BBC political bias

Me too. Alan you echo my feelings, frequently posted here, exactly!:)

I couldn’t agree more Alan.
Jim.
Lincoln .7

It’s interesting to watch “Newswatch” on the BBC. A bit like “Points of View”, but just concerned with news output.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/b00qjrk2

The people in charge of the news services at the BBC consider themselves omnipotent. Again and again, the same criticisms
will be aired by members of the public.
Again and again, the woman in charge will come on the programme and justify their actions. I have yet to hear her say
sorry, or that they have got anything wrong.

I prefer SKY news, but also like to watch a selection of the various news channels. It certainly can be an eye opener, with
lots of important stories the BBC never even mention.

I take everything with a pinch of salt, and disregard the rest.
Jim.
Lincoln .7

Waco – ??…..

The only News I believe, is the news of what happens to ME, on a daily basis.Then I know it’s true and not hearsay.
Jim.
Lincoln .7

………….So says the unbaised views of the Flypast Conservate Club………………

I have no idea but as I have already said the BBC is in the unique position as a public broadcaster paid for by us. It has a remit for proper balance and I remain unconvinced that it upholds it in many areas.

Which might mean that you find the BBC to have a more left wing bias than that poles average…?;o)

I’m in the 9.1%.

I cannot comment on the claims you make for how Sky operates as they appear to be hearsay but I do not discern the right wing bias you assert.

Indeed it is not my experience, but that of a relative who slowly eased a story from a source for her copy. You don’t complain too much if you want to move upwards from a weekly news sheet to the heady heights of what used to be Fleet Street.
And a bias is subjective – when I were a lad a friends dad insisted that The Sun was a working class newspaper for the working man (both true, subjectively) and therefore backed Labour. Even when it backed Thatcher, published the infamous last one leaving turn out the lights headline, and bad mouthed the unions during the miners strike he still believed, then he had a heart attack (unrelated) and the paper never entered the house again.
Sky News bias – look at the studio guests: although not as bad as Fox News see if you can notice the carefully guided questions designed to take the programme in the direction that the company wants it to.

A survey from 2010:

Nearly two-thirds of respondents (64 per cent) said Sky News displays a clear pro-Conservative bias in its reporting. In total, 34.5 per cent of respondents said Sky News displays a “strong Conservative” bias, while 29.3 said the channel shows “some Conservative” bias. One per cent of respondents thought Sky News displays a pro-Liberal Democrat bias, there was zero suggestion of any support for Labour and only 9.1 per cent of respondents said Sky News shows no overall bias.
http://themediablog.typepad.com/the-media-blog/2010/04/uk-media-bias-bbc-channel-4-sky-itv-politics-brown-cameron-clegg-230270410.html

The reason the school wasn’t mentioned much compared to the Shopping Centre is simple, no one in the UK media gives a hoot about a bunch of kids being killed because there were no British kids amongst them, now the Shopping Centre had Brits in abundance………….>>>>>>

Cynical……. Moi?

That reminds me of an episode of Not the Nine O’clock news, where they did a sketch on this very subject.

The reason the school wasn’t mentioned much compared to the Shopping Centre is simple, no one in the UK media gives a hoot about a bunch of kids being killed because there were no British kids amongst them, now the Shopping Centre had Brits in abundance..
Don’t forget they are blowing the crap out of each other day in and day out in Iraq and it’s hardly mentioned either, but as we are sort of no longer there, who gives a toss, let em get on with it, it’s deemed not newsworthy…

Cynical……. Moi?

I cannot comment on the claims you make for how Sky operates as they appear to be hearsay but I do not discern the right wing bias you assert. It is my main source of news supplemented by other services so I watch/listen/read quite a lot.
But the I suppose the attribution or not of bias is a subjective judgement in itself.
Indeed whatever did happen to ITV? It is available on line. Maybe I’ll give it a try. I cannot remember when I last watched it and I gave up Channel 4 ages ago, bored with its agenda lead stories.

Where to start?
It used to be that the BBC was forever being slagged off by the government for being the opposite to those in power at the time. Then along came Blair: new Labour knew the value of good press and how to keep the paper barons on their side, and the broadcast media found themselves being flirted with by the governments backroom boys who had tidbits of juicy info fed to them on the promise that other things get ignored – although sometimes world news did its part too, if you remember the story about it being a good day to release bad government news around and about 11/9/2001…
But getting back to the Labour party conference.
Hands up all those who knew what Miliband’s policies were before the conference?
The Labour leader has been rather quiet since his selection and that has made anything he says newsworthy – not because he is spouting words of genius but (probably) to show that there is an opposition to the current ruling alliance. Whether it has been at the expense of other important news I am not sure: I’ve heard about the bigger slaughter in Pakistan as much as that in Kenya, but I listen to the radio more than newspapers and definitely more than TV, and the BBC more than Sky News (who supply quite a few of the independent stations). Whatever happened to ITN…?
And talking of Sky News, I believe it’s better than it was since Murdoch has separated it off from his other assets but it is still not the wonderfully independent opposition to the BBC, unless you are happy with its inherent right wing agenda (which is, admittedly, nothing like as bad as its US sister Fox News!). Apparently the staff still share stories with the newspapers and both are not above shafting local news media with claiming national exclusives despite the it appearing locally up to several days previously.
Please note: The Times and The Sun do share reporters on occasion; it’s the sub editors that cut down the syllables for the hard of thinking readers.

Short and simply Moggy,,,,Yes, I do, but to each his own.
Jim.
Lincoln .7

That is of course true. My concern is less to do with bias than balance and accuracy.
At least we all have the freedom to chose our news sources across a wide range of print and broadcast media.

Obviously they did – they could hardly do otherwise. Taking that single example to refute the suggestion is meaningless.
As is the dismissal of presumably anything owned by Murdoch. The Times remains a pretty good broadsheet on balance in my view.

With Murdoch, just simply my opinion, as far as alleged political bias from the BBC is concerned, I quoted one example as I have no wish to get into some long winded pointless discussion, but I honestly see no sign of so called left wing bias, of course with some people anything short of bending the knee to the right wing is regarded as bias, but hey ho, this will always be about opinions and unless someone is proposing illegal activity, then they are entitled to their opinion.

Obviously they did – they could hardly do otherwise. Taking that single example to refute the suggestion is meaningless.
As is the dismissal of presumably anything owned by Murdoch. The Times remains a pretty good broadsheet on balance in my view.

Hven’t noticed the BBC to be particularly biased, for those so inclined they broadcast Cameron’s speech in full live, now if that illustrates left wing bias in some minds , then I feel sorry for them.

On the other hand anything which has Murdoch’s sticky fingers any where near, is to be distrusted.