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

Journalists can absolutely have a strong position.

They excluded women. Adult human females (to avoid doubt - i mean the 50% of the population )

My 20 year old son hardly ever watches live TV but loves R4’s Dead Ringers, Have I Got News For You, Just a Minute and I’m sorry I Haven’t a Clue. Can also be drawn into University Challenge even though it makes us feel a bit thick.

I have written complaints re news coverage bias and even considered not paying but when I realised the sources and schematic attacks of its real haters and enemies, I checked myself.

Journalists are trained not to have bias. The platforms have bias. When journalists submit copy, it is sub-edited to suit that particular platform’s slant.

What radio stations offer the output of the BBC?

Local, national and world service would all go.

& who would gain?

It will be interesting to hear (if we ever do) if the splicing of Trumps recordings was an "accident" or a "Zinoviev letter" attempt to intentionally create a story.

The late Robert Fisk doesn't so much spring to mind as run in shouting, backed by a camera crew....

Journalists are trained to report the facts accurately but their beliefs and bias will affect the kinds of stories they will be covering, the people they choose to interview, the questions they choose to ask, the publications they choose to work for and so on. Reporting accurate facts is not the same thing as being unbiased.

Are you a journalist? This isn’t how it works. Perhaps you’re thinking of opinion pieces, not news. A journalist gathers information from all sides, if available, and forms it into a story. They are not responsible for the headline. The editor, according to the publication’s slant, may move information around, remove blocks, or change some entirely. Ditto for the subeditor, who also adds a headline.
As for the publications they work for, writers take whatever work they can get. They cannot afford to pick and choose according to ideological bent. I don’t sound like a conservative, do I? Yet I used to work at an extremely conservative publisher.

But this doesn’t preclude a journalist having bias, but more than that fitting with a strong position at the BBC and doing well in their career due to that. It’s how bias becomes institutionalised.

You’ll laugh your socks off if a corrupt sex offender shuts down an important arm of free speech? You need to look at your priorities.

@Cleikumstovies Was it not the production company that did this? Wasn’t it externally produced?

I don’t sound like a conservative, do I?

You don't sound like a person who understands how journalism or media work.

what free speech?

Oh please. The BBC bends over backwards to demonstrate “balance”, to the point of giving air time to climate change denier nuts and anti-vaxxers. As you know.

I’ve posted this on another thread so I still have it to hand:

One of the Telegraph reports says this:
’The documentary was produced and directed in-house by Matthew Hill, a BBC documentary maker, and edited by Karen Wightman, who has been Panorama’s editor since 2002.’

The full article is archived here:
https://archive.ph/8QEvX

The BBC bends over backwards to demonstrate “balance”, to the point of giving air time to climate change denier nuts and anti-vaxxers.

Just not to feminists. That really shows how low down on the totem poll we are.

The BBC is currently stuffed full of right wingers appointed by various Conservative Prime Ministers. Unfortunately, Robbie Gibb hasn't resigned.

The deep irony in Donald Trump threatening to sue the BBC for dishonest reporting is off the scale when I can't remember a statement or a speech from him that wasn't chock full of lies and boastful self praise from start to finish.

The BBC isn't worried about criticism from the current Labout Government but is shit scared of criticism from the right. Pretty much all the printed press is right-leaning and bashing the BBC is all in a day's work for the Daily Mail, Daily Express, the Telegraph and the (pretends not to be right wing) Times.

I'd still hate to lose the BBC, despite it's faults.

Are you saying the BBC is more right than left?

I would love the bbc to learn from this and be truly impartial, but they've proven time and time again that they're completely incapable, so sadly, I think it needs to stop being funded by us.

All that demonstrates is scientific illiteracy in the news and features departments.

Try telling some of the many women sacked or elbowed out over the years about “balance” and hear the hollow laughter or the victims of any of the ongoing scandals (mostly women and mostly young staffers) or the persistent pay gap and mindset which still sees “leaders” as male, pale and Oxbridge.

I’ve been interested to hear Ed Davey sounding off on every news podcast which would give him airtime. Apparently being appointed by a government means everything you say represents the most insane incarnation of that government (presumably also goes for any potential Davey appts). He went on at some length about Gibbs’ Conservative connections (which were mainly being a spad for a couple of years) and carefully failed to mention that Gibbs’ main qualification was working inside the BBC for over 20 years. Similarly he complains at length about BBC bias against the Liberals (they do airtime roughly pro rata on public popularity) as this gives Reform too much air time. I must have missed him complaining when the Liberals with a bare handful of members benefitted from this exact same policy.

Tim Davie was sounding off about “right wing conspiracies” and apparently has completely failed to take any responsibility for some of the disasters happening on his watch (including the restructuring of news which gave interest groups effective editorial control over content). I used to listen to the Today programme near religiously, the lengthy rant broadcast by one of the presenters was a good example of why I no longer do.

The notion that the Beeb is fine because both left and right complain is to fail to recognise that politics is not just about right and left. Authoritarian progressivism is every bit as popular on the right as the left, especially amongst the bureaucratic classes which still run the BBC. If there is a particular bias its reflective of that class.

Its not just the Evil Right Wing MSM sick of this, try listening to long term BBC journalists who have been elbowed out for wrong think or just given up in frustration. Women like Libby Purves (40 yrs at the Beeb) and Hannah Barnes (15 yrs) are hardly right wing shills and talk as critical friends.

If the BBC fails the blame should be squarely on its leadership over the last 10-15 years. It would be a loss but the real culprits are inside its own walls.

Fair point, not made by the BBC. Arguably, the BBC should sue the makers for producing something made with false information and which has caused damage to reputation. Arguably Mr trump should go after them instead of the BBC.

Well the bbc broadcast it. So they bear responsibility

The BBC retain editorial responsibility for their broadcasts and much of the “external” content is made by former BBC chums with their own production companies.

The Panorama edits were mind numbingly stupid and pointless and indicative of a lazy, arrogant and biased mindset in place of honest journalism. It wasn’t just dishonest, it was stupid and achieved nothing.

It was an old speech which most of the world has already judged (against Trump). All this stupidity did was to resurrect the “steal” arguments and amplify Trump even more. Just leaving the words to stand for themselves would have demonstrated the point, there was no need to over egg it and create a lie in what is supposed to be a documentary.

I agree with people that say that left-leaning people think that the BBC is more right than left and right-leaning people think that the BBC is more left than right.

I'm left leaning so I think that the BBC is more right than left, particularly at the BBC Board level.