Dumping the BBC?

[Proper Tidy]

View attachment 191330 .

It's because rightwingers think the BBC is biased towards liberal social values while leftwingers think the BBC is biased towards the political establishment and the cultural status quo. Which is true, but expressing it as biased towards either left or right is inaccurate. It's just a product of the culture that creates and nurtures it and from which all of its senior types come from, which is the chattering class russell group socially liberal but let's not address economic inequality because that sounds bad for us section of society that controls culture more widely than just the BBC

 

[Azrael]

I didn’t pay my licence for a year once. Had them knocking on my door. Unfortunately I’m a shit liar and they found out that I had a telly. I got a court date, but that went away once I paid the fee.

At least in the UK you can get out of it if you can prove you have no telly. In Germany everybody has to pay the equivalent of the licence fee, no matter what. German telly is far more crap than the BBC, I never watch it and the two main channels show commercials anyway.

In the immortal words of Tony Soprano, "Waaaarant, waaarant."

 

[mx wcfc]

Until this election, I've been quite happy to pay the licence fee. I listen to Radio 6 all the time, and the little telly I do watch is mainly the Beeb. Plus it seemed good value compared to all the amazon, netflix etc channels that my womenfolk sign my bank account up to.

But now I'm starting to get really pissed off with the tory bias.

 

[Azrael]

It's because rightwingers think the BBC is biased towards liberal social values while leftwingers think the BBC is biased towards the political establishment and the cultural status quo. Which is true, but expressing it as biased towards either left or right is inaccurate. It's just a product of the culture that creates and nurtures it and from which all of its senior types come from, which is the chattering class russell group socially liberal but let's not address economic inequality because that sounds bad for us section of society that controls culture more widely than just the BBC

This certainly goes for the traditional kind of BBC bias, which was unconscious, rooted in the unthinking assumptions of the producers. As a conservative (not Tory, never Tory) who loathes neoliberalism, I was in the unusual position of seeing it from both sides. The last BBC drama I can remember giving a conservative POV was Lilies (created by Heidi Thomas, as it happens), which aired back in 2007, and was unceremoniously cancelled after one series.

The recent antics of BBC news are something else altogether, moving from lazy bias to straight-up propaganda, a concerted effort to distort the narrative in the government's favour. Enough to make me nostalgic for the old school Bloomsbury set assumptions. At least they allowed some subtlety, and weren't fully aware of what they were doing.

 

[Azrael]

Until this election, I've been quite happy to pay the licence fee. I listen to Radio 6 all the time, and the little telly I do watch is mainly the Beeb. Plus it seemed good value compared to all the amazon, netflix etc channels that my womenfolk sign my bank account up to.

But now I'm starting to get really pissed off with the tory bias.

This'll be a watershed. In public and private, I've seen and heard people who've reflexively defended the BBC come-what-may express their disgust, look into cancelling their license, and outright say that the BBC should be made subscription only.

The extent and overtness of partiality and deception in an election is something new and sinister. From the string of accidental edits that just happen to favour the government to (according to Labour sources, who I believe) lying through their teeth to get Corbyn interviewed under false pretences, the BBC have junked any pretence at balance and are openly backing the governing party. The placemen in the news dept. may be immediately responsible, but no-one at the top has stepped in to rein them in, making those at the highest levels responsible.

If the BBC succeed in throwing an election, they'll never be forgiven by their natural supporters, nor will they deserve to be. They'll have earned everything that's coming.

 

[Proper Tidy]

This certainly goes for the traditional kind of BBC bias, which was unconscious, rooted in the unthinking assumptions of the producers. As a conservative (not Tory, never Tory) who loathes neoliberalism, I was in the unusual position of seeing it from both sides. The last BBC drama I can remember giving a conservative POV was Lilies (created by Heidi Thomas, as it happens), which aired back in 2007, and was unceremoniously cancelled after one series.

The recent antics of BBC news are something else altogether, moving from lazy bias to straight-up propaganda, a concerted effort to distort the narrative in the government's favour. Enough to make me nostalgic for the old school Bloomsbury set assumptions. At least they allowed some subtlety, and weren't fully aware of what they were doing.

I think it's still more or less the same thing though, or comes from same place. It's not pro tory, it's driven by the absolute fear of corbyn (which I would argue comes from the - fairly mild relatively but that's to me immersed in the arguments of the marxist left - threat of wealth redistribution) amongst the chattering class types, and it's still not, or not entirely, conscious. It's a reaction to that fear that prevents them from dealing with a left movement (shit term this but bear with me) which is a threat to them in anything but bad faith and therefore conversely forces them to show more (not necessarily conscious) good faith to tories than they would in other circumstances

 

[Azrael]

I think it's still more or less the same thing though, or comes from same place. It's not pro tory, it's driven by the absolute fear of corbyn (which I would argue comes from the - fairly mild relatively but that's to me immersed in the arguments of the marxist left - threat of wealth redistribution) amongst the chattering class types, and it's still not, or not entirely, conscious. It's a reaction to that fear that prevents them from dealing with a left movement (shit term this but bear with me) which is a threat to them in anything but bad faith and therefore conversely forces them to show more (not necessarily conscious) good faith to tories than they would in other circumstances

At least I'd know where I was with that. We've now crossed the line from bias to concerted government propaganda. Deceptively editing clips, smearing Labour with the government's narrative, and worst of all, using Andrew Neil to savage Corbyn while (accidentally, of course) neglecting to get Johnson confirmed for similar treatment: this is a concerted campaign of lies and deception that'd do Pravda proud.

It's not entirely unprecedented -- we all know about the Orgreave edit, alongside a general tendency to ignore police lawlessness in the Miners' strike -- but such sustained and overt bias in an election campaign's a whole new level.

 

[Azrael]

This is an old one and quite long, but it's very detailed. It's mainly about the reporting on the first indyref. The Nick Robinson stuff should be required viewing.

Watched this before, but required viewing. As, incredibly, was the three-part docco on Indyref1 aired on BBC Scotland, which also covered the bias in detail, and was impeccably balanced. Mystery for the ages how it ever got made let alone broadcast, but glad it did: an afterglow of the BBC as we like to think it once was.

 

[cupid_stunt]

Well, they have managed to get facebook to take down a Tory ad...

Facebook has deleted a Conservative election ad that used BBC News footage because it infringed the corporation's intellectual property (IP) rights.

The BBC said the material had been used out of context in a way that "could damage perceptions of our impartiality".

On Thursday, the Tories rejected a request from the BBC's lawyers to remove the 15-second video.

The BBC also complained to Facebook, which has now deleted the ad.

Facebook bans Tory ad over BBC footage

 

[Azrael]

Peter Oborne rips apart the BBC's anti-Labour propaganda in a Grauniad op-ed. That's Peter Oborne of all people, ex-Telegraph, ex-Mail, ex-Spectator, conservative to the cuticles.

When you've got a journalist so deeply embedded in Toryism he's in danger of morphing into the Royal Oak taking you to task for being unfair to Labour, you've got a major problem.

 

[Badgers]

Farage being welcomed onto radio 5

 

[Pickman's model]

Farage being welcomed onto radio 5

when he should be being ushered into a tumbril

 

[FabricLiveBaby!]

Nick Robinson's getting ratio'd on Twatter. The comments are

 

[Azrael]

My how they've circled the wagons!

I don't for a second buy the "oh, it's just News, rest are OK" defence. News are running riot 'cause they're allowed to. The corporation's board could put a stop to it at any time. Bosses in other departments could publicly protest. "Talent" could resign with zero personal cost beyond less time on the box. They haven't, and won't, 'cause Auntie looks after her own. This rot runs throughout the organization, and will remain until it's ended in its current form.

 

[DexterTCN]

When you get the concept of dropping state tv....you start to see all the people that quote it...unquestioningly.

 

[SovietArmy]

There is better channel calling ARTE and got English subtitles good documentaries, concerts, current affairs and is free.

 

[Proper Tidy]

There is better channel calling ARTE and got English subtitles good documentaries, concerts, current affairs and is free.

I like the Late Late Show

 

[Badgers]

Labour complains to BBC over "slanted and biased" election coverage - LabourList

 

[Badgers]

Just had a follow up call from a company called ICM on behalf of the BBC regards the complaint I made.

Pleasant enough chap
Lot's of questions about my demographic

Questions like 'how do you rate the BBC from 0 to 10' which is tricky when I rate some of their content (Attenborough etc) a full 10/10 but their news/election coverage a lot lower.

The chap did ask what I hoped/expected from my complaint. Said that I expected some sort of communication and a commitment of responsibility in the future when coverage is deliberately altered to manipulate a political agenda.

 

[Badgers]

 

[magneze]

The Sunday Telegraph claims Mr Johnson's planned overhaul of Whitehall is part of a bid to show the government "works for the people". The paper also reports planned reforms to the civil service, including a review of hiring and firing processes. Separately, it claims Mr Johnson has ordered an urgent review into decriminalising non-payment of the BBC licence fee, which costs £154.40 annually for watching live TV or iPlayer.

PM's 'Whitehall revolution' after election win

 

[FridgeMagnet]

John Simpson says the Tories are doubling down on attacking the BBC, boycotting Today, that famously anti-Tory hotbed of lefties.



Never saw _that_ coming, oh no, completely out of the blue.

 

[Badgers]

Privatisation looming

 

[cupid_stunt]

Privatisation looming

Not in the short term, the current Royal Charter doesn't end until 31st Dec 2027.

 

[Badgers]

Not in the short term, the current Royal Charter doesn't end until 31st Dec 2027.

Plenty of time to run it into the ground and sell it cheap

 

[ska invita]

John Simpson says the Tories are doubling down on attacking the BBC, boycotting Today, that famously anti-Tory hotbed of lefties.



Never saw _that_ coming, oh no, completely out of the blue.

Trump PLAYBOOK. There, I said it. Hard to play the media is my enemy card when you look at the front pages of the papers today, or of course look at the election itself, but I guess the BBC'll do

 

[Wolveryeti]

Main problem with BBC news/politics coverage is that they have been cowed into accepting the bullshit that fact-checking and challenging politicians on the facts can be considered political bias.

Over polarising issues (e.g. Brexit) they have treated it entirely as a difference of views rather than an area where their responsibility as a public service is to inform the public. Hence excessive airtime given to dog shit shills (balance!) who have absolutely no scruples about lying to the public if it furthers their agenda.

If lying on national TV is costless (as it is now) it will become endemic and deep rooted (there is already evidence of this) - and the BBC will just move closer and closer to becoming a mouthpiece of No. 10.

There are ways of combating this, but the BBC has no spine to do so (probably concerned for their cushty jobs and 6 figure salaries). For instance, I agree with the suggestion that lies interviewees tell should form the first item of questioning whenever they are back on the programme next.

I am not quite sure I'm ready to accept the premise that the whole BBC should go or be funded by advertising, but little point of continuing with news/politics output in the current format. It's now beyond a joke and I never watch it / rely on it.

 

[Azrael]

Not in the short term, the current Royal Charter doesn't end until 31st Dec 2027.

Since it's not binding on Parliament, the government can legislate to end it anytime it likes. Whether they will's another question.

 

[Azrael]

Main problem with BBC news/politics coverage is that they have been cowed into accepting the bullshit that fact-checking and challenging politicians on the facts can be considered political bias.

Over polarising issues (e.g. Brexit) they have treated it entirely as a difference of views rather than an area where their responsibility as a public service is to inform the public. Hence excessive airtime given to dog shit shills (balance!) who have absolutely no scruples about lying to the public if it furthers their agenda.

If lying on national TV is costless (as it is now) it will become endemic and deep rooted (there is already evidence of this) - and the BBC will just move closer and closer to becoming a mouthpiece of No. 10.

There are ways of combating this, but the BBC has no spine to do so (probably concerned for their cushty jobs and 6 figure salaries). For instance, I agree with the suggestion that lies interviewees tell should form the first item of questioning whenever they are back on the programme next.

I am not quite sure I'm ready to accept the premise that the whole BBC should go or be funded by advertising, but little point of continuing with news/politics output in the current format. It's now beyond a joke and I never watch it / rely on it.

At the very least, new and current affairs need to go.* The conflict of interest of a state broadcast dominating the news market is just too great.

* Except perhaps the world service, which isn't subjected to the same pressures, and seems to've kept its reputation.

 

[Pickman's model]

Plenty of time to run it into the ground and sell it cheap

So much of it has been privatised, it's in many ways a commissioning organisation