about half the time.

So am I Maizie but I'm sure someone will be along to tell us soon.