Cameron and the BBC - the gloves are off

I mean it's the newspaper to look at. Most places probably stick to trade journals and agencies these days.

claig - I don't know. But it is the place to look, along of course with companies own jobs pages - perhaps Sky only advertises on it's own website. Or uses an agency. I am pretty sure (though don't quote me!) that Murdoch-owned publishers have advertised in the Guardian - though to be honest it's so expensive to advertise there that most publishers don't bother anymore - but they're not advertising in The Times either, is the point. Or the Economist.

I very rarely read the Guardian, though I have picked up the media section from time to time when it's been lying around the office. I got my BBC job from an ad in MediaWeek anyway, not the Guardian.

Does the Daily Mail advertise its positions in the Guardian?

Does Sky TV advertise its jobs in the Guardian?

Looking for jobs in the Guardian Media Section does not make you either an habitual Guardian reader, or a left-winger. It makes you someone who knows where the jobs you are interested in get advertised.

Yes, Nick Robinson is very tabloid.

He still leans to the left. Not as much as Andrew Marr, though, who readers of the Morning Star probably consider to be a fellow traveller!

That is my point susietwoshows. I have no wish to get into arguments about the perceived bias of different news channels. But I do want to challenge LFN on his/her repeated claim that advertising in the Guardian Media Section is flying the flag for the left.

So is nearly everyone in the media a left wing Guardian reader? That wouldn't surprise me. Does Sky TV advertise in the Guardian?

re: advertising for jobs - I work in the media (not in newspapers themselves though) and the only newspaper I have ever looked for jobs in is the Guardian - everyone in the media knows that it's the place to advertise. Nothing to do with the bias of the people advertising. Employers won't advertise in the Times simply because they know not enough people look for jobs there. End of. The Economist only advertises very senior executive roles.

I can't bear Nick Robinson, his whole approach is so tabloid, as a replacement for Andrew Marr he's just awful.

There was massive left wing bias at the BBC, said the Director General of the BBC,

www.newstatesman.com/uk-politics/2010/09/lecture-thompson-bbc-interview

Most of the so-called intelligentsia have a left bias. But even after all of that, sales of the Daily Mail still outstrip sales of the left wing rags. The public is naturally right wing, it is only the massive bias to the left in the media, that influences the public to believe what the left wing spinners want them to believe.

LadyBlaBla Of course the whole of BBC news isn't biased. It's just an overwhelming majority of it.

Even the BBC's criticisms of Labour during its time in office tended to be from the left.

No-one watches Channel 5 news anyway - but it will be interesting to see if it changes its editorial spin after the takeover by Richard Desmond.

Given it's fronted by Natasha Kaplinsky, I doubt it!

ITV news is probably the most Tory out of the mainstream broadcasters.

Channel 4 is hideously leftie. It doesn't even pretend to hide its bias though. I prefer that though. They have better production standards than the BBC, in my opinion.

I would consider Channel 4 as left wing. I think ITV is probably neutral, though I don't watch its news much.

Katisha Have the BBC ever done experimental trials with other newspapers, internet recruitment sites, or their own site to assess the impact of advertising in the Guardian?

I certainly can't remember it - and I have been following media trends relatively closely, though not slavishly, over the last few years.

'Why is it the right wingers are so paranoid about left wing bias in the media anyway'

because it influences the way the public thinks. Even after all of the left wing bias, the public still voted for the Coalition. But the left wing bias gave the Labour party more votes than it would otherwise have got. Bias on the EU and global warming and many other issues, distorts the public debate and influences public opinion. If equal time was given to all sides, then that would be fine.

I think your panaoia is getting the better of you LFN. The Media Section has been going for years. If I were looking for a media job I would certainly be buying it, although I am not normally a Guardian buyer.

You may "refuse to accept" that it produces any useful applications, but upon what evidence is this refusal actually based?

Perhaps the BBC doesn't have sufficient evidence to get through the rigorous editorial policy to use Guardian Media Group's tax arrangements when discussing tax avoidance... it's not always a left wing consipiracy you know.

Why is it the right wingers are so paranoid about left wing bias in the media anyway, your lot are in government anyway, what more do you want? To control the way we all think too?

I agree with Huddspur I think we need to look at privatising some bits of the BBC

I see the Guardian Media Group also has an offshore tax vehicle in Luxembourg.

Strangely, I did not learn this fact from the BBC over the years, either.

Katisha I refuse to accept that the Guardian media supplement adds anything to the recruitment process. Are you really suggesting that if they only put vacancies on the BBC's own website, it would lead to a lower calibre or quantity of applicants?

I also do not believe that advertising in the Guardian leads to better applicants than advertising in the Economist, for example.

Interesting sidestep Longfingernails.

How does advertising in the industry-known Media Section prove left-wing bias?