Cameron and the BBC - the gloves are off

[LadyBlaBlah]

www.newstatesman.com/blogs/the-staggers/2010/10/bbc-cuts-cameron-brussels

So why does he hate the BBC - is it just because it is public funded or is it because of his dealings with Murdoch?

Whichever, I would imagine this is a real problem with voters

On an aside, I have noticed that they refuse to put anyone of worth on Question Time, and do reluctantly on Newsnight to defend their policies

Honestly as a nurse I am often appalled at the health drivel in the mail.

SHJ :o

'So claig, what is it that makes you believe that most people prefer lower taxation and less government "interference"? Did you read it in the Mail?'

no, I go by the election results.

It's the same in almost every country. People are against bureaucrats and being taxed, hence the rise of the Tea Party in America.

SylviaPankhurst, did you believe all the stuff about swine flu? 1 in 3 nurses apparently refused to take the injection. Do you remember the Mail's story about the leaked memo about possible side effects like Guillen-Barre Syndrome. I remember when it broke on a Sunday. It was the only paper that broke that story.

Re the Mail health scares, even a stopped clock tells the right time twice a day. If your brief is to come up with a health scare on a daily basis, you're bound to come close to the truth once in a blue moon.

General elections? You mean the tories? It's funny, I don't remember them getting a majority.

'General elections? You mean the tories? It's funny, I don't remember them getting a majority.'

In spite of the "massive" left wing bias, the Tories still won. Without the bias, it would have been a landslide.

Massive left wing bias? Good god. So what's the evidence for this then? (And no, the fact that you find your own opinions to the right of a lot of what you read in the media is not evidence that the media has a left wing bias.)

'BBC Director General Mark Thompson has admitted the corporation was guilty of a 'massive' Left-wing bias in the past.

The TV chief also admitted there had been a 'struggle' to achieve impartiality and that staff were ' mystified' by the early years of Margaret Thatcher's government.
But he claimed there was now 'much less overt tribalism' among the current crop of young journalists, and said in recent times the corporation was a 'broader church'.
He claimed there was now an 'honourable tradition of journalists from the right' working for the corporation.
His comments, made in the New Statesman magazine, are one of the clearest admissions of political bias from such a senior member of its staff.
The BBC has long been accused of being institutionally biased towards the Left, and an internal report from 2007 said it had to make greater efforts to avoid liberal bias.'

lol claig. I notice you have discreetly cut off the sentence which makes it clear that he was talking specifically about the state of the BBC in 1979 as opposed to now.

"In the BBC I joined 30 years ago [as a production trainee, in 1979], there was, in much of current affairs, in terms of people's personal politics, which were quite vocal, a massive bias to the left. The organisation did struggle then with impartiality. And journalistically, staff were quite mystified by the early years of Thatcher.

Now it is a completely different generation."

'an internal report from 2007 said it had to make greater efforts to avoid liberal bias.'

I don't expect him to say it still has a 'massive' left wing bias.

No, they didn't win. You know that perfectly well. That's why they are in coalition with the Lib Dems.

And really, you completely forgot the existence of the Star and the Express? Bit rich to start claiming the media is dominated by the left wing when you can't even remember how many national newspapers there are... in fact the reality is there's a huge right wing bias in the press. And in broadcasting, the BBC is impartial (TV news is supposed to be impartial but I don't see much evidence of that on Sky). That's what pisses the rabid Tories off so much, they think the state broadcaster should just regurgitate Tory Party press releases, no questions asked.

As for the Tea Party, nice attempt at spin but I'm sure you are aware it is bankrolled by billionaires seeking to promote their own interests. Which would be OK if they were honest. Dressing it up as a mass popular movement of ordinary homespun folks is a big, fat lie.

I don't read the Express and the Star, that's why I forgot about them. I watch Channel 4 and the BBC because it is intelligent coverage, but I don't kid myself that it is unbiased. I know that they leave certain sides of an argument out of it and don't give them access.

I agree that somebody is obviously pulling some strings at the Tea Party. I don't know who they are, but I agree it is a political movement, just like any other and is therefore funded by rich people who wish to influence political decisions.

So claig, tell us, if the BBC and Channel 4 both have a left wing bias, what is it you consider the ideal, politically neutral media outlet?

There isn't one. What we need is intelligent debate and opinion on the BBC and Channel 4. We need them to give equal access to opposing right wing views, views that are anti-EU or anti the left wing global warming consensus, among other issues.

Well if you remember, C4 did screen that anti-global warming consensus documentary a while back. Later of course had to apologise as it turned out the documentary had seriously misrepresented its participants. But you can't fault them for trying.

Thing is Claig, you are extrapolating from what you watch and read to make massive and inaccurate statements about the whole media. You can't say 'the media is overwhelmingly left wing' without bothering to check whether there are any titles you might not read personally that are right wing. In fact if you look at the number of titles and readership you'll see there is massive right wing bias in the press. And it's still the press that sets the news agenda, so the theoretically impartial broadcast news actually starts from a position largely defined by news sources with a right wing bias.

BBC News had some right-wing anti-EU Tories on tonight, btw. Bill Cash IIRC.

I agree that was excellent. I like Channel 4. I watch Channel 4 News. But I still think they are left-biased. That documentary was unusual and not the norm. All of these organisations are clever enough not to be too too obvious in their bias, otherwise the public would all tune out.

Not to mention giving the vile Hugh Hendry a place on the Question Time panel last night. I really don't see a shortage of right wing voices on the BBC.

Bill Cash. Quite. Not surprised that they had him on.

I am really talking about the media for the more intelligent audience. That is where the left wing bias exists.

claig, you may think they are left-biased, but you see that doesn't make them so. It more likely just makes you very right wing. Amazingly your own opinions are not necessarily at the direct centre of all possible views.

Hugh Hendry is a bad advert for Tories. Not surprised they had him on. He'll probably be a regular from now on. He is often on Newsnight.

Oh dear, we really are into reds under the beds territory now.

I think my views are in the mainstream, as shown by the election results. Many of these mainstream views don't get access on the "liberal" media, which is why the BBC had to create an internal report

'an internal report from 2007 said it had to make greater efforts to avoid liberal bias.'

Claig, your views are reflected in the election results? Let's remind ourselves:

Tories: 36% of votes
Labour: 29%
Lib Dems: 23%

You are really surprisingly liberal. I'd never have guessed.

Claig, really don't think you can use the last election as proof that there is a majority of people for any political belief system. That's kind of the point. No-one won.

no one won, but the majority of votes cast for a party, was for the Tories. I was one of the 36%, and reflect the views of that majority.