The BBC should lose the license fee and be forced to operate like any other streaming service after the complete destruction of trust this week

[SingleSexSpacesInSchools]

Thats it really, the BBC lied to us, all of us.

They edited a Trump speech to make him look like he said something he did not.

They pushed one side of the transgender debate relentlessly, deliberately hiding negative stories on detransitioners, the US WPATH file and thousands of more cases

https://archive.ph/wWdMS

https://archive.ph/uiEKW

They have cancelled people for wrong-think at every opportunity, pushed drag queens over women, turned woman hours into mens hour, constantly attacked anyone who does not share their extreme liberal left wing views and kept them off the news cycle

They have utterly and completely lost all trust, they ARE biased they DON'T give balance in the news

Everyone thought it was a conspiracy, now we know it's actually true and we have PROOF

Today the BBC Director and News Director have both quit in absolute disgrace.

It is time the BBC was consigned to the dustbin because we are never getting back to the BBC I loved and trusted, the one that ran programmes to inform and entertain and educate, that BBC is long gone.

Replace it, completely.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/live/cd9kqz1yyxkt

No one except Rupert Murdoch.

No, the issue at the BBC is the same as the issue in academia, you can cut off the head as many times as you like, it's the rest of the beast that is the issue

So the right then?

Surely if you think it’s slightly to the right of centre the left would benefit with it gone.

The role of the hugely biased BBC complaints unit also needs investigation, and why successive governments couldn’t give a fuck.

Yes! Just this👌

I really don’t think it’s helping to brush off the doctoring of Trump’s speech as a mistake, balls up, or even just as editing. What they did didn’t just have the effect of shortening his speech, it changed what Trump said. Broadcasting it just before the presidential election also leaves the BBC open to the charge of interfering in a foreign election. Downplaying it helps no-one.

Editing to add that I’ve cross posted with bekindwisely!

I've thought a bit about this. My take on it is that part of the problem is due to the increased bandwidth the BBC has.

In that bad (good?) old days there were only 2 TV channels and 4 radio channels. There wasn't much room on the BBC for anything other than the news and a couple of current affairs programs. Nowadays there is much more room and time to be filled on programs like BBC News. Thus the corporation has changed from only reporting the bare facts because that is all it had time to do (see for example the Ten OClock News which is long on facts and short on opinion), to interpretation of the facts and opinion because there is so much more air time to fill on channels like BBC news. Keeping reporting impartial becomes a lot more tricky if you are broadcasting a lot of opinion and interpretation.

The BBC does strive (IMO) to be impartial, and I think for UK politics it does largely succeed, probably because it would get hit with a massive stick by politicians if it didn't. However I get the impression that the importance of impartiality for foreign news has a lot less emphasis than it does for UK politics, - it's almost as if they get more of a pass in that area to be more opinionated. Certainly for me their reporting as regards Trump seems to be a lot less impartial, and I think that this has built up over time to be something that has become more and more acceptable within the organisation to not be so impartial as regards Trump and his policies. This of course is a major issue, in the respect that once a culture of being able to act impartially regards reporting a subject takes hold, it's only a matter of time before more and more extreme examples of impartiality come to the fore, and this is where we end up - where it becomes "OK to dis Trump because a lot of people dislike him and we've be doing it for ages."

Moving on to the licence fee, I think the problem is that no one has really wanted to tackle the licence fee in the modern world of TV. I think this is partially because it is nearly impossible to come up with a model that would gain as much revenue as the current one, and would therefore result in a massive curtailment of BBC programming and services.

For me the licence should be split into two separate charges, one for broadcasting infrastructure, and one for BBC programming. Then people who don't wish to watch the BBC can pay fheir share of the infrastructure costs, without funding the programming. I think the issue with this though is that it would result in a huge loss of revenue for the BBC as a significant proportion of people would only pay the infrastructure charge. This would probably result in massive spending cuts, programs being axed and job losses. It's probably not surprinsg that no government wants to take on this hot potato.

I know you didn't, but I did, just to be clear.

Broadcasting it just before the presidential election also leaves the BBC open to the charge of interfering in a foreign election.
No, Panorama would not be available to a US audience. You can't watch it (unless you use a VPN)

Thank you for the correction although I think you might possibly have just have demonstrated the larger point I was trying to make.

No. He’d benefit through increased influence and revenues.

I think that the loss of the BBC as a cultural beacon would be tragic (and I speak as one who loathes Radio 4) but I don’t think there’d be a direct or significant political impact, because the BBC doesn’t have much political sway now, compared to the openly biased channels.

The right thinks the BBC is a leftist propaganda machine. The left think the BBC is a rightist propaganda machine. I think that’s good. I hope it stays that way.

Let's also not forget the small matter that Trump did NOT and still DOES NOT accept the validity of the 2020 elections and that he was impeached for incitement to insurrection. It was down to a quirk of the US system that he was not brought to justice for his part in it (due to not enough votes in the Senate). Not to say that there was no manipulation in the Panorama report- I understand how this could have come across as misleading- but let's not forget what the actual topic was and let's not rewrite history.

I hear you - but equally let's not forget the broader context of what happened in Jan 2021.

Have the editors of the Panorama programme resigned. They were also the ones responsible for the Gaza documentary .
I have cancelled my licence.
The BBC is broken and I am not prepared to pay for a broken, left wing, antisemitic biased corporation.

And I hear you too. But I don’t think any of that changes the seriousness of our state broadcaster apparently doctoring that speech. As far as I’m concerned, if I can’t trust the BBC to present me with the truth then I can’t trust them to analyse the broader context either.

Not to nitpick but the terminology you use here is very loaded. 'State broadcaster' suggests zero editorial independence - bit like Russia's Channel1. Was that intentional?
Yes, trust is crucial. When a mistake is made people have to apologise and in some cases resign. I would not call the BBC's existence into question over this because we do need a public service broadcaster that strives for impartiality - and not a state broadcaster.

Very well, I shall amend ‘state broadcaster’ to ‘public service and publicly funded broadcaster’.

Both Trump and the Daily Telegraph are delighted about the problems at the BBC. Make you wonder why they’re so happy.

Why are you saying the Telegraph are 'happy'? They're reporting on it, which is their job as journalists,

The left.

I wonder what will happen when Reform win the next election? Will they abolish the BBC or infiltrate it? It's unfortunate that the BBC has completely lost public trust because it will make it so much easier now for those things to happen.

@nomas not sure what I was lying about. My point at the time of posting was that Trump element was dominating but from my observations on reading the app this morning there was little to no mention of the other issues raised which indicate that there are longer standing biases at play.

Now if I have missed those additional elements from my early morning elements, that’s not a lie, just point me in the right direction. But from my lunchtime observations, the contents of the dossier are difficult to find.

I agree, although I’d frame the BBCs view of the rest of the world as still a bit colonial. It believes it knows best and so truly thinks that the deliberate or by omission editing and reporting it does is to support its view of how the world should be, and that’s its role. Rather than to just report news and events as they are.

The biggest issue I see, which is the same as the crisis facing the NHS, is that those who work there and ‘manage’ it see their purpose as just to ensure that the BBC (or the NHS) continues to exist, not to provide a good, impartial service.

The left would benefit if the BBC disappeared?

Ok if you’re sure

I am disappointed in the BBC, but I think you are being hyperbolic.