Tuesday, January 23, 2007

The depth and breadth of BBC bias

Like many of you I have argued that the BBC is systematically biased. It has a left wing default view which is a systematic result of the way it is constituted.

Yesterday I left a comment on The Editors BBC blog that said:

Have you ever thought of carrying out an opinion poll of your editorial staff to see if any of them have ever voted Tory in their entire lives ?

Many of us suspect that if you did the answer would be no.

Its that perception (true or false) you need to deal with.

Well later on t hat night the Editor of the Daily Mail had as go - see Biased BBC's introduction here.

We also find out that a NuLabour Pensions ( steeling from the yet to be old to pay the parasitic state sector bumped up salaries and pensions whilst condemning many people to live in poverty and misery in the future) minister was having it off with the Newsnight Producer of the night. See here for the Daily Mails take on this.

But what I really find shocking is that the woman in question had worked for Labour in the 2005 general election... Surely no editor should have that strong party political affiliations. This story shows that they do and they can't be trusted.

The BBC had literally been caught with it trousers down.

But still they will carry on either lying to themselves or the public ( its never quite clear which ) about being impartial.

PS On the Editors blog a fellow named Ian (I link to his comparison of the treatment of soldiers with workers at Tesco ) left the following reply to my post:

I doubt that any of the programme's staff have voted tory, as I suspect there are very few people of pensionable age employed on the programme.

Well Ian, you must live a very sheltered life. Sheltered from crippling Council Tax; sheltered from the struggle to get your children seen by a real doctor when they are ill; sheltered from your car being vandalised - by the police being more interested in thought crime; sheltered from serving for your country in Iraq and Afghanistan were the government just lies about the equipment you'll be sent and them abandons you in Selly Oak hospital to endure the utter misery of the stealth NHS waiting lists whilst you consider your shattered life; sheltered from meeting any young people who aren't totally in hoc to Gordon Brown's client parasite state, but rather being crushed to pay for it. You must live a very privileged life and meet very few young people - maybe you work for Newsnight ?

During elections I canvass door to door and many of the hard working, and young, people I meet vote Conservative - there are confused students who believe what the Fib Dems tell them - but they grow out of it really quickly when they have to shoulder responsibility.

Tag BBC, BBC+Bias

Update: Also see Guido on this..


ian said...

I've been sheltered from going to Iraq and Afghanistan by the simple tactic of not volutarily joining the army. There are no conscripts in the forces today - every single soldier is there as a direct consequences of choices they made. And if I get hurt in a workplace accident, then I have to join the NHS queues. Just because you go into a warzone, doesn't mean you should be entitled to preferential treatment over those people you're supposedly protecting.

It's also my experience that the NHS is vastly improved in the last few years after decades of tory neglect.

But no, I don't work for the BBC. It's also my perception that it is biased, but in a thoroughly right wing way. On that basis we might reasonably assume that despite our perceptions, it isn't

What is the council tax on a shed, anyway?

PS. You would note from the original comment, I can actually spell programme.

Man in a shed said...

Ian - thanks for your comment and sorry for the spell check (US settings on Blogger ?) mess up - I'll go and correct it after posting this.

You are at commendably consistent in your view.

I would argue that those who risk their lives in the service of their country deserve the best care we can give. Its part of the deal that keeps moral up at the front, the knowledge that you'll be looked after. I would also say that a country that sends people out to fight for it, and in effect damaged them, has an obligation to ensure their care.

On the NHS front -lots more money is spent on salaries - but many things have got worse. I know that from personal experience and that of my family.

Both my parents were doctors - one in the RAF, the other a GP. I can see very clearly how things have gotten worse.

The view on the BBC must be an issue of standpoint. If your a long way to the left then perhaps the BBC could seem right wing (I have difficulty in imagining it). Perhaps we could agree its pro-Blair and NuLabour - but perhaps not.

The BBC problem is that a very large amount of Conservative voters feel its very biased and are fed up. Perhaps you should be able to vote which organisation your TV poll tax/ licence fee goes to. The time is going to come when the BBC gets fixed - but due their power it is unlikely to be trailed in a manifesto.

The Council Tax on Shed's just keeps going up - since 1997, just as my pension goes south ( but the money north) over the same period.

ian said...

But the Army aren't the only people who serve their country. Should the Police and Firemen get priority? What about bin men? Politicians? Civil Servants? Captains of industry?

I know the idea of a two tier health service is popular amongst tories, but I don't see why anyone should get preferential treatment. Shouldn't the highest standards of care be available to all, no matter who you are?

My experience of the NHS has been that it's improving. I can't speak for anyone else's.

If soldiers don't want to go to war, they shouldn't join up. This isn't rocket science. Even now, we have thousands of soldiers kicking around in barracks, not doing the job they're paid to do. Imagine the fuss if half the civil servants employed by the government weren't doing their jobs at any particular time.

As for the BBC, I think it might well be pro-blair, but I don't see how that gives it a left wing bias. Quite the opposite, if anything. Just because Conservative voters feel its biased doesn't mean that it is. Find a single example, say, of the Today programme giving Israel a hard time over its actions. You won't, because they don't.

Perhaps the idea of deciding how to allocate TV licence should be applied to other attributes of taxation. If I don't want Trident, or a war in Iraq, should I have to pay for it?

(Thanks for correcting the spelling)