• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

BBC admits to left bias

There's the buried report callinig out Auntie Beebs vicous anti Israeli bias too. One which for years they have denied. It's endemic, they were so convinced of their correctness and heard no dissenting opinion that they do not even consider it bias.

The Pilger interview on the today programme this week, discussing Bush's comparison of Iraq and the Tet offensive was a classic example of this. Even without the mutual 'Bush is teh stupid' japing. They didn't mention the fact that conservative analysts correctly blame the media for spinning the military success of the Tet offensive into a political failure. The Washington correspondent in fact said:

"Commentators here have been trying to work out why President Bush broke with previous practice and accepted a comparison between Iraq and Vietnam."
Click to expand...

Which shows quite how narrow their circle of commentators is.

This is an interesting tool, it records stealth editing on the BBC news website and the censorship of comments in the have your say section.
 
DaChew said:
Someone needs to tell them that the left bias of the media is all a myth.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/pages/live/articles/news/news.html?in_article_id=411846&in_page_id=1770
Click to expand...

Well considering you are linking to the daily mail you have provided fairly solid evidence that it is. Of course we have no idea what the orginal said after it's been through the mail's filters but lets see what can be teased out:

On the show, celebrities are invited to throw their pet hates into a dustbin and it was imagined that Baron Cohen chose some kosher food, the Archbishop of Canterbury, a Bible and the Koran.

Nearly everyone at the summit, including the show's actual producer and the BBC's head of drama, Alan Yentob, agreed they could all be thrown into the bin, except the Koran for fear of offending Muslims.
Click to expand...

Room 101 is not meant to be for major political statements. Putting the Koran in room 101 would be a much much bigger political statement than any of the others (I doubt even the mail would complain about the others much).

The interview with bin larden is presented in an interesting way. It would hardly be the first bin larden interview to appear in the british press and hardly the first time the BBC have intercviewed terroists.

In the case of the BBC's 'diversity tsar' it would appear that on certian issues at least they are being ignored (although that might have something to do with the unofficial policy that any news program should have at least one man that was certianly around in the 90s)

BBC executives admitted the corporation is dominated by homosexuals
Click to expand...

I doubt it. It probably has more than avagre for various reasons although deliberate policy would not be needed to produce that result.

and people from ethnic minorities,
Click to expand...

Does that include scotish?

deliberately promotes multiculturalism,
Click to expand...

A side effect of trying to be neutral.

is anti-American, anti-countryside
Click to expand...

That would be "represents the feelings of the majority of the british people".
 
geni said:
Room 101 is not meant to be for major political statements. Putting the Koran in room 101 would be a much much bigger political statement than any of the others (I doubt even the mail would complain about the others much).
Click to expand...

Why would putting the Koran in the bin be a much bigger political statement than putting the bible in the bin?

Oh, that's right: offended Christians don't cut people's heads off or gun them down in the street.

In other words, it's not really about politics, it's about their personal courage, or lack thereof, in the face of violent threats.
 
Putting the Koran in room 101 would be a much much bigger political statement than any of the others
Click to expand...

Precisely because subscribers to the liberal consensus chicken out of any ideological confrontation with members of a designated victim group. See the craven reaction by the likes of John Simpson to the cartoons for examples.

represents the feelings of the majority of the british people
Click to expand...

I'll think you will find that the Mail, Sun and Daily Express are closer to the mainstream of UK political opinion than the BBC. They certainly shift the most papers. The level of anti Americanism in this country disgusts me (it's the modern comics perfectly acceptable substitute for Paki jokes), and the BBC is partially to blame for it.
 
Last edited:
Nice to see being a homosexual is still wrong in the eyes of the the Mail and I presume the people agreeing with its views in this thread.
 
You presume wrong Darat. The petty bigotry in the Mail annoys me almost as much as the BBC's knee jerk liberalism, though I do consider it far less dangerous in the current climate. The major difference is that I'm not obliged by criminal law to pay money to the Daily Mail group.

But yes, feel secure in your victory by accusing people of harbouring an unfashionable predjudice.
 
Last edited:
RyanRoberts said:
You presume wrong Darat. The petty bigotry in the Mail annoys me almost as much as the BBC's knee jerk liberalism, though I do consider it far less dangerous in the current climate. The major difference is that I'm not obliged by criminal law to pay money to the Daily Mail group.

But yes, feel secure in your victory by accusing people of harbouring an unfashionable predjudice.
Click to expand...

"unfashionable prejudice" - That's right it's just a matter of fashion, so hey perhaps it will change again and I'll become a criminal again if as you say "I'll think you will find that the Mail, Sun and Daily Express are closer to the mainstream of UK political opinion than the BBC."

And an ETA for my own: I should add that I was of course very unfairly tarring people with my comment about "and I presume the people agreeing with its views in this thread." I would suggest that you perhaps read the Daily Mail article without your own bias against the BBC and realise that it is also promoting its own biases and says (to paraphrase) "the BBC has lots of 'ethnic' and homosexuals in it and they are not 'us' and what they do is bad"
 
Last edited:
so hey perhaps it will change again and I'll become a criminal again if as you say
Click to expand...

Well, it could. Though the positive changes we have seen in attitudes towards homosexuals would be hard to reverse, and I dont think the Mail is the retrograde force we should be most concerned about. I apologize for the tone of the reply.

realise that it is also promoting its own biases
Click to expand...

Yes, of course it is. The original report in the evening standard was slightly more reasonable in its language. The fact that the mail spins that article as a problem with 'them ethnics and poofters' running things is both petty bigotry and misses the point. I also wouldn't expect anything else of an article in the daily mail, any more than I would expect a euro-sceptic, hawkish or atlanticist stance from the BBC.

The fact remains that the Beeb has seemingly confessed to something that has been blindingly obvious to many after years of denial.
 
Last edited:
RyanRoberts said:
The fact remains that the Beeb has seemingly confessed to something that has been blindingly obvious to many after years of denial.
Click to expand...

I don't think you can say "The BBC has confessed...." -

"some BBC employees are of the opinion that....." would appear to be more accurate.

Political pundit Andrew Marr said: 'The BBC is not impartial or neutral. It's a publicly funded, urban organisation with an abnormally large number of young people, ethnic minorities and gay people. It has a liberal bias not so much a party-political bias. It is better expressed as a cultural liberal bias.'

Washington correspondent Justin Webb said that the BBC is so biased against America that deputy director general Mark Byford had secretly agreed to help him to 'correct', it in his reports. Webb added that the BBC treated America with scorn and derision and gave it 'no moral weight'.

Former BBC business editor Jeff Randall said he complained to a 'very senior news executive', about the BBC's pro-multicultural stance but was given the reply: 'The BBC is not neutral in multiculturalism: it believes in it and it promotes it.'
Click to expand...

and it all comes down to postmodernist arguments as to whether "true" objectivity can exist........

with regards to news reporting i don't think it can, although generally the BBC does a decent job of trying.....spending time abroad watching CNN, FOX or NHK (Japan) makes you appreciate what we've got here.....

i do however think that there is an anti-American streak betrayed in some of the reporting which i find rather distasteful.....The reporting post-Katrina was truly derogatory....*so by no means is the Beeb perfect.



* after looking on the web, it appears i agree with Tony on this one.....:)

Tony Blair says he "didn't much care for" some BBC reports about Hurricane Katrina, after claims he was angry at the corporation's "anti-Americanism".
But the prime minister told the BBC's Sunday AM programme: "I'm not making any great criticism of the BBC - you carry on doing whatever you want."

Media tycoon Rupert Murdoch said Mr Blair told him the BBC World Service coverage was "full of hate of America".
Click to expand...
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/4280122.stm
 
Last edited:
So when's the Mail going to admit to being biased? Or admit that it was wrong to suggest that Britain shouldn't accept Jewish refugees back in the 1930s?
 
Mojo said:
So when's the Mail going to admit to being biased? Or admit that it was wrong to suggest that Britain shouldn't accept Jewish refugees back in the 1930s?
Click to expand...

Is there a problem with the Mail being biased? Not in and of itself, no. How about the BBC? Yes, that IS a problem in and of itself.

Why? Because the Mail doesn't force people to pay for it by government mandate, whether or not they are customers, but the BBC does. The BBC has an obligation not only to its viewership but to everyone who is forced to pay for them that non-state media simply does not.
 
Ziggurat said:
Why would putting the Koran in the bin be a much bigger political statement than putting the bible in the bin?

Oh, that's right: offended Christians don't cut people's heads off or gun them down in the street.
Click to expand...

No the books places in the two religions are slightly different. For example I am not aware of anyone haveing an objection to a bible being placed halfway up in a pile of other books. The same is not true for the Koran.


Different religions treat their books differently. The Guru Granth Sahib is treated by the Sikhs with even more respect that the muslims treat the koran.
 
I think its unfair to accuse the BBC of anti-Americanism. Mostly they are reporting on the actions of the US government, which is not the same as "America".

Bush is largely a figure of fun in Britain. And he is way too right wing to stand any chance of getting elected over here. Even the Daily Mail isn't what you would call a Bush supporter. No one over here will admit to being that. The BBC tends to reflect the sensibilities of the British people on this.

If Bush represents America then I'm rabidly anti-American. But he doesn't and I'm not.
 
RyanRoberts said:
Precisely because subscribers to the liberal consensus chicken out of any ideological confrontation with members of a designated victim group. See the craven reaction by the likes of John Simpson to the cartoons for examples.
Click to expand...

No the books places in the two religions are slightly different. For example I am not aware of anyone haveing an objection to a bible being placed halfway up in a pile of other books. The same is not true for the Koran.


Different religions treat their books differently. The Guru Granth Sahib is treated by the Sikhs with even more respect that the muslims treat the koran.


I'll think you will find that the Mail, Sun and Daily Express are closer to the mainstream of UK political opinion than the BBC. They certainly shift the most papers. The level of anti Americanism in this country disgusts me (it's the modern comics perfectly acceptable substitute for Paki jokes), and the BBC is partially to blame for it.
Click to expand...

The two things listed are views held by rather a lot of the british people. the mail probably holds the first. The second? Well not many will admit holding it dirrectly but with most of the population of the UK living in urban areas it is to be expected that there will be some friction with the fox hunting subserdised people in the countryside.
 
geni said:
No the books places in the two religions are slightly different. For example I am not aware of anyone haveing an objection to a bible being placed halfway up in a pile of other books. The same is not true for the Koran.
Click to expand...

Sorry, my mistake: so the real issue is we must reward the biggest complainers.
 
Ziggurat said:
Sorry, my mistake: so the real issue is we must reward the biggest complainers.
Click to expand...

Not really. There isn't really any item in relation to the christian faith that has the same ah idol worship role (don't try saying that is saudi arabia). The Crucifix would probably come cloest and that wasn't considered (and even then considering the aproval by Sister Wendy Beckett of Piss Christ that is somewhat open to question as an equiverlence).

I supose secular equiverlents in the US would be the constitution or the flag
 
geni said:
Not really. There isn't really any item in relation to the christian faith that has the same ah idol worship role (don't try saying that is saudi arabia).
Click to expand...

But how is this not then a case of muslims being given gentler treatment because they claim they're more sensitive to offense?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom