For those that say BBC is unbiased

[DOD]Asprilla;24558190 said:
They do. The response rates are better though twitter and facebook. These are the mechanisms that people use, simple as that.

Sorry they don't actually _have_ to use Twitter or Facebook any more than they have to drink Starbucks coffee - and the BBC is not there to promote private companies. I believe French TV banned their promotion back in 2011 because it broke advertising rules. The BBC should follow their example.
 
The BBC should be re-named 'UK Govt. Broadcasting' for the amount of propaganda they spew. They should also get fully funded through their sponsors: Apple Corp. and Facebook Corp. the amount of free advertising they do for them.

News outlet reports on successful companies. Shocking.
 
Sorry they don't actually _have_ to use Twitter or Facebook any more than they have to drink Starbucks coffee - and the BBC is not there to promote private companies. I believe French TV banned their promotion back in 2011 because it broke advertising rules. The BBC should follow their example.

No they don't have to. However, if they want people to feedback to them then twitter and facebook are excellent mechanisms to do so and produce much higher responses.

I very much doubt that BBC making use of twitter as an ancillary channel or using facebook as a comms tool with have a significant impact on the market penetration of either.

You've got to accept that facebook and twitter are pervasive.

Oh, and it's Costa at Broadcasting House and MediaCity. Starbucks at Media Village.

Sky have Costa too. The FT have their coffee from Monmouth, lucky swines.
 
Last edited:
I think some people need a better understanding of what left and right really mean in reference to UK parties:

http://www.politicalcompass.org/ukparties2010

Really, that's largely just opinion based as far as I can tell. However, the 4 axis political spectrum is really nice. Funnily enough though I'm down near the greens and I actually like their policies on a superficial level.
 
Whatever its faults I'd rather have my news from the BBC than pretty much any other media source (apart from the dreadful Robert Peston, who makes me want to punch the TV every time he's on...!)
 
The BBC are biased. That's fine, I don't mind it. Most other media outlets are biased too, though of-course not all in the same political direction.

What I do have a problem with is that the BBC are taxpayer funded.

I don't mind Sky News being biased, as I have a choice about whether to give them money or not. The BBC however get my money whether I agree with their bias or not :confused:. That's not cool. If you want to be taxpayer funded then you should be neutral, not biased. If you want to be biased then people need to have a choice whether to buy your product or a competitors.
 
liberal bias? I think its more of a fabian socialist bias.

Of course all the lefitst, will never admit to a leftist bias on a state media station that is funded by a mandatory forced taxation. Of course a state media will always be bias because its a matter of incentives. Why would the state media give unbias views on their channels that don't further the interest of the BBC.

The difference with private organizations is that they are dependent on paying customers, unlike the bbc which people have no choice with. As they have paying customers to please, the private news networks have to be populist in their views. But the bbc does not need to adhere to customers, it just pushes fabian socialism and question time and all those types of programs on the bbc, anything that is meant to be political or intellectual in nature, always and i mean always, is pro labour and pro state and anti-capitalist.

Even when they have a documentary about the something non relevant, say the history of train industry, it always has a leftist slant, an anti-capitalist slant. Because the bbc is not capitalist, its anti-capitalist.
 
The BBC & news should represent facts, not public opinion.

They don't even present facts. Look at the recent foreign adventures and the reporting of the news on Syria. Lots of reports of 'atrocities' then at the end saying "We don't have independent verification of these claims". That is propaganda. Or not reporting facts that would embarrass the Govt's position.
Thank goodness for satellite TV and reports from other nations TV's.

The public are idiots (I put forward the OP as evidence to this assertion).

Some definitely are, probably because the BBC used to have a good reputation for reporting facts.

Of course, a report in the most right wing of the popular press complaining of bias is not really a good starting point.
 
Last edited:
liberal bias? I think its more of a fabian socialist bias.

Coming from your bias, groen, I take that as meaning they are centrist.

Of course all the lefitst, will never admit to a leftist bias on a state media station that is funded by a mandatory forced taxation. Of course a state media will always be bias because its a matter of incentives would the state media give unbias views on their channels that don't further the interest of the BBC.

In my lifetime, considerably longer than yours groen, the BBC has been, with few exceptions, very establishment.

The difference with private organizations is that they are dependent on paying customers, unlike the bbc which people have no choice with. As they have paying customers to please, the private news networks have to be populist in their views. But the bbc does not need to adhere to customers, it just pushes fabian socialism and question time and all those types of programs on the bbc, anything that is meant to be political or intellectual in nature, always and i mean always, is pro labour and pro state and anti-capitalist.

So you are saying that news from private organisations like the Murdoch or the Barclay Bros media do not follow the line of their owners?

Even when they have a documentary about the something non relevant, say the history of train industry, it always has a leftist slant, an anti-capitalist slant. Because the bbc is not capitalist, its anti-capitalist.

What leftist slant is that - saying that it is costing us more in subsidy than the old BR - that is not leftist but a fact.
 
Last edited:
They don't even present facts. Look at the recent foreign adventures and the reporting of the news on Syria. Lots of reports of 'atrocities' then at the end saying "We don't have independent verification of these claims". That is propaganda. Or not reporting facts that would embarrass the Govt's position.
Thank goodness for satellite TV and reports from other nations TV's.
Oh I agree, which is why I said should.

I was just saying that public opinion shouldn't be a consideration to reporting the news (neither should reporting what you are told or propagander either mind).

I tend to view news from as many different sources as possible, then determine in which way they are motivated to lie.

If a strong propaganda/national pride motivation exists, I take it with a pinch of salt.

If a strong economic motivation exists, I take it with a huge handful of salt.

If a report is on something which in reality nobody has anything to gain from it, then I tend to take it with a little bit less salt :p
 
Whatever its faults I'd rather have my news from the BBC than pretty much any other media source (apart from the dreadful Robert Peston, who makes me want to punch the TV every time he's on...!)

Of course you would, you probably sit on the left like much of the nation and are thus happy to swallow what they're feeding you. Still if the BBC didn't exist, there'd be a gap in the market and someone would fill it. It's a shame that anyone who doesn't agree with them are forced to subsidise your opinions though.
 
All news agencies these days put more stock and emphasis on editorials and teaching you their view of events as opposed to the presentation of facts then letting people draw their own opinion.

Sad but there you go, irritates me no end trying to read a paper and getting told what I should think. Just give me the facts please, I have a brain.(against all evidence to the contrary :p)
 
Really, that's largely just opinion based as far as I can tell. However, the 4 axis political spectrum is really nice. Funnily enough though I'm down near the greens and I actually like their policies on a superficial level.

The 2-axis (economic + social) 4 quadrants makes far more sense because although there is a tendency for right wing economics to follow authoritarian regimes the 2 are different dimensions. The plot helps clarify my dislike of labour, thery are more authoritarian than the Tories and closest to the BNP! Which makes sense the BNP are actually somewhat leftish when it comes to economic policy (mostly because they want to see robs hood style taxes to take prey from the rich).
For someone like me who want economic centralist/slightly right but socially liberal there are not many choices with the UK.

Always amuses me when bigots complain about the last left. Do they mean the slightly more authoritarian Labour Party, the slightly more social liberal Conservative party, both of which are actually very far right economically and socially, or do they mean a true left-economic or liberal party?
As it stands the only truely left party is the greens (ls lightly left economics and slightly liberal). There is no far left.

As to the data, it is fairly objective scale. Complete state ownership, a la communism is on the far left economically. Extreme far right economic policies appear on the right, see US main parties. Extreme authoritarian regimes,e.g. Nazis appear at the top. Of course the exact positioning of the parties has some error margin and fuzziness that is hard to convey.
 
The 2-axis (economic + social) 4 quadrants makes far more sense because although there is a tendency for right wing economics to follow authoritarian regimes the 2 are different dimensions. The plot helps clarify my dislike of labour, thery are more authoritarian than the Tories and closest to the BNP! Which makes sense the BNP are actually somewhat leftish when it comes to economic policy (mostly because they want to see robs hood style taxes to take prey from the rich).
For someone like me who want economic centralist/slightly right but socially liberal there are not many choices with the UK.

Always amuses me when bigots complain about the last left. Do they mean the slightly more authoritarian Labour Party, the slightly more social liberal Conservative party, both of which are actually very far right economically and socially, or do they mean a true left-economic or liberal party?
As it stands the only truely left party is the greens (ls lightly left economics and slightly liberal). There is no far left.

As to the data, it is fairly objective scale. Complete state ownership, a la communism is on the far left economically. Extreme far right economic policies appear on the right, see US main parties. Extreme authoritarian regimes,e.g. Nazis appear at the top. Of course the exact positioning of the parties has some error margin and fuzziness that is hard to convey.

I realise that is two axis, my brain wasn't engaged.

However again, I still don't think it's easy to just label our political parties via the axis. Sure, you'll get an overall picture (and it's still opinion based) honestly I think anyone who doesn't think we have left leaving social policies are mad. Don't get me wrong, I'm a supporter of left leaning social policies myself, I want a welfware state but not one where non-contributors can take the **** and live a better life than your average net contributor.

My political leanings aren't that simply summed up either, I absolutely abhor council tax. The idea that we're taking money from people to allow them to continue to live in the property they own is a ridiculous notion in my mind. A non-domicile property tax makes a lot better in my opinion as taxing folks who are trying to make money makes a lot more sense than taxing our grans just trying to live out their dying days in the home they built.

I'm not sure if the left and right is all the relevant anymore, outside ideology the world pretty much reflect that left leaning social policies win, and the problem is really a question of exactly how much one should spend on them.
 
The bbc has mastered the art of appearing to be liberal, well they attempt to appear unbiased but they failed at it. They are bias due to the nature of the funding that allows for the bbc to exist.

Name one rightist person on the bbc? name one rightist on the bbc that was given an advantage? The only time the right makes an appearance is when the bbc are pretending to be non biased and even then they patronize the rightists and mock them. But there are many leftists on the bbc and most of the shows are left and pretend to be center.

I often wonder if political ideology is a question during recruitment process. Makes sense though. Why would they hire pro-capitalists?

Poltical ideology to the BBC:

far left doesn't exist, just good left, then liberal or center, then no good right exists, just far right.

So left can do no evil and right is always evil, that's the bbc political perspective.
 
Last edited:
Immigration is part of the Jewish war on whites

After living here thousands of years and not mixing (very few Jews have European ancestry because they segregate to remain pure) they now have secured their own homeland Israel, control the wealth (Jewish bankers) the media (owned primarily by Jews) and of course our politicians like David Cameron the Azkenazi's Jew and self confessed Zionist.

Now they back stab Europe by turning into a melting pot where we're meant to race mix and destroy our own race (if whites aren't having white kids, what will happen? pretty obvious) Those who oppose it are considered far-right and racist, when what's being done to them is just that.


Sick of these Jews, they've created more holocausts than they've been victim of (First soviet union government was 80% Jewish, Putin admitted it) The sooner Muslim countries unite and wage war on Israel the better for all.


Worth the ban.
 
Name one rightist person on the bbc? name one rightist on the bbc that was given an advantage?

The Institute of Directors and The Taxpayers Alliance get a massive amount of airtime on BBC News despite being marginal groups.

If you're looking for a single person, how about Jeremy Clarkson?

BBC staff on are on average better educated and better traveled than the general population. Of course they lean to the left in a lot of people's eyes.
 
Immigration is part of the Jewish war on whites

After living here thousands of years and not mixing (very few Jews have European ancestry because they segregate to remain pure) they now have secured their own homeland Israel, control the wealth (Jewish bankers) the media (owned primarily by Jews) and of course our politicians like David Cameron the Azkenazi's Jew and self confessed Zionist.

Now they back stab Europe by turning into a melting pot where we're meant to race mix and destroy our own race (if whites aren't having white kids, what will happen? pretty obvious) Those who oppose it are considered far-right and racist, when what's being done to them is just that.

Sick of these Jews, they've created more holocausts than they've been victim of (First soviet union government was 80% Jewish, Putin admitted it) The sooner Muslim countries unite and wage war on Israel the better for all.


Worth the ban.
Who were you before the last ban?.

The bbc has mastered the art of appearing to be liberal, well they attempt to appear unbiased but they failed at it. They are bias due to the nature of the funding that allows for the bbc to exist.

Name one rightist person on the bbc? name one rightist on the bbc that was given an advantage? The only time the right makes an appearance is when the bbc are pretending to be non biased and even then they patronize the rightists and mock them. But there are many leftists on the bbc and most of the shows are left and pretend to be center.

I often wonder if political ideology is a question during recruitment process. Makes sense though. Why would they hire pro-capitalists?

Poltical ideology to the BBC:

far left doesn't exist, just good left, then liberal or center, then no good right exists, just far right.

So left can do no evil and right is always evil, that's the bbc political perspective.
The BBC isn't far left.

I've yet to see huge BBC support for far reaching nationalisation, on increasing the taxes for the highest earners & corporation tax - advocating worker ownership & collectivism.

This "Far left" of what you speak is only "centre left social policy" - which is stated above is a result of them being higher educated than the average person in the UK.

If I was you I would wonder why the most intelligent people in society tend to be more left leaning politically on average - or why racism, stupidity & low IQ's have a strong correlation with right-wing social ideology (notice the distinction between social & economic, economic right wing supports have plenty of intelligent people within the ranks - social right wing is full of religious whack-jobs, bigots & idiots).

Economically the story's all have a right slant (as left wing economic policy isn't even on the table & hasn't been for some time).
 
Last edited:
Back
Top Bottom