Tories go to war with the BBC

[claig]

Lots of the papers have this as headlines

"Tories go to war with the BBC

David Cameron, infuriated by the corporation's election coverage, appoints BBC critic John Whittingdale to "sort out the BBC" ahead of the royal charter review next year"

www.telegraph.co.uk/culture/tvandradio/bbc/11598450/Tories-go-to-war-with-the-BBC.html

I'll believe it when I see it, I doubt the Tories have that level of courage.

Surely even the Tories can see the value of the BBC. And it did them no harm - they won ffs.

It is quite telling that they don't like an independent broadcaster but quite happily schmooze the Murdoch press.

We are slowly turning into a quasi democracy, what with this and the proposed changes to MPs' boundaries to favour the Tories even more. It is scary.

The BBC are saying that senior Tories are playing down "the war on the BBC" but are saying that they are "unhappy" about the election coverage.

So it's the same old, they won't do anything to the BBC, they don't have the courage. Farage said he would like to "cut it to the bone", but the Tories wouldn't dream of it.

"During his last appearance on Newsnight, Boris Johnson, the mayor of London, suggested Mr Paxman was the “last” Conservative at the BBC.

Asked if that was really true, he said: “If I had to... are there any members of the press here? I think I'll plead the fifth on that one.”

But he suggested he found himself at odds with the political leanings of most at Newsnight, according to a Daily Telegraph reporter in the crowd."

www.independent.co.uk/news/people/jeremy-paxman-im-a-onenation-tory-and-newsnight-is-made-by-13yearolds-9566874.html

I do wonder if any of these politicians ever actually watch the BBC because as far as I can see there is definitely not a left wing bias.

The problem with the BBC and most media outlets is that opinion is now reported as fact. How often have we heard a non-story about something that somebody believes but may or may not be true.

Cardiff Uni did a study a couple of years ago and found the BBC to have a more Conservative, Eurosceptic slant than left wing based on the number of news articles/appearances.

I actually don't think the BBC news is biased either way but I hate the news because of the opinion reporting. But this is a general complaint with media and knowledge about the issues.

It's the perception point ie just because something is perceived to be X doesn't mean it is X but if you repeat the view long enough, most people will believe it because they can't be bothered to do their own research.

Maybe it just looks left wing compared to the press. I find it unbelievable that a newspaper is allowed to publish a paper with the headline 'vote tory', although at least that was out in the open after weeks of insidious right wing reporting on the election.

I can't believe the BBC isn't biased. How is it the audience on the debates were all jeering ukip, but then ukip got 12% of the vote? Why the furious clapping after every ' get the Tories out' speech but then the Tories win a majority!?

As far as I recall every single Government, whether Tory or Labour, when in power has believed the BBC is biased. If both sides think it is biased, then the Beeb has probably got it about right.

Your view of the football game depends a bit on where you are sitting in the stands - to use an analogy.

I think a lot of the Tory views come from the fact that the those in positions of influence in the Beeb tend to come from a metropolitan liberal elite, which does not of course mean they cannot separate their personal views from the coverage they run with.

I agree with where one sits in the stands is a factor, but I would say that the BBC managers running the schedules and some of the presenters, especially on radio, had the 'liberal elite bias'.

Looking back I remember that during Labour's 13-years, Conservatives appearing on the TV political shows were (rightly or not) treated like something that came in on the bottom of someones shoes - in fact as someone who loves political debate, I refused to watch the Andrew Marr show and Question Time for years.

And based on the facts/apologies, some BBC executives have since admitted stifling debate on key government policy/issues during that time e.g. immigration.
www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2354713/BBC-chief-admits-We-deep-liberal-bias-migrants--changed.html

Now I at least watch Andrew Marr as I think he (and Andrew Neil, not co host Jo) sticks it to all politicians, but whether more willing or not, I find more opposition MPs being given air time over the past 5-years, than the previous 13-years e.g. UKIP who were taking 2-3 times more Conservative voters, asked with a 2010 "drivel" manifesto to comment on non EU issues.

One recent story intrigues me as reported by Nick robertson, when Ed Miliband was meeting "BBC Executives" and TELLING THEM he was 'going to weaponize the NHS'; why was he meeting them, why would he disclose to them his/Labour's controversial strategy?

Finally as possibly relevant to us all funding the BBC;
www.thecommentator.com/article/1953/exclusive_bbc_left_wing_political_bias_illustrated_through_uk_political_funding_revelations

Is this the same Robin Shepherd of The Commentator who is Director of International Affairs at the neoconservative Henry Jackson Society.

As regards the Daily Mail link, it was the former head of BBC News who said that there was a deep, liberal bias but only in relation to race and immigration. The Stuart Prebble report concluded, overall, that the BBC's coverage of immigration was 'broad and impressive' and that on the EU the BBC offer 'a wide and comprehensive range of information and viewpoints' and that the BBC’s coverage of religion is 'comprehensive and impressive.'

www.bbc.co.uk/bbctrust/our_work/editorial_standards/impartiality/breadth_opinion.html

I'm always baffled by claims of the BBC's supposed left-wing bias. People constantly gripe about it and yet all the 'evidence' seems to be purely anecdotal. It may have been an issue in the distant past, during the Thatcher years and so on, but those who claim it today seem hard pressed to produce any actual proof. My father-in-law constantly trots out the claim as though it was an incontrovertible fact, but where's the evidence? This recent academic study seems to have found the opposite! theconversation.com/hard-evidence-how-biased-is-the-bbc-17028

Election .... even if as you say "only in relation to race and immigration",

I would strongly argue that a lack of an open debate on the government of the days immigration objectives, that lack of warning also had much wider social consequencies, on our indigenous unemployed, public services, housing etc.

“In Their Own Words”
biasedbbc.org/quotes-of-shame/

”When people ask for evidence of an institutional Left-wing bias at the BBC, this is the place to go for evidence. Out of the mouths of Beeboids….”

P.S. I'd like to add, the growth of UKIP's popularity.

I reckon Jeremy Vine and Vanessa Feltz are Tories.

They can't all be 'reds next to the bed' on the radio, can they? lol

Most of the female presenters on the BBC seem like Tories. The men presenters less so.

My guess would be that Cameron will not seriosly take on the BBC He will huff and puff a bit

Agreed, the political anger equivalent of first day in full power, 'first one up against the wall' - using (blue) soggy noodles as ammo.

Isitmebut as I said above, I have a problem with all media outlets reporting opinion as news. The definition got "news" is newly received or noteworthy information especially about recent events. Not somebodies view that there are too many immigrants here taking all our jobs and housing. That is just their perception unless they come up with hard evidence not anecdotal evidence.

To be honest I don't watch any TV news because it is just opinion reporting rather that facts or information.

As regards David Vance's website listing a few quotes from current and ex employees, again that is just their opinion. I'm all for open debate where the issues can be discussed in a calm and reasoned manner and with empirical evidence not just a load of perceptions being bandied around. I'm not sure David Vance is for open debate however - he retains the right to remove any blogpost if comment for any reason it if he doesn't like it.

Again, I'll refer back to the study and the BBC report commissioned which actually looks at evidence.

I must say, I've seen this David Vance bloke before. He's absolutely obsessed by the BBC. He's called a "political" analyst but really he's just a nutter with a blog. If you get a moment, do peruse some of his blog posts and ensuing comments. I particularly like this one with the comment regarding Obama.

biasedbbc.org/blog/2010/01/25/four-lions/#comments

It's a total smoke screen, them Tories are a crafty lot. The vast majority of newspapers and the Beeb are ridiculously pro- Conservative, this time around anyway.