BBC bias

[O'Kelly Isley III]

1 hour ago, Albus Bulbasaur said:

Why would the BBC give voices to every fringe opinion under the sun?

Of course they give airtime to sizeable groups. Right now there isn't any worthwhile sizable group that's opposing the monarchy. A Scottish football forum isn't quite the same as the Brexit movement or any of the others things being used as piss poor examples. 

99% of the country is enjoying having time off and if they're not interested in the Royals they're not paying attention to it and enjoying the weather, just because some people are choosing to spend their time online getting teary eyed and hate wanking over something doesn't merit BBC coverage. 

https://www.republic.org.uk/

Apparently they are experiencing a considerable surge in interest and membership this weekend. 

But you make the most of the closing day of your Jubilee celebrations, especially as it's very likely to be the last of its kind.

[Albus Bulbasaur]

7 minutes ago, O'Kelly Isley III said:

https://www.republic.org.uk/

Apparently they are experiencing a considerable surge in interest and membership this weekend. 

But you make the most of the closing day of your Jubilee celebrations, especially as it's very likely to be the last of its kind.

Are they doing anything substantial like a protest event? I'm sure that would attract coverage. 

Your "apparently" members signed up to their website wouldn't quite cut it for a BBC report. 

Funny you say "your jubilee celebrations". I've not watched a single minute of them and I'm not a royalist so they're just as much yours as they are mine. 

What would you actually want that would placate you here, you want the BBC to be simultaneously promoting the existence of republican groups alongside their jubilee coverage? 

Edited June 5, 2022 by Albus Bulbasaur

[Suspect Device]

Just looked that up and there seems to be only about 40,000 'supporters'. Not exactly massive.

Even though I am against the monarchy in principle, I get the feeling that I'm in the minority. I'd like to see that tested in a vote. 

[Duries Air Freshener]

24 minutes ago, O'Kelly Isley III said:

https://www.republic.org.uk/

Apparently they are experiencing a considerable surge in interest and membership this weekend. 

But you make the most of the closing day of your Jubilee celebrations, especially as it's very likely to be the last of its kind.

If push comes to shove, a large chunk will express anti-monarchist views in a Yes or No opinion poll, but they don't care that much.

Check the tiny crowd at this 'rally'.

 

[williemillersmoustache]

You wouldn't expect there to be a place for someone popping on to Test Match Special to opine that cricket is shite. So it's not unreasonable for the actual coverage of the joobly events to be bereft of rational/opposing views to the "isn't it wonderful/everyone is loving this/whole nation brought together/miscellaneous fawning jingowank."

News and current events output is different though and the BBC does have an obligation to represent and provide a platform to more than just one side of an argument.

The BBC have literally "both sided" everything from tawdry domestic criminality to the US insurrection and war crimes in the Middle east so it is at least worthy of note they aren't fussed about doing it here. 

Anyway it's nearly over, soon we'll be able to turn on the news ans read about Michelle Mone being a racist robbing cow and the governments failed 2.9bn outsourced unemployment scheme. Or pints that were never unavailable being available again, paid for in shillings or groats or something.  

[BFTD]

15 minutes ago, williemillersmoustache said:

You wouldn't expect there to be a place for someone popping on to Test Match Special to opine that cricket is shite.

Dara O'Briain had a bit about psuedoscientists demanding to have a voice on science programs. His idea was that he'd be fine with that if he could sit in the corner with a paper when some fanny's reading out the horoscopes so he could finish with, "astrology is still shite".

I'd be up for doing that on the cricket broadcasts.

[O'Kelly Isley III]

1 hour ago, Albus Bulbasaur said:

Are they doing anything substantial like a protest event? I'm sure that would attract coverage. 

Your "apparently" members signed up to their website wouldn't quite cut it for a BBC report. 

Funny you say "your jubilee celebrations". I've not watched a single minute of them and I'm not a royalist so they're just as much yours as they are mine. 

What would you actually want that would placate you here, you want the BBC to be simultaneously promoting the existence of republican groups alongside their jubilee coverage? 

In a word, balance.

[Dons_1988]

5 hours ago, Albus Bulbasaur said:

Why would the BBC give voices to every fringe opinion under the sun?

Of course they give airtime to sizeable groups. Right now there isn't any worthwhile sizable group that's opposing the monarchy. A Scottish football forum isn't quite the same as the Brexit movement or any of the others things being used as piss poor examples. 

99% of the country is enjoying having time off and if they're not interested in the Royals they're not paying attention to it and enjoying the weather, just because some people are choosing to spend their time online getting teary eyed and hate wanking over something doesn't merit BBC coverage. 

Platinum Jubilee: What does Scotland think of the Queen? https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-61685855

This article acknowledges that over a third of Scot’s oppose the monarchy and around a quarter of the uk overall. That is more than a fringe view. 

In any case, they don’t necessarily need to constantly be having opposing views on the matter, but the coverage of the jubilee should be proportionate and not completely dominate every medium the bbc operate whether it be on radio or tv. 

[Albus Bulbasaur]

You've got to love posting an article on the BBC covering a point of view in a discussion about how the BBC doesn't cover such points of view. 

[Dons_1988]

7 minutes ago, Albus Bulbasaur said:

You've got to love posting an article on the BBC covering a point of view in a discussion about how the BBC doesn't cover such points of view. 

Yep, the article is a welcome change from the coverage there’s been but it doesn’t change the overwhelming tone of the coverage for the past fortnight or so. 

Just because you are apathetic to the whole thing doesn’t mean everyone else should be. 

[Albus Bulbasaur]

9 minutes ago, Dons_1988 said:

Yep, the article is a welcome change from the coverage there’s been but it doesn’t change the overwhelming tone of the coverage for the past fortnight or so. 

Just because you are apathetic to the whole thing doesn’t mean everyone else should be. 

I've said earlier in the thread if the discussion was around continuation of the monarchy or something then you'd expect even debate but this is a celebration event, you can make an argument that they should tone it down and have more variety but there isn't really an argument to be made over "opposition" views getting airtime here. 

I don't watch the Olympics and I get fed up of the wall to wall coverage but generally speaking I just don't watch it rather than screeching about it on football forums. 

As evidenced by the viewing figures and the popularity of the jubilee across the UK I'm really not surprised by the level of coverage, even if I find it nauseating myself. 

Edited June 5, 2022 by Albus Bulbasaur

[Duries Air Freshener]

1 minute ago, Albus Bulbasaur said:

I've said earlier in the thread if the discussion was around continuation of the monarchy or something then you'd expect even debate but this is a celebration event, you can make an argument that they should tone it down and have more variety but there isn't really an argument to be made over "opposition" views getting airtime here. 

I don't watch the Olympics and I get fed up of the wall to wall coverage but generally speaking I just don't watch it rather than screeching about it on football forums. 

As evidenced by the viewing figures and the popularity of the jubilee across the UK I'm really not surprised by the level of coverage, even if I find it nauseating myself. 

I agree with you there.

Even as a Monarchist, I find the media coverage over the top, but like yourself I just don't bother tuning in.

[Dons_1988]

31 minutes ago, Albus Bulbasaur said:

I've said earlier in the thread if the discussion was around continuation of the monarchy or something then you'd expect even debate but this is a celebration event, you can make an argument that they should tone it down and have more variety but there isn't really an argument to be made over "opposition" views getting airtime here. 

I don't watch the Olympics and I get fed up of the wall to wall coverage but generally speaking I just don't watch it rather than screeching about it on football forums. 

As evidenced by the viewing figures and the popularity of the jubilee across the UK I'm really not surprised by the level of coverage, even if I find it nauseating myself. 

again, if you’re apathetic to the issue then good for you but there’s very legitimate reasons to feel angry/uncomfortable about the entire concept of monarchy, let alone the coverage of the jubilee. 

 

[Albus Bulbasaur]

2 hours ago, Dons_1988 said:

again, if you’re apathetic to the issue then good for you but there’s very legitimate reasons to feel angry/uncomfortable about the entire concept of monarchy, let alone the coverage of the jubilee. 

 

Yeah of course people are allowed to feel how they like and I'm allowed to post the opinion that I think they're overreacting and making the issue larger than it is. I think having issues with the monarchy is a lot more understandable than being raging at the BBCs coverage of the jubilee, I'd say that's an extremely petty grievance in comparison to taking issue with the monarchy in general, also there's a million better examples of "BBC Bias". 

 

Edited June 5, 2022 by Albus Bulbasaur

[DiegoDiego]

there's a million better examples of "BBC Bias". 

Yet you're largely absent from this thread unless defending them.

[Albus Bulbasaur]

17 minutes ago, DiegoDiego said:

 

Yet you're largely absent from this thread unless defending them.

I enjoy the BBC and acknowledge they have flaws, I think this thread overall is pretty silly and shouldn't really be a political subject but more like a "shit journalism" thread or something closer to that. 

I don't feel the need to come on and post about shit BBC reports because it's not something that would really bother me unless it was really unexpected but I do enjoy reading some of the hyperbolic conspiracy type stuff posted here and sometimes like to argue against it. I don't think this is crazy behaviour, I'm not bootlicking for the BBC at all I'm just trying to stop some of the crazies from unhinging themselves even more so. You can't deny the BBC is up there on most UK Altright conspiracy theorists hit list for whatever reason they seem suitable at whatever their chosen point is. 

[Granny Danger]

At least we don’t have to put up with Kuntsberg’s mewlings over the confidence vote.

[Blue Brazil Forever]

4 hours ago, Granny Danger said:

At least we don’t have to put up with Kuntsberg’s mewlings over the confidence vote.

We got a full dose of Peston's instead.

[Granny Danger]

8 minutes ago, Blue Brazil Forever said:

We got a full dose of Peston's instead.

Can’t remember who said, but there was the classic line “Robert Peston is so far up Boris’s arse he can see Laura Kuenssberg’s feet”.

[Blue Brazil Forever]

7 minutes ago, Granny Danger said:

Can’t remember who said, but there was the classic line “Robert Peston is so far up Boris’s arse he can see Laura Kuenssberg’s feet”.

I'm amused by the sheer amount of MSM salivating going on. The procurement guys can get spittoons in from Amazon (398 pages).