BBC

It was crap, yes: but I wasn't forced to pay for it.

There's some great journalists there who've stuck their neck out but they certainly should never have employed Ben Hunte.

I think they definitely lean more TRA side but TRAs think the BBC is transphobic anyway.

Maybe if both sides hate you, you ARE impartial?

Rather than pointing just at the BBC, I think the mainstream broadcast media is under the thumb. After all it was ITV (News) who devoted a significant amount of biased opinion in a headline slot with their Emily Bridges interview.

I know that Peter Hitchens is a bit barking, but his article today also looks at the BBC's so-called 'impartiality', although through a different lens.

www.dailymail.co.uk/debate/article-10907457/PETER-HITCHENS-Biased-BBC-says-dope-legal-cocaines-joke-pay-it.html

He complained about the BBC allowing Will Self to have the opportunity to say that marijuana should be legalised without arranging for the opposite argument to be aired at some point, given that this is a significant issue for the UK. The response was that basically that it was up to the BBC what was important or not, and if they don't think it matters then they don't have to give balance.

I have got used to stupid responses from the complaints people. But the answer I got was so ridiculous, it made me laugh out loud. They said: 'While we accept that the drugs issue is of course capable of causing political or societal controversy, we do not agree that it is currently a 'major matter' as defined in our editorial guidelines.'

Like I said I've got no time for Hitchens, and disagree with him on most things, but this is a fascinating glimpse into how the BBC is gaming its own editorial policy.

There are a lot of aspects for this subject. Perhaps OP will clarify in time.

Sex and gender discussions?

(This is the Feminism: Sex and Gender Discussions board.)

The issue of councils' recycling records is important, I haven't given up hope that the BBC can still report on this issue accurately.

The BBC's main problem is that it has an unusually high percentage of TQ+ employees, and those employees get highly upset at any hint of anything that questions, or represents beliefs of anything other than, the One True Faith. As the two jounos who have left the Guardian in a very loud, public tantrum, to some even just mentioning anything off script in passing, no matter how carefully done, is intolerable heresy.

However I have little patience with the BBC on this as they are taking public taxes and on a brief of impartiality and representation of everyone and everything, not just the bits that they like and which don't make their staff kick off. They need to be more like Netflix and start being clear: if you cannot tolerate diversity and range of opinions then this isn't the right workplace for you. Currently when they come out with that awful ad about 'BBC, it's for everyone' I shout back at the tv about 'but not if you're female or homosexual and want equality'.

Assuming WarriorN has correctly identified the issue you mean OP, the BBC is s-l-o-w-l-y getting there - the Nolan Investigates series was excellent (but SHOULD have been broadcast on Radio 4) and Emma Barnett has conducted some pretty good interviews on Woman's Hour.

No because I happen to know bbc reporters/ employees who are trying to make changes.

The problem is that stonewall got there first.

As demonstrated by the bbc radio documentary on stonewall - so I do listen bit you've got to listen hard and weigh up bias.

Which issue?