BBC bias

No MOnica I do not think it is patronising to suggest that the average viewer, or even some viewers, will be more likely to vote for a candidate that has free publicity that his opponents do not have.

That is why we have strict rules about the amount of exposure politicians are allowed in the run up to an election.

Varian, I complained about Tim Wonnacott and his patronising use of a northern accent. Shortly thereafter he was suspended from Bargain Hunt. Don't seriously think it was anything to do with my complaint though.

He has only just announced his candidature. I think once someone declares they are standing in a seat and submits their forms then impartiality rules come in. I believe that there are very strict rules governing how the BBC distributes air time during an election/bye election.

When we have a general election, you hear quite a lot from the top spokespeople of both main parties, but all the other people standing against them in their constituency, from the other main party to the dog walkers party do not get equal time.

Varian I do think you are being very patronising to the average viewer or listener, to think that they would vote for someone just because they saw them on TV.

Not if he does badly in his performance on QT, and even if he does well, if you don't want to support UKIP then you wouldn't be voting for him.
Maybe the other candidates either don't want / can't be on QT but may appear somewhere else, Andrew Marr or Andrew Neil programmes.

Do you not think that the BBC, by offering Paul Nuttall, the opportunity to have his say on Question Time, is giving him an advantage over all the other candidates in an election taking place so soon?

This advantage could be a deciding factor, so the BBC, instead of being an impartial observer, becomes a flag waver for UKIP.

Whatever Farage's personal success in elections, UKIP is a big player in British politics at the moment, quite out of proportion to its size and official representation.

Not to focus a lot of attention on it would be to ignore the fact that nearly 4 million people voted UKIP in the last election and there are many people, who traditionally always voted for one of the two main parties and found it difficult to imagine ever changing their voting pattern who are broadly in sympathy with UKIP's aims and are now thinking the unthinkable and voting UKIP. The current leader of UKIP, Paul Nuttall, is standing for election at Stoke-on-Trent because it is not beyond the bounds possibility that he may win it.

I think there is every good reason for the BBC to be giving UKIP a lot of air time. Publicity works both ways, one in depth interview, if the interviewee balls it up can kill his and his party's chances.

Have any of you ever had any success with complaining to the BBC and getting some sort of result?

If so, how did you do it?

Indeed not! No words to describe the people who support him either.

Our dear friend Farage is now a presenter on LBC, what a !!!!!! no words to describe the weasel

I don't know how many times I've read that the BBC has a left wing bias. It's a load of ***! I haven't kept track, but it seems to me that UKIP gets far more exposure than it deserves.

Somebody on GN (sorry, can't remember who) said Farage doesn't charge much to appear on TV programmes.

You're right, they helped to create the monster and happily wheel him out at any given opportunity. they never get Sandi Toksvig on do they.

I think that Nuttall, as the brand new leader of UKIP, was always going to be a choice for QT.Farage presumably was always up for a spot on QT when he was asked.Not everybody wants to do it as it can be quite hostile.QT needs a good mixed panel.