BBC bias

[Granny Danger]

On 09/09/2022 at 10:34, Billy Jean King said:

That's three times this morning that BBC has shown vox pop footage from both Buck Palace and Windsor where the plebs have said "queen of England " with no attempt by the BBC reporter to correct them.

She certainly wasn’t queen Elizabeth the second of Scotland.  That is a fact.

[tamthebam]

5 hours ago, Granny Danger said:

She certainly wasn’t queen Elizabeth the second of Scotland.  That is a fact.

Well...

In 1953 there was controversy in Scotland when Lizzie called herself Elizabeth II. A postbox with the EIIR cipher was blown up in The Inch, Edinburgh (no-one was caught but if a family friend didn't do it himself he certainly knew who did..). No pillar box in Scotland carried EIIR after that, just ER. 

Scottish Nationalists John MacCormick and Ian Hamilton also took a case to the Court of Session regarding the monarch's title- see MacCormick v Lord Advocate 1953.

[Frank Quitely]

Almost as depressing as today's clusterfuck from Kami Kwasi is tonight's Newsninght.  I've just watched a discussion between Kirsty Wark and a former Treasury adviser to Phillip Hammond who now works at Lazards Bank and journos from the Spectator and the FT.  Hardly even an attempt at any sort of balance but at least the FT guy comprehensively rubbished the prospect of any of it working.

[DA Baracus]

Caught a wee bit of some show on Radio Scotland earlier. They were discussing the 'budget' stuff and the three guests pretty much tore it apart, to the obvious discomfort of the presenter (Shereen Nanjiani I believe).

After the discussion ceased, she said there was some listener correspondence. Said correspondence was some mewling about how the SNP will blame Westminster for this and how Scotland has bankers too. That was the full extent of the 'correspondence'. Very balanced.

[welshbairn]

Have to say the coverage I've heard on Radio 4 and World Service has been nearly universally been "Jesus, WTF do they think they're doing? We're fucked!".

[Monkey Tennis]

On the news earlier, we got more of this "among economists, the jury is out" stuff.

It bugs me and is exactly what Emily Maitlis was on about the other week.  The jury is not at all evenly divided, yet there's this nutty and dishonest requirement, because two views are possible, to present them as equally held and valid.  

[Boo Khaki]

The BBC's idea of 'impartiality' is so warped that it has become about never challenging the most blatant of nonsense, no matter how absurd it is, and giving completely unmerited platforms to quacks, liars, and people with an obviously dishonest agenda, purely for the purpose of being able to claim that they always give representation to a 'broad range' of opinions and views.

If they had any integrity, their so-called journalists would be constantly heard challenging politicians and suchlike with 'hold on, that's totally at odds with what you claimed last year', 'that simply is not true', and 'can you provide evidence to back up that claim?', but they do no such thing.

It's come as no surprise to hear that there is essentially a BBC veto on anyone mentioning Brexit in the context of any article decrying the perilous state of the UK economy. Just go and read any article on their website. You'll see mentions of 'global financial turmoil', 'energy crisis', 'cost of living crisis', 'war in Ukraine', 'Covid', 'cost of Covid' and so on, but resolute refusal to utter the 'B' word anywhere. It's completely and utterly dishonest, and can only be because they have completely given up on the pretence of being anything other than a state propaganda mouthpiece.

[Dawson Park Boy]

4 hours ago, welshbairn said:

Have to say the coverage I've heard on Radio 4 and World Service has been nearly universally been "Jesus, WTF do they think they're doing? We're fucked!".

Well, that’s the left wing BBC for you.

[Dawson Park Boy]

25 minutes ago, Boo Khaki said:

The BBC's idea of 'impartiality' is so warped that it has become about never challenging the most blatant of nonsense, no matter how absurd it is, and giving completely unmerited platforms to quacks, liars, and people with an obviously dishonest agenda, purely for the purpose of being able to claim that they always give representation to a 'broad range' of opinions and views.

If they had any integrity, their so-called journalists would be constantly heard challenging politicians and suchlike with 'hold on, that's totally at odds with what you claimed last year', 'that simply is not true', and 'can you provide evidence to back up that claim?', but they do no such thing.

It's come as no surprise to hear that there is essentially a BBC veto on anyone mentioning Brexit in the context of any article decrying the perilous state of the UK economy. Just go and read any article on their website. You'll see mentions of 'global financial turmoil', 'energy crisis', 'cost of living crisis', 'war in Ukraine', 'Covid', 'cost of Covid' and so on, but resolute refusal to utter the 'B' word anywhere. It's completely and utterly dishonest, and can only be because they have completely given up on the pretence of being anything other than a state propaganda mouthpiece.

The country voted for Brexit.

Its over.

[Boo Khaki]

1 minute ago, Dawson Park Boy said:

The country voted for Brexit.

Its over.

Indeed they did, and that in no way should prevent honest journalism from pointing out what an egregiously stupid act of economic self-harm it was, or being honest about the direct consequences.

It's also pretty far from 'over', as you can see from the ongoing farce in NI.

[williemillersmoustache]

Sopel, Goodall and Maitliss do this Newsagents podcast on Global. 

They summarise events, give their own view, interview politicians and take questions from the public. It's mental that the BBC either binned or allowed these folk to leave. It's not perfect but is worth a listen and I'm sure I heard John Sopel swear last week which was thoroughly gratifying. 

 

 

 

[Dawson Park Boy]

1 hour ago, williemillersmoustache said:

Sopel, Goodall and Maitliss do this Newsagents podcast on Global. 

They summarise events, give their own view, interview politicians and take questions from the public. It's mental that the BBC either binned or allowed these folk to leave. It's not perfect but is worth a listen and I'm sure I heard John Sopel swear last week which was thoroughly gratifying. 

 

 

 

Pleased to hear that it’s good.

If they want to give their own views, that’s great but NOT on the BBC.

The fact you’re enjoying it shows it must be left of centre oriented.

Just like GB news is right of centre.

We need more programmes of a varied nature.

[Clown Job]

What an unusual way to word this…

 

[Fullerene]

Utterly bizarre.  The UK voted for Brexit.  Stop talking about it!

If it really was a great success they would be constantly talking about it.

WW2 is over.  Have they stopped talking about that war?

[KingRocketman II]

Given how many times this Govt contradicts itself, over-turns previous decisions and runs rough-shod through manifesto promises, I am always amused as to why some gammons consider Brexit (or indy for that matter- "you had your vote!") is seen as enshrined and cannot be revisited - particularly with the emerging cluster-f**k that informs the current "oven-ready" agreement/deal. 

[Clown Job]

Think the media up here will start asking questions about the state of the UK Government instead is wondering why the Scottish Government won’t copy them

[williemillersmoustache]

2 hours ago, Clown Job said:

What an unusual way to word this…

 

It's such a yawning gaping hole in the BBC Oatcakes remit/output. They are either unwilling or unable to to hold the UK government to account either because they have made an editorial decision to leave it to UK wide teams,  or the UK government basically refuse to engage, (it's a bit of both imo).

So their only option is, which coincidentally is very helpfully to the staunch brigade, is to immediately plamf UK government actions at the door of ScotGov in the style of "whit are ye gonna dae aboot it." 

I have limited sympathy but what Scotland does in response is absolutely news worthy. It's just VERY ODD that BBC Shortbread News has no capacity/desire to scrutinise UK government actions in a Scottish context. Innit?

Edited September 26, 2022 by williemillersmoustache

[Antlion]

1 hour ago, KingRocketman II said:

Given how many times this Govt contradicts itself, over-turns previous decisions and runs rough-shod through manifesto promises, I am always amused as to why some gammons consider Brexit (or indy for that matter- "you had your vote!") is seen as enshrined and cannot be revisited - particularly with the emerging cluster-f**k that informs the current "oven-ready" agreement/deal. 

Because they’re dirty b*****ds.

[ICTJohnboy]

2 hours ago, Fullerene said:

 

WW2 is over.  Have they stopped talking about that war?

 

Yep.

Like the 1966 World Cup result.

[Clown Job]

31 minutes ago, williemillersmoustache said:

It's such a yawning gaping hole in the BBC Oatcakes remit/output. They are either unwilling or unable to to hold the UK government to account either because they have made an editorial decision to leave it to UK wide teams,  or the UK government basically refuse to engage, (it's a bit of both imo).

So their only option is, which coincidentally is very helpfully to the staunch brigade, is to immediately plamf UK government actions at the door of ScotGov in the style of "whit are ye gonna dae aboot it." 

I have limited sympathy but what Scotland does in response is absolutely news worthy. It's just VERY ODD that BBC Shortbread News has no capacity/desire to scrutinise UK government actions in a Scottish context. Innit?

Not just the BBC that takes that approach