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

Ah I see, that sort of majority. Well I was one of the 64% who didn't vote Tory. So I'm more mainstream than you. Bad luck.

I'm one of the 71% who didn't vote Labour, so I'm more mainstream than you. More people preferred the Tories to the other parties.

No Party got a majority of votes Claig, the Conservatives got a plurality of votes.

I don't think there is a bias in the BBC to be honest

huddspur, do you agree that there was a 'massive' bias in the BBC, as the Director General said, but that it has now disappeared and that there is no longer a bias?

No I don't think there's ever been a big bias in the BBC, I've always found presenters such as Paxman,Maitlis,Neil very fair and impartial.

ok

I say that as a Lib Dem voter btw

There was a documentary on the BBC this evening - about so-called poverty and unemployment in York - which typifies the kind of left-wing bias complained of by posters here, which is not confined to news programming.

There was an unemployed man.

There was a single mother.

There was a man in his 50s who had lost his job.

Unbelievably, all of these loafers and whingers were portrayed sympathetically, when clearly any "disadvantage" they suffered was entirely their own responsiblity.

The sooner the BBC is wound up, the better. What we need is more documentaries about how making the rich richer will enrich us all.

Sorry to answer this late Claig but of course sometimes they get it right in terms of health and the daily mail but more often than not they get it very wrong and it is completely unscientific.

They use attention grabbing headlines to get people to read the nonsense they print and then pretend it is science or research.

As for the election we have a coalition because no one won.

"why should be BBC be impartial" er BECAUSE ITS CHARTER SAYS IT SHOULD BE. The reason the BBC receives our licence fees is to act as the nation's broadcaster and accordingly it is not supposed to display any bias.

'They use attention grabbing headlines to get people to read the nonsense they print and then pretend it is science or research.'

are you talking about the Chief Medical Officer and the swine flu "pandemic"?

The Mail are not always right, but then neither is the Chief Medical Officer.

No I am not Claig. As has been pointed out to you once already they do sometimes get it right. More often than not though they use pseudo science and scandal.

You can get cancer from getting angry with your partner says a new programme from the privately run clinic for people with anger management problems, women in their 50's are prone to spots on their ankles says the latest research from Schol if they dont wear our special shoes etc etc,

The BBC provides an excellent impartial
service as a public interest broadcaster.

Cameron is a toff on a supermarket sweep style grab-raid through public services :(

I cant believe he got elected, even though he only got about a third of the vote. Hes like our own G W bush.

I come into contact with the beeb in the course of my work and trust me the people I come across bend over backwards to be impartial and to be seen to be impartial. The Salford decision is stupid for reasons stated by previous posters and some people are paid too much but remember everyone who has left recently has moved to itv/ channel 5/ sky for a lot more money. Ergo the bbc is not dominant and more importantly we need the BBC to ensure quality journalism and programming is available to as many people as possible in the UK. Personally I cannot afford sky and shudder at the thought of fox news in the UK. If anyone thinks the daily mail is bad.......