why the bbc is going down the pan

[Falcon]

I accidentally tuned into Chris Evans on Radio 2 recently, listened to 10 minutes in which I learned about his recent purchase of a yacht, and him bemoaning a puncture on his Range Rover during a visit to an elite motor sport event (which he learned about from his flunkey, who fixed it while he was quaffing champagne), and switched off.

A few days later I tuned into Radio 4 discussing the proposed runway extension to Heathrow, in which I learned that it was a jolly good thing for Britain. The news that the stuff that the aeroplanes run on is getting too expensive for them to burn, and the stuff that comes out of the back of them now has nowhere to go, as fairly fundamental factors in the story, wasn't mentioned and seems to have eluded the program researchers.

The BBC, as evidenced from the tone and content of its anchor "middle England" programs, appears to have lost any connection with the UK I see when I look out of my window.

 

[Captain Hurrah]

Why are you being unkind to ern?

It's too thick for ern. ern could at least be funny and witty with it.

 

[krtek a houby]

Well, when they thought Ian Thomlinson was a protestor, they was blaming him left right and centre, blaming the crowd for not letting the ambulance through (when that was the police) They didn't conceed their stance until they actually had no other choice. Even after the videos which clearly showed an unprovoked attack, they still stuck with the "brave police" speil.But basiaclly, watch them when they report on a protest. They are always 100% behind the police/goverment, and try to demonise the protestors as much as possible. If there's a peaceful protest, it barely gets a mention. Plus, and you'll have to do your own digging (at work and need to do stuff) but they've been guilty of using old stock footage, not just for protests, but some of the Syria/Egypt/Lybia unrest footage was years old.

Just look at what they say objectivly for a bit, have a game of spot the angle.

That's quite a few interesting allegations. I don't think BBC play the blame game, at least not in the way you suggest. I'm not saying occasional editorial bias doesn't slip in there sometimes but they are not Fox or Pravda. Or even Sky. I don't see the BBC as a tool of the Govt and if you recall, there have been plenty of times under New Labour or the current shower, when the BBC has been painted as being biased against the Govt of the time. Look at the whole Gilligan affair, for example.

It's very difficult for the organisation to tread that fine line and present a completely non-partisan (if that's the correct term) approach to current affairs. I still trust their output, when it comes to news reporting. But that's just me.

 

[butchersapron]

That's quite a few interesting allegations. I don't think BBC play the blame game, at least not in the way you suggest. I'm not saying occasional editorial bias doesn't slip in there sometimes but they are not Fox or Pravda. Or even Sky. I don't see the BBC as a tool of the Govt and if you recall, there have been plenty of times under New Labour or the current shower, when the BBC has been painted as being biased against the Govt of the time. Look at the whole Gilligan affair, for example.

It's very difficult for the organisation to tread that fine line and present a completely non-partisan (if that's the correct term) approach to current affairs. I still trust their output, when it comes to news reporting. But that's just me.

Did you miss the example of Orgreave that Idris gave?

 

[krtek a houby]

Did you miss the example of Orgreave that Idris gave?

I'm afraid I don't speak your language. Please engage with someone else.

 

[elbows]

There are several different ways of looking at this question.

Many parts of the BBC are not part of the government, but they are part of the establishment.

The views of the BBC will be shaped by their own internal culture, which in this case is going to be heavily influenced by their history, their establishment role, etc.

Add to that the type of people that end up staffing the BBC at various levels. Oxbridge types dominate.

And then there is their international function, which I would find hard not to define as propaganda, especially given historical funding of things like the world service by the foreign office. An argument can be made that they care about their credibility far more than many of the other state-backed media of other countries, and done right this makes it better propaganda. Im sure this is also further balanced and enhanced by a strong feeling in the minds of most that work there that they are indulging in honest journalism of the highest order.

 

[butchersapron]

Honest objective journalism is the opium of the BBC.

 

[elbows]

And AlJazeera is quite similar to the BBC model in more ways than may be apparent. Indeed at their inception their English-language departments had quite a lot of former BBC staffers,although I believe this probably evolved quite rapidly over time. I would certainly not describe AlJazeera as completely free from influence by its hosting state, and Im sure it values its credibility.

 

[elbows]

Should also point out that when done right propaganda is not necessarily at odds with truth, Its often about tone and focus as much as substance.

Hands up if you have never seen a BBC news humanoid that came come across as a spook. There are some obvious examples, but since its a subject that goes almost completely undiscussed I don't feel like throwing names out there.

 

[krtek a houby]

Should also point out that when done right propaganda is not necessarily at odds with truth, Its often about tone and focus as much as substance.

Hands up if you have never seen a BBC news humanoid that came come across as a spook. There are some obvious examples, but since its a subject that goes almost completely undiscussed I don't feel like throwing names out there.

More than likely, esp in the 70s & 80s. Wouldn't disagree there.

 

[elbows]

Anyone remember that rather interesting concept for a BBC program where they explored the world of emergency high-stakes state event management using something of a game-show format?

eg A deadly virus has broken out, and people have been quarantined. They are trying to break out of the hospital. Do you authorise the police to shoot at them? Don't answer too quickly now, heres a civil servant to advise you of the way such balancing acts are considered.

 

[krtek a houby]

Anyone remember that rather interesting concept for a BBC program where they explored the world of emergency high-stakes state event management using something of a game-show format?

eg A deadly virus has broken out, and people have been quarantined. They are trying to break out of the hospital. Do you authorise the police to shoot at them? Don't answer too quickly now, heres a civil servant to advise you of the way such balancing acts are considered.

I don't remember this. What was it, who devised it? It sounds more like a drama, tbh?

 

[Louis MacNeice]

I'm afraid I don't speak your language. Please engage with someone else.

You've never heard of the BBC's manipulation of the 'Battle of Orgreave' footage from the miners' strike...really?

Louis MacNeice

 

[krtek a houby]

You've never heard of the BBC's manipulation of the 'Battle of Orgreave' footage from the miners' strike...really?

Louis MacNeice

I haven't, no. I'm dismissing butcher's post, not the allegation. I have an open mind and I remember the strike but at the same time, I was 14 and in Ireland - so no, I haven't come across it.

 

[Blagsta]

I'm afraid I don't speak your language. Please engage with someone else.

Battle of Orgreave. Miner's strike. BBC reversed order of footage shown, to make it look like the miners had attacked the police first, rather than the other way round. Look it up, its well known.

 

[elbows]

Where people go wrong when judging BBC reporting of national politics is political parties - the BBC will be biased in favour of the state and institutions, and various values, not a particular party. Obviously its not always this clear-cut because the agenda of a party in power can become the state agenda, and people at various levels of the BBC may not agree with particular agendas.

 

[elbows]

I don't remember this. What was it, who devised it? It sounds more like a drama, tbh?

It made use of dramatised footage of the incidents, but the main thrust of the show was a strange mix of game-show and real advisors.

I forgot what it was called, but remembered the presenter so I was able to figure it out. Its this:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Crisis_Command

 

[butchersapron]

Where people go wrong when judging BBC reporting of national politics is political parties - the BBC will be biased in favour of the state and institutions, and various values, not a particular party. Obviously its not always this clear-cut because the agenda of a party in power can become the state agenda, and people at various levels of the BBC may not agree with particular agendas.

Spot on.

 

[ViolentPanda]

That's quite a few interesting allegations. I don't think BBC play the blame game, at least not in the way you suggest. I'm not saying occasional editorial bias doesn't slip in there sometimes but they are not Fox or Pravda. Or even Sky. I don't see the BBC as a tool of the Govt and if you recall, there have been plenty of times under New Labour or the current shower, when the BBC has been painted as being biased against the Govt of the time. Look at the whole Gilligan affair, for example.

It's very difficult for the organisation to tread that fine line and present a completely non-partisan (if that's the correct term) approach to current affairs. I still trust their output, when it comes to news reporting. But that's just me.

I'm not sure that they've even tried to "tread that fine line" many times in the last 30 years. Idris and butch mentioned Orgreave, but you can find examples of poor/pro-establishment reporting running through the Beeb's history - footage of rioters at Notting Hill lobbing stuff at the Old Bill, with footage of the OB driving their cars and vans at the rioters only "found in the vaults" back in the '90s. Footage at Wapping edited so that what got broadcast was police on the defensive and protesters attacking, which didn't reflect the reality most of the time, as most of the "attacks" on the OB were retaliatory, usually due to them cavalry-charging protestors and getting baton-happy. Same with footage of the Brixton, St. Pauls and Brum riots and fuck knows how many other actions by members of the public.
I watch their output, but I don't trust it.

 

[elbows]

And so its all over for Bush House.

I recommend watching the 3 minute audio-photo thing that accompanies the story, it has the right atmosphere and some of the comments are relevant.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/magazine-18801251

 

[elbows]

Article moaning about the World Service cuts, which I consider quite hilarious for all the wrong reasons:

http://opendemocracy.net/ourbeeb/cl...ly-respected-voice-of-britain-is-getting-fain

Includes a typical example of the doublethink that leaps out and slaps me in the face whenever I read about this sort of thing, in the form of a quote from William Hague:

“should remain an articulate and powerful voice for Britain in the world, and a trusted provider of impartial and independent news.”

A voice for Britain and yet somehow impartial, chinny reckon.

 

[savoloysam]

What is it with this respect your elders stuff at the moment? It's all over the schedule. Life if shit enough for millions of people as it is without daily reminders, that we're all going to get sick, old and die one day.

How thoroughly depressing.

 

[elbows]

< generationally bitter mode on >

The baby boomers are getting old enough to start thinking about really old age, and are preparing to get exactly what they want out of it at the expense of everyone else. It matters so much more now that it affects them, see.

 

[treelover]

Its looking like for BBC News really 'bad news' stories like the again emergent Eurozone crisis aren't going to get in the way of the wonderful Olympics...

 

[bi0boy]

LATEST NEWS: Olympic torch visits fictional London borough of Walford in special live section of BBC soap EastEnders

I couldn't find anything about this important news item on either cnn.com or the guardian's wesbite

 

[frogwoman]

every time i seem to switch it on it's full of the same royal/olympic bollocks

good morning pyongyang

 

[DownwardDog]

Anyone remember that rather interesting concept for a BBC program where they explored the world of emergency high-stakes state event management using something of a game-show format?

eg A deadly virus has broken out, and people have been quarantined. They are trying to break out of the hospital. Do you authorise the police to shoot at them? Don't answer too quickly now, heres a civil servant to advise you of the way such balancing acts are considered.

Was that the one where the twat who ran a chain of sushi restaurants wouldn't give authorisation for an airliner shootdown and they crashed into the House of Commons? I lol'ed.

 

[Captain Hurrah]

Simon Woodroffe? With the pants at half mast, and brightly coloured socks?

 

[teahead]

Sure the bbc News has its problems (occasional propoganda, laughable cultural agendas, fillers and irrelevance from time to time), but it's up to you how you use its information. If you want balance in your understanding of the world, you need to go and find it for yourself. News output isn't some kind of teat with good and bad 'brands' (unless you're insisting on behaving like a baby).

What's really sad is the idea that somehow 'freedom of the press' is sacrosanct. Broadcast media - transmitted and in print - is in trouble because of the way economics has shaped the market since the 70's, alongside all the cultural effluence that's risen to the surface with Leveson.

For a piece of real crap, look at this.
http://www.guardian.co.uk/media/greenslade/2011/sep/27/ivan-lewis-leveson-inquiry

Guy sounds like a soapboxer for the Holy Guild of Apothecaries...

Licensing would be complicated. It probably works best in medicine. But no one's held to account for the damage done by the Press and of course no one could finance a private action. What doesn't work in news journalism is the market model. There's no substantial checks and balances to 'news reporting' so it's free to cater to its own perceived interests relatively undisturbed.

R3, and maybe R6, would be a loss no? Thankfully, people who are demanding about the they listen to tend to worry less about the authority of the individual planning the output (except at shit parties).

 

[elbows]

Was that the one where the twat who ran a chain of sushi restaurants wouldn't give authorisation for an airliner shootdown and they crashed into the House of Commons? I lol'ed.

Damn I think I missed that one!