# BBC News.



## SocketRocket (Nov 22, 2017)

I  am finding it difficult to watch the BBC News anymore.  The BBC put a  negative spin on anything this country does these days and especially  Government policy.    OK, the Government may not be perfect but the BBC  never question anything people say that agrees with their own Liberal   elite views.   It seems to me they cannot take a neutral view on  anything political and are attempting to brainwash us into a certain  political way of thinking.   
 BBC, please just give us the facts and let  us make our own minds up.


----------



## Hobbit (Nov 22, 2017)

Pretty much every news outlet gives an opinion, and looks for the human slant. I'm with you on the "just give me facts, and let us make our own minds up."


----------



## Doon frae Troon (Nov 23, 2017)

SR
I have been trying to tell you this since 2014 but you disagreed strongly then.
What's changed ?


----------



## FairwayDodger (Nov 23, 2017)

Supporter of inept government doesnâ€™t like the reporting of the worldâ€™s most impartial news organisation. How surprising.


----------



## patricks148 (Nov 23, 2017)

have you seen any of Laura Kuenssberg reports.... if that's anti Gov left leaning :rofl::rofl:lol


----------



## guest100718 (Nov 23, 2017)

patricks148 said:



			have you seen any of Laura Kuenssberg reports.... if that's anti Gov left leaning :rofl::rofl:lol
		
Click to expand...

Im sure she used to have scottish accent


----------



## SwingsitlikeHogan (Nov 23, 2017)

FairwayDodger said:



			Supporter of inept government doesnâ€™t like the reporting of the worldâ€™s most impartial news organisation. How surprising.
		
Click to expand...

^^^+1 - some don't like to hear what they don't want to hear.  Much easier then to just blame the messenger.


----------



## Doon frae Troon (Nov 23, 2017)

patricks148 said:



			have you seen any of Laura Kuenssberg reports.... if that's anti Gov left leaning :rofl::rofl:lol
		
Click to expand...

I actually quite like her, she seems to have a bit of balance. 
Certainly 100% improvement on the shamed Nick Robinson


----------



## JamesR (Nov 23, 2017)

I'd be happy if they got rid of most of the rubbish bells & whistles and stuck to one person sitting behind a desk telling me what has happened.
I don't want standing news, or roving reporters standing outside a building, struggling with the elements, telling me the same as what the studio newsreader could tell me.
I don;t want it to be all editorials.
Just give me the the facts of what has happened and I'll infer what that means and decide what to do based on my own analysis.


----------



## chrisd (Nov 23, 2017)

Our Laura is so anti Tory it us no longer news reporting to me


----------



## Doon frae Troon (Nov 23, 2017)

chrisd said:



			Our Laura is so anti Tory it us no longer news reporting to me
		
Click to expand...

erm...... she is anti Corbyn, Sturgeon and Cable as well or had that escaped you.
As I said she seems to be balanced.


----------



## spongebob59 (Nov 23, 2017)

Don't watch BBC news anymore, switched to ITV (mainly because their local news is better as well)


----------



## Lord Tyrion (Nov 23, 2017)

I also have switched over to ITV news. Tom Bradley is a breath of fresh air but I mainly went because I could not bear Laura K any more. I don't know if she is left, right or down the middle. I just find her style or reporting hugely irritating. Too much about her.


----------



## SocketRocket (Nov 23, 2017)

FairwayDodger said:



			Supporter of inept government doesnâ€™t like the reporting of the worldâ€™s most impartial news organisation. How surprising.
		
Click to expand...

You are doing it now, you are using your bias against me to colour your reply on the subject.  I thought you were a bit more grown up than that.

I don't care if it's the Government , opposition , global warming or whatever, I just want the information so that I can make my own mind up.


----------



## SwingsitlikeHogan (Nov 23, 2017)

chrisd said:



			Our Laura is so anti Tory it us no longer news reporting to me
		
Click to expand...

Maybe she is just commenting on how it is - and if that reflects negatively on the Tories then that may actually be because that is just how it is.  

So in commenting upon the OBR forecasting of UK economic growth as reported in the Budget yesterday by The Chancellor (so clearly he accepts the numbers) and the forecast that the deficit won't be cleared until 2031 - a mere 16yrs after the *Tories* originally planned  - LK reflects accepted opinion on the numbers by calling it a 'grim outlook' - is that anti-Tory?  Or should she leave us sitting with the figures without a clue what they mean - on whether they are good, bad or middling?


----------



## Liverpoolphil (Nov 23, 2017)

Who exactly are the BBC biased towards?

I have heard Tory supporters say they are biased towards the left - Labour supports say they are biased towards the right , Scots say they are biased towards the English , English say biased towards the Scots ?! 

Or maybe the truth is they become biased when they report on something that one group donâ€™t like or want to hear - 

And then there is the old adage - if you think they are biased why are you watching it ? 

For me they seem to report whatâ€™s going on - if itâ€™s a negative spin maybe thatâ€™s because itâ€™s a negative impact what is happening- vice versa of positive 

But I have no doubt it will boil down to people not liking what they hear and it seems to me what they hear is truth and facts


----------



## SwingsitlikeHogan (Nov 23, 2017)

Liverpoolphil said:



			Who exactly are the BBC biased towards?

I have heard Tory supporters say they are biased towards the left - Labour supports say they are biased towards the right , Scots say they are biased towards the English , English say biased towards the Scots ?! 

Or maybe the truth is they become biased when they report on something that one group donâ€™t like or want to hear - 

And then there is the old adage - if you think they are biased why are you watching it ? 

For me they seem to report whatâ€™s going on - if itâ€™s a negative spin maybe thatâ€™s because itâ€™s a negative impact what is happening- vice versa of positive 

But I have no doubt it will boil down to people not liking what they hear and it seems to me what they hear is truth and facts
		
Click to expand...

^^^+1


----------



## Crazyface (Nov 23, 2017)

Why do news channel focus on bad news, then chuck in a bit of light hearted good news at the end? Why not do it the other way round? It would be a much better watch. Not that I bother much. It's far too depressing.


----------



## adam6177 (Nov 23, 2017)

100% agree with this and I think I made a similar post recently (pretty sure I was ranting about paying this corrupt organisation the mandatory license fee).

Since then I've boycotted all BBC content..... I dont use their websites, radio or TV stations anymore.  

I remember at school being taught about propaganda during the war.....to me that is all the BBC are.  They are a propaganda tool for the government, nothing more, nothing less......and yet we're all forced to pay for them.  Absolute joke.


----------



## Hobbit (Nov 23, 2017)

An example of the bias, for those that think otherwise, is the use of negatives when there just isn't any need. In a recent report on economic performance the reporter started with, "despite Brexit..." Why start a positive news report on economic performance with "despite Brexit?"

And in the run up to the last GE, the labelling of John McDonnell a Marxist. The majority of people couldn't define what a Marxist is but to some hearing it, it would be seen as a negative even though they don't know whether he is or not.

A cross-party select committee has already, officially, reprimanded the BBC for biased reporting, but maybe that was biased too.


----------



## FairwayDodger (Nov 23, 2017)

SocketRocket said:



			You are doing it now, you are using your bias against me to colour your reply on the subject.  I thought you were a bit more grown up than that.

I don't care if it's the Government , opposition , global warming or whatever, I just want the information so that I can make my own mind up.
		
Click to expand...

Iâ€™m using what I know about you to inform my reply.

The bbc give us the facts but itâ€™d be a lot of dry, repeated information if that was all they did.

The have a formula that they follow which is basically to give any interviewee a hard time and challenge everything they say even if itâ€™s obviously fair comment.  Iâ€™d like to see them being firmer where it was needed and sometimes agreeing rather than always arguing for the sake of â€œbalanceâ€.

What particularly annoys me is when they give air time to hate mongers to debate basic human rights just to give â€œbalanceâ€. You see it all the time when they discuss LGBT issues.

On the political front though they do it to all sides and you genuinely donâ€™t see any other media organisation in the world being so impartial.


----------



## SocketRocket (Nov 23, 2017)

FairwayDodger said:



*Iâ€™m using what I know about you to inform my reply*.

The bbc give us the facts but itâ€™d be a lot of dry, repeated information if that was all they did.

The have a formula that they follow which is basically to give any interviewee a hard time and challenge everything they say even if itâ€™s obviously fair comment.  Iâ€™d like to see them being firmer where it was needed and sometimes agreeing rather than always arguing for the sake of â€œbalanceâ€.

What particularly annoys me is when they give air time to hate mongers to debate basic human rights just to give â€œbalanceâ€. You see it all the time when they discuss LGBT issues.

On the political front though they do it to all sides and you genuinely donâ€™t see any other media organisation in the world being so impartial.
		
Click to expand...

You don't know me at all although you seem to have a 'Hate Monger' view of me.  Can you not see that.

I disagree with your comment regarding them giving any interviewee a hard time, it's my opinion that they use that policy in a very one sided manner and I am not talking about attacking the Government but in all cases where it suits their agenda.


----------



## FairwayDodger (Nov 23, 2017)

SocketRocket said:



			You don't know me at all although you seem to have a 'Hate Monger' view of me.  Can you not see that.

I disagree with your comment regarding them giving any interviewee a hard time, it's my opinion that they use that policy in a very one sided manner and I am not talking about attacking the Government but in all cases where it suits their agenda.
		
Click to expand...

If you think my use of the term â€œhate mongerâ€ in that post was in any way directed at you, please reread and think again.


----------



## shortgame (Nov 23, 2017)

Agree with O/P
Not quite as bad as channel 4 yet though...

As someone above said, it's also in the little nuances and choices of expression they use 'despite Brexit' etc

Brexit and Trump being the obvious 'targets'


----------



## FairwayDodger (Nov 23, 2017)

Someone on here previously posted a montage of â€œdespite brexitâ€ stuff and it was easily shown to be a false grievance. Almost always itâ€™s used appropriately and often in a pro-brexit piece.


----------



## SwingsitlikeHogan (Nov 23, 2017)

Hobbit said:



			An example of the bias, for those that think otherwise, is the use of negatives when there just isn't any need. In a recent report on economic performance the reporter started with, "despite Brexit..." Why start a positive news report on economic performance with "despite Brexit?"

And in the run up to the last GE, the labelling of John McDonnell a Marxist. The majority of people couldn't define what a Marxist is but to some hearing it, it would be seen as a negative even though they don't know whether he is or not.

A cross-party select committee has already, officially, reprimanded the BBC for biased reporting, but maybe that was biased too.
		
Click to expand...

they use 'despite Brexit' because *at the moment* just about everything associated with Brexit is problematic, difficult and causing argument and disagreement.  If everything was going tickety-boo with the negotiations and we were all able to look forward with confidence to the glowing future being painted by the government - if in that context the BBC continued to say '_despite Brexit'_ then I'd agree there was a bias case to be made.

But we are where we are - because of Brexit


----------



## PhilTheFragger (Nov 23, 2017)

Socket ,stop being so precious, not every post is about you or aimed at you.


----------



## SwingsitlikeHogan (Nov 23, 2017)

FairwayDodger said:



			If you think my use of the term â€œhate mongerâ€ in that post was in any way directed at you, please reread and think again.
		
Click to expand...

You are wasting your time @FD


----------



## SwingsitlikeHogan (Nov 23, 2017)

PhilTheFragger said:



			Socket ,stop being so precious, not every post is about you or aimed at you.
		
Click to expand...

Oh they are - they really are...


----------



## Bunkermagnet (Nov 23, 2017)

I canâ€™t think of a more balanced news broadcaster the World over. Perhaps those complaining of their perceived â€œbiasâ€ would prefer something like Fox News to give you your â€œfactsâ€?
As usual something is wrong or biased when people donâ€™t like whatâ€™s being said.


----------



## User20205 (Nov 23, 2017)

adam6177 said:



			100% agree with this and I think I made a similar post recently (pretty sure I was ranting about paying this corrupt organisation the mandatory license fee).

Since then I've boycotted all BBC content..... I dont use their websites, radio or TV stations anymore.  

I remember at school being taught about propaganda during the war.....to me that is all the BBC are.  They are a propaganda tool for the government, nothing more, nothing less......and yet we're all forced to pay for them.  Absolute joke.
		
Click to expand...

You do realise the OP was talking about the BBC being anti government?? Now youâ€™re talking about it being govt propaganda? 

Itâ€™s not all BBC content also. I donâ€™t remember any overly political messages on TMS this morning. There was however a nice conversation about ginger & walnut carrot cake sent in by sue & nick hook in surrey.....I was furious, typical south east bias!! Donâ€™t the bbc know the rest of the country can produce a cake!!!!! And who eats carrot cakes, apart from lefty leaning, pinko commies!!!


----------



## Hobbit (Nov 23, 2017)

FairwayDodger said:



			Someone on here previously posted a montage of â€œdespite brexitâ€ stuff and it was easily shown to be a false grievance. Almost always itâ€™s used appropriately and often in a pro-brexit piece.
		
Click to expand...

And yet a cross party select committee found it to be biased and reprimanded the BBC. I don't doubt Brexit is a bad idea.

A quick Google below...

"Regulator says report on Labour leaderâ€™s views about shoot-to-kill breached impartiality and accuracy guidelines"

"The BBC has been reprimanded for a â€œseriousâ€ breach of rules on impartiality and accuracy over a ​Radio 4 show that featured climate sceptics mocking the science behind global warming"

And then there's the example of Dame Judi Murray's comments on the Radio 4 programme in a piece about transgender, for which she received a reprimand for lack of impartiality.

There's plenty of examples out there, so lets be realistic and admit that the BBC has a proven record of bias.​*[SUB][SUP]
[/SUP][/SUB]*​


----------



## Lord Tyrion (Nov 23, 2017)

therod;1773419And who eats carrot cakes said:
			
		


			No one is the answer to that question. 

Even worse was the courgette cake my wife once made. It was a shocker and never been repeated. 

Vegetables and cakes do not mix.
		
Click to expand...


----------



## FairwayDodger (Nov 23, 2017)

Hobbit said:



			And yet a cross party select committee found it to be biased and reprimanded the BBC. I don't doubt Brexit is a bad idea.

A quick Google below...

"Regulator says report on Labour leaderâ€™s views about shoot-to-kill breached impartiality and accuracy guidelines"

"The BBC has been reprimanded for a â€œseriousâ€ breach of rules on impartiality and accuracy over a ​Radio 4 show that featured climate sceptics mocking the science behind global warming"

And then there's the example of Dame Judi Murray's comments on the Radio 4 programme in a piece about transgender, for which she received a reprimand for lack of impartiality.

There's plenty of examples out there, so lets be realistic and admit that the BBC has a proven record of bias.​*[SUB][SUP]
[/SUP][/SUB]*​

Click to expand...

Is that institutional bias or just getting it wrong sometimes? I think the latter. Especially since there isn't a trend in one direction or other, offending opposite ends of the political spectrum at different times.


----------



## DaveR (Nov 23, 2017)

Crazyface said:



			Why do news channel focus on bad news, *then chuck in a bit of light hearted good news at the end*? Why not do it the other way round? It would be a much better watch. Not that I bother much.* It's far too depressing*.
		
Click to expand...


Just turn over to the 6pm news at 6:29 in future then


----------



## Hobbit (Nov 23, 2017)

FairwayDodger said:



			Is that institutional bias or just getting it wrong sometimes? I think the latter. Especially since there isn't a trend in one direction or other, offending opposite ends of the political spectrum at different times.
		
Click to expand...

I think in an off the cuff interview, when the interviewer is asking questions of the responses, it is possible to be unintentionally biased. And then there's the political preferences of interviewers when interviewing someone with an obvious different stance to theirs - Andrew Marr does some great interviews but, equally, he can give some interviewees an easy ride.

As to the institutional aspect, I'd be inclined to say they try their best to be impartial but occasionally that falls down (probably) due to poor editing and direction, or is it an editor's subconscious preference breaking through.

Does the Beeb have an establishment line they take? No I don't think it does, apart from trying to satisfy the majority of its viewers.

However, institutional or otherwise there's too many 'mistakes' leading to reprimands. Is that not down to poor management, and hence institutional?


----------



## JamesR (Nov 23, 2017)

FairwayDodger said:



			...The bbc give us the facts but itâ€™d be a lot of dry, repeated information if that was all they did...
		
Click to expand...

In my opinion:

The News is just a dry repetition of facts. It isn't an entertainment show.

Magazine programmes, interviews, debates and Editorials are where opinion should be stated (and viewers should be informed that opinion and not necessarily facts are what is being discussed).

The BBC should be impartial as it is not privately owned. Any privately owned show can say pretty much whatever they want, but not a publicly funded "news" programme.


----------



## SocketRocket (Nov 23, 2017)

PhilTheFragger said:



			Socket ,stop being so precious, not every post is about you or aimed at you.
		
Click to expand...

Are you posting that with your Mods hat on or as a Forum member.  If it's as a Member then you are talking rubbish as I have never suggested every post is about me.  If it's as a Mod then you should be sending me a PM.


----------



## drdel (Nov 23, 2017)

It seems to me SR simply expressed an opinion and raised an issue about the BBC's style of reporting.

However the school playground quickly and unjustifably jumped into attack SR mode playing the person not the ball: racing off down the tracks of a Brexit, Tory v Labour, the old nut of Scotland v RoUK. Its a bit rich he then gets chastised for defending himself.

Not everything is about the PM. JC Brexit etc

In my view the BBC should expect to be held to different standards than other purveyors/media because it is tax funded precisely to protect it from the influence of political parties, commercial organisation and other pressure groups.

Unfortunately in their financially protected ivory tower they have chosen to let celebritisation (hence Â£Â£Â£s) become the norm. Consequently the prime objective of LK is the promotion of LK. Hence we hear more of her telling us what was (she thinks) said instead of us being allowed to hear the actual speaker's words.

Ironically (IMO) Al Jeezera broadcasts are often better!!!


----------



## Old Skier (Nov 23, 2017)

Strange how so many past head of this and that have now gone on to lead left wing think tanks being paid for by Labour.

Biggest problem at the BBC is they want to be the news. Direct problem of 24hr reporting.


----------



## SwingsitlikeHogan (Nov 23, 2017)

JamesR said:



			In my opinion:

The News is just a dry repetition of facts. It isn't an entertainment show.

Magazine programmes, interviews, debates and Editorials are where opinion should be stated (and viewers should be informed that opinion and not necessarily facts are what is being discussed).

The BBC should be impartial as it is not privately owned. Any privately owned show can say pretty much whatever they want, but not a publicly funded "news" programme.
		
Click to expand...

The BBC mandate is to Inform, Educate and Entertain

How does the BBC educate without that being from the BBC perspective?

I tell you the world's going mad when some folks choose to believe Putin's propaganda outlet _Russia Today _over the BBC  - mad - just mad.


----------



## JamesR (Nov 23, 2017)

SwingsitlikeHogan said:



			The BBC mandate is to Inform, Educate and Entertain
.
		
Click to expand...

It can inform by telling us the news (ie, reading us the facts)
It can educate by showing us Blue Planet, Horizon etc
It can entertain by showing us comedy, drama, films etc


----------



## JamesR (Nov 23, 2017)

SwingsitlikeHogan said:



			How does the BBC educate without that being from the BBC perspective?
		
Click to expand...

The News = facts, there should be no perspective to facts

They can debate the facts on other shows - question time, newsnight etc


----------



## SocketRocket (Nov 23, 2017)

SwingsitlikeHogan said:



			The BBC mandate is to Inform, Educate and Entertain

*How does the BBC educate without that being from the BBC perspective?*

I tell you the world's going mad when some folks choose to believe Putin's propaganda outlet _Russia Today _over the BBC  - mad - just mad.
		
Click to expand...

You educate people by informing them of the facts.  You Educate people by teaching them to study the facts and consider the causes and effects of them.   You do not educate people by manipulating the facts to support your own thinking.


----------



## JamesR (Nov 23, 2017)

SocketRocket said:



			You educate people by informing them of the facts.  You Educate people by teaching them to study the facts and consider the causes and effects of them.   *You do not educate people by manipulating the facts to support your own thinking*.
		
Click to expand...

It doesn't even have to be a malicious attempt to affect people's thoughts. Whenever someone discusses a subject they will put their own slant on it, whether intended or not.


----------



## Old Skier (Nov 23, 2017)

SwingsitlikeHogan said:



			The BBC mandate is to Inform, Educate and Entertain

How does the BBC educate without that being from the BBC perspective?

I tell you the world's going mad when some folks choose to believe Putin's propaganda outlet _Russia Today _over the BBC  - mad - just mad.
		
Click to expand...

And the Mail and the Sun


----------



## jim8flog (Nov 23, 2017)

One of my main criticism of the BBC News in recent years is that they have become very 'good' at making a drama out of crisis.


----------



## Robster59 (Nov 23, 2017)

SocketRocket said:



			You educate people by informing them of the facts.  You Educate people by teaching them to study the facts and consider the causes and effects of them.   You do not educate people by manipulating the facts to support your own thinking.
		
Click to expand...

Do they manipulate the facts or just not report it with the kind of slant you would like to have on it?  Perhaps you'd like the kind of 'impartial' reporting Fox News puts on its reporting?


----------



## SwingsitlikeHogan (Nov 23, 2017)

Robster59 said:



			Do they manipulate the facts or just not report it with the kind of slant you would like to have on it?  Perhaps you'd like the kind of 'impartial' reporting Fox News puts on its reporting?
		
Click to expand...

Correct sir - some should just have a go watching Fox News to see what manipulation of the facts actually looks and sounds like.  It ain't pretty.  See reporting on the race for Alabama Senator and Roy Brown.


----------



## drdel (Nov 23, 2017)

SwingsitlikeHogan said:



			Correct sir - some should just have a go watching Fox News to see what manipulation of the facts actually looks and sounds like.  It ain't pretty.  See reporting on the race for Alabama Senator and Roy Brown.
		
Click to expand...

If you want to contribute a valid point of debate please compare apples with apples. People should glean their knowledge from a variety of sources while being aware of potential conflict of interests. I'm sure no-one would hold Fox out to be a paragon of virtue!

But the real point is that "Fox" and others are commercial broadcasters / newspapers who need to attract cash via ratings related advertiser revenue - the BBC is unique being funded by UK residents via a 'licence' and we should rightly expect it to operate against much higher standards of objectivity.


----------



## Sweep (Nov 23, 2017)

JamesR said:



			In my opinion:

The News is just a dry repetition of facts. It isn't an entertainment show.

Magazine programmes, interviews, debates and Editorials are where opinion should be stated (and viewers should be informed that opinion and not necessarily facts are what is being discussed).

The BBC should be impartial as it is not privately owned. Any privately owned show can say pretty much whatever they want, but not a publicly funded "news" programme.
		
Click to expand...

^^^^^^ This &#128077;


----------



## Sweep (Nov 23, 2017)

drdel said:



			It seems to me SR simply expressed an opinion and raised an issue about the BBC's style of reporting.

However the school playground quickly and unjustifably jumped into attack SR mode playing the person not the ball: racing off down the tracks of a Brexit, Tory v Labour, the old nut of Scotland v RoUK. Its a bit rich he then gets chastised for defending himself.

Not everything is about the PM. JC Brexit etc

In my view the BBC should expect to be held to different standards than other purveyors/media because it is tax funded precisely to protect it from the influence of political parties, commercial organisation and other pressure groups.

Unfortunately in their financially protected ivory tower they have chosen to let celebritisation (hence Â£Â£Â£s) become the norm. Consequently the prime objective of LK is the promotion of LK. Hence we hear more of her telling us what was (she thinks) said instead of us being allowed to hear the actual speaker's words.

Ironically (IMO) Al Jeezera broadcasts are often better!!!
		
Click to expand...

^^^^^^ and this ðŸ‘


----------



## SocketRocket (Nov 23, 2017)

SwingsitlikeHogan said:



			Correct sir - some should just have a go watching Fox News to see what manipulation of the facts actually looks and sounds like.  It ain't pretty.  See reporting on the race for Alabama Senator and Roy Brown.
		
Click to expand...

Who suggested Fox news is any better.  I don't have Fox News on my TV but I do have the BBC and since the public fund it I expect it to act in a more responsible manner.   There are many news programs around the world that are probably as bad or worse than the BBC but two wrongs dont make a right.   That's like saying Mugabe was not that bad because Kim Jong Un is worse.


----------



## User62651 (Nov 24, 2017)

Caught some of Michael Gove on BBC R4 earlier, complimentary about BBC in that he went as far as to say people should believe what they hear/read on BBC as opposed to what they read on social media. Don't necessarily agree with that but it was a tick for BBC impartiality I believe from a pro-Brexit cabinet minister.


----------



## SwingsitlikeHogan (Nov 24, 2017)

maxfli65 said:



			Caught some of Michael Gove on BBC R4 earlier, complimentary about BBC in that he went as far as to say people should believe what they hear/read on BBC as opposed to what they read on social media. Don't necessarily agree with that but it was a tick for BBC impartiality I believe from a pro-Brexit cabinet minister.
		
Click to expand...

BBC getting plaudits for persistent questioning of John McDonnell on cost of borrowing and exposing him badly - oh that was Andrew Neil - maybe he doesn't count as the BBC


----------



## ArnoldArmChewer (Nov 24, 2017)

JamesR said:



			I'd be happy if they got rid of most of the rubbish bells & whistles and stuck to one person sitting behind a desk telling me what has happened.
I don't want standing news, or roving reporters standing outside a building, struggling with the elements, telling me the same as what the studio newsreader could tell me.
I don;t want it to be all editorials.
Just give me the the facts of what has happened and I'll infer what that means and decide what to do based on my own analysis.
		
Click to expand...

I agree 100%


----------



## SwingsitlikeHogan (Nov 24, 2017)

ArnoldArmChewer said:



			I agree 100%
		
Click to expand...

And if you haven't a clue what it means for you, your family, your country or international affairs you'd still be 100% happy...

Doing your own analysis of the facts is nice idea - but really?


----------



## IanM (Nov 24, 2017)

SwingsitlikeHogan said:



			And if you haven't a clue what it means for you, your family, your country or international affairs you'd still be 100% happy...

Doing your own analysis of the facts is nice idea - but really?
		
Click to expand...


Thinking for yourself not encouraged eh?


----------



## Hobbit (Nov 24, 2017)

SwingsitlikeHogan said:



			BBC getting plaudits for persistent questioning of John McDonnell on cost of borrowing and exposing him badly - oh that was Andrew Neil - maybe he doesn't count as the BBC
		
Click to expand...

Seriously? 

Do you honestly think an interviewer shouldn't push the potential next Chancellor on his borrowing and spending plans? And when the next Chancellor gets evasive and doesn't answer questions you think that's acceptable?

How many times have you said the lack of transparency and honesty in the Brexiteers is unacceptable? How many times have you asked for detailed plans for Brexit, and then decried the govt for not providing them?

I listened to McDonnell in the run up to the election, and since. Of the plans for renationalisation, fully costed with the issuing of govt bonds. And on each occasions he's been asked for details he's dodged the issue. Why? At best its a perverted version of PFI with govt/country paying out to the ex-owners for donkeys years via the Bonds. Marxism has been proven around the world, time and again, in countries like Zimbabwe and Venezuela to be an unmitigated disaster.

And you think the BBC is at fault for trying to get the truth out of the main architect of the next financial disaster to be inflicted on the UK in the name of socialism? Open your eyes, if only to your own double standards.


----------



## Doon frae Troon (Nov 24, 2017)

In England we have 'despite Brexit'
In Scotland we have 'SNP Bad'.

Why do the BBC do it?
Quite simple really they are afraid of losing their structure and their jobs.


----------



## User62651 (Nov 24, 2017)

IanM said:



			Thinking for yourself not encouraged eh?
		
Click to expand...

So you know everything about everything then? You need no assistance to learn? Experts are not to be believed? 
You didn't need trained by others to get through school, then college/uni, then more training from others to do your job?

Strewth.


----------



## Hobbit (Nov 24, 2017)

maxfli65 said:



			So you know everything about everything then? You need no assistance to learn? Experts are not to be believed? 
You didn't need trained by others to get through school, then college/uni, then more training from others to do your job?

Strewth.
		
Click to expand...

The lecturers I had taught me to research and qualify the information I am given. Just because one source gives you information and opinion doesn't make it right.

The Beeb may be one of the more trusted sources of information but that doesn't mean they have to believed blindly.


----------



## IanM (Nov 24, 2017)

maxfli65 said:



			So you know everything about everything then? You need no assistance to learn? Experts are not to be believed? 
You didn't need trained by others to get through school, then college/uni, then more training from others to do your job?

Strewth.
		
Click to expand...

Thank you for demonstrating my point.... where in my comment is any of that?   If someone is labelled an expert, are you not allowed to question them?  (Actually, that's exactly what is happening in Unis these days.   If you are not of a certain view, you don't get to speak!

And as you ask, I went to a school and university that taught me "how to think," not "what to think."


----------



## User62651 (Nov 24, 2017)

Hobbit said:



			The lecturers I had taught me to research and qualify the information I am given. Just because one source gives you information and opinion doesn't make it right.

The Beeb may be one of the more trusted sources of information but that *doesn't mean they have to believed blindly.*

Click to expand...

Agreed but they always give both sides of an issue/argument then an editorial may follow where an 'expert' voices a view that should be impartial. As soon as they give a view they're shot down as biased. Can't win. Beeb are as fair as it gets. Said before but ITV/Sky/Beeb do take a consistent view through their political commentators. Turn over from Marr to Peston or Kuensberg to Islam, you get similar views.


----------



## SwingsitlikeHogan (Nov 24, 2017)

Hobbit said:



			Seriously? 

Do you honestly think an interviewer shouldn't push the potential next Chancellor on his borrowing and spending plans? And when the next Chancellor gets evasive and doesn't answer questions you think that's acceptable?

How many times have you said the lack of transparency and honesty in the Brexiteers is unacceptable? How many times have you asked for detailed plans for Brexit, and then decried the govt for not providing them?

I listened to McDonnell in the run up to the election, and since. Of the plans for renationalisation, fully costed with the issuing of govt bonds. And on each occasions he's been asked for details he's dodged the issue. Why? At best its a perverted version of PFI with govt/country paying out to the ex-owners for donkeys years via the Bonds. Marxism has been proven around the world, time and again, in countries like Zimbabwe and Venezuela to be an unmitigated disaster.

And you think the BBC is at fault for trying to get the truth out of the main architect of the next financial disaster to be inflicted on the UK in the name of socialism? Open your eyes, if only to your own double standards.
		
Click to expand...

Of course it's OK - it's what I'd expect of journalist on the BBC - and that McDonnell couldn't or wouldn't some up with any figures is not good.  But my comment re Neil was simple in the context of all the criticism the BBC get for being leftie and anti-Brexit.


----------



## SwingsitlikeHogan (Nov 24, 2017)

IanM said:



			Thinking for yourself not encouraged eh?
		
Click to expand...

Come on please - for goodness sake you know that the ability of *any *individual to understand the implications of the sort of facts we are talking about is severely limited - we ALL need some guidance.  That so many families do not have a single book in their house and take their political guidance from the tabloids does not bode well for 'thinking for yourself'

And so let's have a look at today's headline in the Daily Mail

_*Fury erupts as Brussels BLOCKS British cities from competing to be the European capital of culture - leaving councils preparing bids potentially millions of pounds out of pocket*_

The readers are led to believe that this is all about the EU punishing the UK for daring to vote to Leave - that the EU is turning it's back on us - and doing councils and therefore us the taxpayer out of Â£Â£millions they have already spent on their bids.

When in fact the *rules *for the City Of Culture exclude any UK city as the UK will not satisfy the candidate criteria.  The individuals who should be blamed for the huge waste of tax payers money are the counsellors who either knew and ignored the rules (so they could continue with their jollies putting their bids together) or who did not know them and were not advised of them by the government and told to stop spending money that will just have been wasted.  

This is *nothing *to do with the EU being vindictive.  It is *all *to do with us having voted to leave the EU and therefore, under the rules, disqualifying ourselves - but you would never know that from the Daily Mail headline.


----------



## Doon frae Troon (Nov 24, 2017)

In fairness to the Dundee councillors they probably believed that Scotland would still be in the EU by 2023.


----------



## Bunkermagnet (Nov 24, 2017)

Doon frae Troon said:



			In fairness to the Dundee councillors they probably believed that Scotland would still be in the EU by 2023.
		
Click to expand...

That just shows then how naive and ingorant of rules those councillors are then. If Scotland had voted for independance, they wouldn't have been allowed to stay in the EU and would have to go through the whole applying process.
Much the same as Catalonia trying for independance, but at least they knew they wouldnt be in the EU straight away if they gained independance.


----------



## USER1999 (Nov 24, 2017)

The city of culture / waste of money issue is a non issue anyway. The fact that the uk cities competing to get it now cant qualify having spent the money = waste, is flawed. Only one city can win the bid, and the others have all wasted the money. The Uk has wasted millions trying to get the world cup. We still dont have it.


----------



## SwingsitlikeHogan (Nov 24, 2017)

Hobbit said:



			The lecturers I had taught me to research and qualify the information I am given. Just because one source gives you information and opinion doesn't make it right.

The Beeb may be one of the more trusted sources of information but that doesn't mean they have to believed blindly.
		
Click to expand...

Lecturers are all lefties and anti-Brexit - apparently


----------



## SwingsitlikeHogan (Nov 24, 2017)

Doon frae Troon said:



			In fairness to the Dundee councillors they probably believed that Scotland would still be in the EU by 2023.
		
Click to expand...

Apparently work was started on the bids about a year ago - so AFTER the vote...


----------



## SwingsitlikeHogan (Nov 24, 2017)

Hobbit said:



			The lecturers I had taught me to research and qualify the information I am given. Just because one source gives you information and opinion doesn't make it right.

*The Beeb may be one of the more trusted sources of information but that doesn't mean they have to believed blindly.*

Click to expand...

100% agree on this - when some simply complain that _The BBC_ is anti-Brexit and Leftie-Liberal is just nonsense - and when some quote _Russia Today _as a preferred trusted source of information it is also dangerous nonsense.


----------



## Doon frae Troon (Nov 24, 2017)

SwingsitlikeHogan said:



			Apparently work was started on the bids about a year ago - so AFTER the vote...
		
Click to expand...

I should have put a  after my comment.


----------



## SwingsitlikeHogan (Nov 24, 2017)

Old Skier said:



			Strange how so many past head of this and that have now gone on to lead left wing think tanks being paid for by Labour.

*Biggest problem at the BBC is they want to be the news.* Direct problem of 24hr reporting.
		
Click to expand...

You know this for a fact and have evidence to support the statement?


----------



## SwingsitlikeHogan (Nov 24, 2017)

murphthemog said:



			The city of culture / waste of money issue is a non issue anyway. The fact that the uk cities competing to get it now cant qualify having spent the money = waste, is flawed. Only one city can win the bid, and the others have all wasted the money. The Uk has wasted millions trying to get the world cup. We still dont have it.
		
Click to expand...

It's not a non-issue for the Brexit-Tory loving press.  For them it's a BIG issue and one that must be placed firmly at the door of the vindictive EU as more evidence of why it is the right decision to leave - when in fact it is the opposite - it is an issue brought about by UK public choosing by a small majority to leave and not understanding the consequences fully.  There being of course far too many consequences to expect any individual to understand, so why would we expect them to when voting - just vote on the Leave headlines.  All will be OK in LaLa Land


----------



## TheDiablo (Nov 24, 2017)

FairwayDodger said:



			Supporter of inept government doesnâ€™t like the reporting of the *worldâ€™s most impartial news organisation*. How surprising.
		
Click to expand...

Whilst indubitably far more impartial than most, it is nonetheless a bold statement, not something many in our out of the industry would agree with. Not even the most impartial based in the UK!


----------



## FairwayDodger (Nov 24, 2017)

TheDiablo said:



			Whilst indubitably far more impartial than most, it is nonetheless a bold statement, not something many in our out of the industry would agree with. Not even the most impartial based in the UK!
		
Click to expand...

Iâ€™m all for overegging it when arguing a point! 

:rofl:


----------



## SocketRocket (Nov 24, 2017)

FairwayDodger said:



			Iâ€™m all for overegging it when arguing a point! 

:rofl:
		
Click to expand...

Put that along with your personal attack on me rather than addressing the subject matter and it points towards you needing to consider your own blind prejudices.


----------



## ColchesterFC (Nov 24, 2017)

SwingsitlikeHogan said:



			100% agree on this - when some simply complain that _The BBC_ is anti-Brexit and Leftie-Liberal is just nonsense - and when some quote _Russia Today _as a preferred trusted source of information it is also dangerous nonsense.
		
Click to expand...

I agree. Whatever next? If we go far enough down that path we'll eventually get to the point where people (or a person) are quoting Wings over Scotland as a reputable source.


----------



## SocketRocket (Nov 24, 2017)

SwingsitlikeHogan said:



			It's not a non-issue for the Brexit-Tory loving press.  For them it's a BIG issue and one that must be placed firmly at the door of the vindictive EU as more evidence of why it is the right decision to leave - when in fact it is the opposite - it is an issue brought about by UK public choosing by a small majority to leave and not understanding the consequences fully.  There being of course far too many consequences to expect any individual to understand, so why would we expect them to when voting - just vote on the Leave headlines.  All will be OK in LaLa Land
		
Click to expand...

I started this thread to discuss the BBC and their lack of impartiality.  You are making posts about Brexit in it, it's not about Brexit.  Struth, you seem obsessed.


----------



## FairwayDodger (Nov 24, 2017)

SocketRocket said:



			Put that along with your personal attack on me rather than addressing the subject matter and it points towards you needing to consider your own blind prejudices.
		
Click to expand...

I have always found you to be quite a robust poster on here so it's a bit surprising to see you so upset by a piece of mild sarcasm. I apologise. And fear not, it's never my intent to offend anybody so it will not happen again.


----------



## User20205 (Nov 24, 2017)

SocketRocket said:



			Put that along with your personal attack on me rather than addressing the subject matter and it points towards you needing to consider your own blind prejudices.
		
Click to expand...

snowflake


----------



## JamesR (Nov 24, 2017)

I donâ€™t necessarily think then bbc are biased, I donâ€™t think they are particularly impartial either.
I actually think they are seriously lacking in good journalists.


----------



## bluewolf (Nov 24, 2017)

I tend to watch the Beeb news more than any other channel. I suppose the fact that they annoy me 50% of the time means that they're relatively impartial. Good enough for me. I also tend not to get annoyed by them giving airtime to opinions. I think I'm probably just about smart enough to form my own opinions........


----------



## JamesR (Nov 24, 2017)

bluewolf said:



			... I also tend not to get annoyed by them giving airtime to opinions. I think I'm probably just about smart enough to form my own opinions........
		
Click to expand...

May be thatâ€™s why I get annoyed at them giving opinions - because I can make up my own mind and I donâ€™t want them to try to tell me what to think!


----------



## NWJocko (Nov 24, 2017)

SwingsitlikeHogan said:



			choosing by a small majority to leave and not understanding the consequences fully.  There being of course far too many consequences to expect any individual to understand, so why would we expect them to when voting
		
Click to expand...

You couldn't make this up, really made me laugh, thanks :rofl:

So you constantly berate people who voted to leave for not understanding  the issues then say there are too many issues for them to understand, then criticise them for not understanding when placing their vote.  In a single sentence!!!!!

Absolute gold :rofl: :rofl:


----------



## bluewolf (Nov 24, 2017)

JamesR said:



			May be thatâ€™s why I get annoyed at them giving opinions - because I can make up my own mind and I donâ€™t want them to try to tell me what to think!
		
Click to expand...

But if you don't get a varied mix of opinions then how can you be sure that yours is correct?  We all form incorrect opinions at times. It's only by getting other views that we can confirm or deny our own. Unless you know you're right of course. In which case you should probably be giving the news, not receiving it. ðŸ˜‰


----------



## JamesR (Nov 24, 2017)

bluewolf said:



			But if you don't get a varied mix of opinions then how can you be sure that yours is correct?  We all form incorrect opinions at times. It's only by getting other views that we can confirm or deny our own. Unless you know you're right of course. In which case you should probably be giving the news, not receiving it. ðŸ˜‰
		
Click to expand...

I get variety of opinions, and I discuss and debate issues. 
I would never take the word of a â€œjournalist â€œ at the beeb or any other news source as being gospel as I simply donâ€™t trust them, and as such donâ€™t believe they should be trying to influence opinion.


----------



## SocketRocket (Nov 24, 2017)

FairwayDodger said:



			I have always found you to be quite a robust poster on here so it's a bit surprising to see you so upset by a piece of mild sarcasm. I apologise. And fear not, it's never my intent to offend anybody so it will not happen again.
		
Click to expand...

I assure you I am not upset that easily.  I am more surprised that someone who has such a strong dislike for blind prejudice that contravenes your personal agendas can suggest that it can be put down to 'mild sarcasm' when used to undermine anothers.    Anyhow, lets put it aside now.


----------



## SocketRocket (Nov 24, 2017)

Back to the thread.  I do accept that programs like QT, Panorama etc are designed to question news and as long as they give a balanced view then that's fair.   I am not sure they always do this though, the BBC especially have an influence from their senior Directors that is overtly biased.   The BBC News tends to start off with the facts of a matter but then bring in their Specific Editors who then put a biased spin on to it.   Kuenssberg and Pienaar are IMO very biased in their comments.


----------



## Hobbit (Nov 24, 2017)

NWJocko said:



			You couldn't make this up, really made me laugh, thanks :rofl:

So you constantly berate people who voted to leave for not understanding  the issues then say there are too many issues for them to understand, then criticise them for not understanding when placing their vote.  In a single sentence!!!!!

Absolute gold :rofl: :rofl:
		
Click to expand...

Yes but its only a complex issue for the thicko Leavers.. the super intelligent Remainers are all knowing and knew that it was wise to stay where they were.... oops, I've just spilt my G&T!!


----------



## Doon frae Troon (Nov 24, 2017)

ColchesterFC said:



			I agree. Whatever next? If we go far enough down that path we'll eventually get to the point where people (or a person) are quoting Wings over Scotland as a reputable source. 

Click to expand...

Wings v Daily Mail.
I shall let you read and decide which is the more reputable.

https://wingsoverscotland.com/the-loser/#comments


----------



## SwingsitlikeHogan (Nov 24, 2017)

NWJocko said:



			You couldn't make this up, really made me laugh, thanks :rofl:

So you constantly berate people who voted to leave for not understanding  the issues then say there are too many issues for them to understand, then criticise them for not understanding when placing their vote.  In a single sentence!!!!!

Absolute gold :rofl: :rofl:
		
Click to expand...

I am glad you enjoyed my careful juxtaposition of statements that were intended to highlight the folly of reducing such a complex issue as *leaving *the EU to such a simplistic vote


----------



## ColchesterFC (Nov 24, 2017)

Doon frae Troon said:



			Wings v Daily Mail.
I shall let you read and decide which is the more reputable.

https://wingsoverscotland.com/the-loser/#comments

Click to expand...

That's not setting the bar very high though is it Doon? Being more reputable than the Daily Mail is a bit like being a better father than Josef Fritzel.


----------



## Hobbit (Nov 24, 2017)

Doon frae Troon said:



			Wings v Daily Mail.
I shall let you read and decide which is the more reputable.

https://wingsoverscotland.com/the-loser/#comments

Click to expand...

The tax changes were proposed by the SNP a year ago with a 'go live' date of April 2017 but a decision was made by the SNP not to make the changes. Nicola Sturgeon has made it very clear that the SNP want to increase the income tax levels for higher earners to greater levels than in England.

And yet Wings says its not even proposed yet. And you ask which is the more reputable. Cut from the same cloth.

https://inews.co.uk/essentials/news/politics/budget-2017-snp-urged-drop-plans-hike-income-tax/


----------



## Hobbit (Nov 24, 2017)

SwingsitlikeHogan said:



			I am glad you enjoyed my careful juxtaposition of statements that were intended to highlight the folly of reducing such a complex issue as *leaving *the EU to such a simplistic vote 

Click to expand...

And Parliament abdicated that responsibility. Forget party politics for a second, Parliament as a whole barring a few decent politicians is filled with dross.


----------



## SocketRocket (Nov 25, 2017)

SwingsitlikeHogan said:



			I am glad you enjoyed my careful juxtaposition of statements that were intended to highlight the folly of reducing such a complex issue as *leaving *the EU to such a simplistic vote 

Click to expand...

You continue to turn this thread into a Brexit debate. Get over it man.


----------



## Doon frae Troon (Nov 25, 2017)

Hobbit said:



			The tax changes were proposed by the SNP a year ago with a 'go live' date of April 2017 but a decision was made by the SNP not to make the changes. Nicola Sturgeon has made it very clear that the SNP want to increase the income tax levels for higher earners to greater levels than in England.

And yet Wings says its not even proposed yet. And you ask which is the more reputable. Cut from the same cloth.

https://inews.co.uk/essentials/news/politics/budget-2017-snp-urged-drop-plans-hike-income-tax/

Click to expand...

........and what about the London house buyer in Scotland.
Did you just read the headline. ?


----------



## Doon frae Troon (Nov 25, 2017)

ColchesterFC said:



			That's not setting the bar very high though is it Doon? Being more reputable than the Daily Mail is a bit like being a better father than Josef Fritzel.
		
Click to expand...

Which was my point....http://www.pressgazette.co.uk/nrs-d...newspaper-print-and-online-23m-readers-month/.


----------



## Hobbit (Nov 25, 2017)

Doon frae Troon said:



			........and what about the London house buyer in Scotland.
Did you just read the headline. ?
		
Click to expand...

Obviously I didn't just read the headline otherwise I wouldn't have known to post something to counter your point. However, you haven't acknowledged my point either, i.e. that the SNP have long proposed a tax hike yet Wings says otherwise, even though Nicola is quoted in many media outlets and has spoken about it in interviews.

What has a London house buyer got to do with honesty and accuracy in news reporting?


----------



## Dasit (Nov 25, 2017)

I think the main problem with the BBC is a lot of the public do not realise they have their own massive agenda, and push it in their wording for most articles, "despite Brexit" etc




At least in America it is clear when watching News, CNN are full on left side, Fox is full on right side for example.


----------



## MegaSteve (Nov 25, 2017)

I just love Newswatch...

Perfect platform for Mr [and Mrs] Grump...


----------



## Doon frae Troon (Nov 25, 2017)

Hobbit said:



			The tax changes were proposed by the SNP a year ago with a 'go live' date of April 2017 but a decision was made by the SNP not to make the changes. Nicola Sturgeon has made it very clear that the SNP want to increase the income tax levels for higher earners to greater levels than in England.

And yet Wings says its not even proposed yet. And you ask which is the more reputable. Cut from the same cloth.

https://inews.co.uk/essentials/news/politics/budget-2017-snp-urged-drop-plans-hike-income-tax/

Click to expand...

SNP options........Daily Mail proposals.
You are aware one of the options is to do nothing.


----------



## Foxholer (Nov 25, 2017)

TheDiablo said:



			Whilst indubitably far more impartial than most, it is nonetheless a bold statement, not something many in our out of the industry would agree with. Not even the most impartial based in the UK!
		
Click to expand...

I'm genuinely interested in which one(s) you consider 'more impartial' than the Beeb!

I've always found the Beeb to be pretty fair - if not absolutely impartial! It's pretty hard for any reporter/interviewer to maintain impartiality! I'm happy that they probe statements and incidents relating to either/any side of the political area fairly evenly. With Conservatives in power, there will naturally be more 'news' from them to critique and it's the negative points of their policies that will be simplest/most obvious to coment about! I don't believe they acted any differently when Labour was in power, or indeed during the Coalition government.

FWIW. When I first arrived in UK, I considered the BBB's reporting to be considerably further to the *right* of the spectrum than I was used to! And NZ's broadcasting/news setup was greatly modelled on the BBC! 

I'm inclined to the view that the OP's opinion of the Beeb's position is simply relative to his own! Given his score in a 'Left/Right' style thread on that subject (quite some time ago; I think even before the Scottish Referendum, let alone Brexit!), I am not surprised that he considers the Beeb 'left leaning'! Genghis Khan's autobiography would probably be too 'pink' for him too imo!


----------



## Hobbit (Nov 25, 2017)

Doon frae Troon said:



			SNP options........Daily Mail proposals.
You are aware one of the options is to do nothing.

Click to expand...

You are still doing it. You are refusing to acknowledge that Wings is as accurate as the Daily Mail. You need to broaden your material, and include Nicola's own words, which in effect is the only evidence you need to see that Wings is guilty of inaccuracy.


----------



## drdel (Nov 25, 2017)

The thread's topic is the BBC yet we keep getting boring repetitious dross from dragged from Brexit, politicians, newspaper baise/ownership.

Surely, there can be nobody who reads the DM or the Guardian,( for example) expects to get to the truth. Similarly commercial radio/TV channels need audience rating to sell the adjacent advertising 'space' so look to sensationalise their terminology. 

However, I expect many people _think_ their getting unbiased information from the nation's public broadcaster rather than the self promoting personalty journalist that seem to be paraded.

The point is that BBC should aspire to demonstraby higher standards yet IMO its no better than the commercially funded alternatives.


----------



## Foxholer (Nov 25, 2017)

Hobbit said:



			You are still doing it. You are refusing to acknowledge that *Wings* is as accurate as the *Daily Mail.* You need to broaden your material, and include Nicola's own words, which in effect is the only evidence you need to see that Wings is guilty of inaccuracy.
		
Click to expand...

Neither of those organisations is a 'proper' News organisation! Both are merely broadcasters of their own opinions. They both  simply use news as a source/excuse to publish those opinions! Given that that is how newspapers came into being in the first place, i have no issue with their existence. I simply disregard many of their conclusions.

Like the OP, I'd sooner simply be presented with facts and draw my own conclusions - and I'm actually 'happy' to have my opinion changed by facts I wasn't aware of! Unfortunately, simply providing facts doesn't automatically guarantee impartiality! What is needed for that is the equivalent of the court oath - 'The facts, all the facts and nothing but the facts'! And I think that would be very dry news! I'm happy knowing that there's a touch of 'personal/organisational bias' in reports and look at different news sources if I deem it necessary/important!



drdel said:



			...
The point is that BBC should aspire to demonstraby higher standards....
		
Click to expand...

I believe that there are policies and procedures in place that do this!



drdel said:



			...
 yet IMO its no better than the commercially funded alternatives.
		
Click to expand...

Partially apathy; partly 'good PR' by 'the comercially funded alternatives' imo.

Key to getting a balanced/independent vew is using either a pure fact-based source, or various 'opinion-based' sources and making ones own mind up!


----------



## Doon frae Troon (Nov 26, 2017)

Moothie Ruthie on The Marr Show once again......how many times is that this year?

The BBC seem pretty determined to get their former employee to head the Tory Party.


----------



## shortgame (Nov 26, 2017)

Dasit said:



			I think the main problem with the BBC is a lot of the public do not realise they have their own massive agenda, and push it in their wording for most articles, "despite Brexit" etc




At least in America it is clear when watching News, CNN are full on left side, Fox is full on right side for example.
		
Click to expand...

Aye, and commonly (and seemingly more and more frequently) referring to the Conservatives as 'Tories', a subtle difference with derogotary connotations


----------



## SwingsitlikeHogan (Nov 26, 2017)

Dasit said:



			I think the main problem with the BBC is a lot of the public do not realise they have their own massive agenda, and push it in their wording for most articles,* "despite Brexit" e*tc




At least in America it is clear when watching News, CNN are full on left side, Fox is full on right side for example.
		
Click to expand...

You should just quit perpetrating and supporting a point of view using two words that mean one thing in one context and another when used in the context they have very occasionally been used.  

Your complaints would have substance, and I would 100% agree with you, were Brexit negotiations going well and a clear destination being spelled out.  That the the negotiations appear to be a shambolic mess, with difficulties left, right and centre; the country split in it's opinions and with furious arguments ongoing in the electorate never mind the politicians - then it is quite reasonable to use 'despite Brexit' when reporting or commenting upon any other related political matter.  Indeed appropriate whjen commenting on anything that goes well and that gives us a bit of relief from Brexit...

And so - Despite Brexit - I am fortunate to be able to play friendly golf with other members of a different political view - and long may that continue.


----------



## SwingsitlikeHogan (Nov 26, 2017)

Dasit said:



			I think the main problem with the BBC is a lot of the public do not realise they have their own massive agenda, and push it in their wording for most articles, "despite Brexit" etc




At least in America it is clear when watching News, CNN are full on left side, Fox is full on right side for example.
		
Click to expand...


Re Fox - but things are a-stirring in Fox with the Roy Brown controversy and disgrace with what the PotUS has been saying about it - but just have a look and listen to the opprobrium heaped by Fox News Viewers upon Shep Sheppard (leading presenter on Fox News) when he dared to analyse and rubbish the whole Uranium One attack on the Clinton Foundation.


----------



## Hobbit (Nov 26, 2017)

SwingsitlikeHogan said:



			You should just quit perpetrating and supporting a point of view using two words that mean one thing in one context and another when used in the context they have very occasionally been used.  

Your complaints would have substance, and I would 100% agree with you, were Brexit negotiations going well and a clear destination being spelled out.  That the the negotiations appear to be a shambolic mess, with difficulties left, right and centre; the country split in it's opinions and with furious arguments ongoing in the electorate never mind the politicians - then it is quite reasonable to use 'despite Brexit' when reporting or commenting upon any other related political matter.  Indeed appropriate whjen commenting on anything that goes well and that gives us a bit of relief from Brexit...

And so - Despite Brexit - I am fortunate to be able to play friendly golf with other members of a different political view - and long may that continue.
		
Click to expand...

Late last year the Beeb reported an increase in UK construction, "despite Brexit." 

It also reported an increase in hate crime due to Brexit. The Home Office reported a drop in prosecutions, saying that even with increased vigour in investigating the alleged crimes it was found that a lot of the reported crimes were at best anecdotal and many of them were foreign nationals assuming they had been attacked because of their nationality rather than, for example, a straightforward mugging or assault. Sadly the Beeb hasn't broadcast it may have been wrong with its original reporting.

The following were reported on the Beeb;

"Despite Brexit, The Head of Investment (Northern Ireland) says the economy is thriving."

"Ryanair raises passenger growth forecast, despite Brexit."

"Siemens promises UK investment, despite Brexit." _This one I remember as it relates to the Siemens plant in Hull._

I count 10 other (economic) headlines that include "despite Brexit."

Some may well turn out to be prophetic, but where an economic result is being announced, rather than a predication, why prefix it with despite Brexit?

And as I posted earlier, a cross-party committee has already found and reprimanded the Beeb for its bias.


----------



## SocketRocket (Nov 26, 2017)

Foxholer said:



			I'm inclined to the view that the OP's opinion of the Beeb's position is simply relative to his own! Given his score in a 'Left/Right' style thread on that subject (quite some time ago; I think even before the Scottish Referendum, let alone Brexit!), I am not surprised that he considers the Beeb 'left leaning'! Genghis Khan's autobiography would probably be too 'pink' for him too imo!
		
Click to expand...

Here we go again!   Another one of the groovey gang who prefer to play the man than the ball.  If I attempt to defend myself I guess I will get a reprimand suggesting I'm too "Precious" and that "it's not all about me".   You couldn't make it up


----------



## Mark_Aged_42 (Nov 27, 2017)

DaveR said:



			Just turn over to the 6pm news at 6:29 in future then 

Click to expand...

Dont do that - then you get the R4 alleged comedy half hour, which inevitably features an omni present right on comedian/comedienne bashing the usual suspects.


----------



## SwingsitlikeHogan (Nov 27, 2017)

Hobbit said:



			Late last year the Beeb reported an increase in UK construction, "despite Brexit." 

It also reported an increase in hate crime due to Brexit. The Home Office reported a drop in prosecutions, saying that even with increased vigour in investigating the alleged crimes it was found that a lot of the reported crimes were at best anecdotal and many of them were foreign nationals assuming they had been attacked because of their nationality rather than, for example, a straightforward mugging or assault. Sadly the Beeb hasn't broadcast it may have been wrong with its original reporting.

The following were reported on the Beeb;

"Despite Brexit, The Head of Investment (Northern Ireland) says the economy is thriving."

"Ryanair raises passenger growth forecast, despite Brexit."

"Siemens promises UK investment, despite Brexit." _This one I remember as it relates to the Siemens plant in Hull._

I count 10 other (economic) headlines that include "despite Brexit."

Some may well turn out to be prophetic, but where an economic result is being announced, rather than a predication, why prefix it with despite Brexit?

And as I posted earlier, a cross-party committee has already found and reprimanded the Beeb for its bias.
		
Click to expand...

Actually in the examples you give the BBC's very occasionally using 'Despite Brexit' could be considered to be supportive of Brexit - because 'Despite Brexit', and all the Project Fear Doom-mongering - look at all the positive things happening that counter that negativity.


----------



## Foxholer (Nov 27, 2017)

Hobbit said:



			Late last year the Beeb reported an increase in UK construction, "despite Brexit." 

It also reported an increase in hate crime due to Brexit. The Home Office reported a drop in prosecutions, saying that even with increased vigour in investigating the alleged crimes it was found that a lot of the reported crimes were at best anecdotal and many of them were foreign nationals assuming they had been attacked because of their nationality rather than, for example, a straightforward mugging or assault. Sadly the Beeb hasn't broadcast it may have been wrong with its original reporting.

The following were reported on the Beeb;

*"Despite Brexit, The Head of Investment (Northern Ireland) says the economy is thriving."
*
"Ryanair raises passenger growth forecast, despite Brexit."

*"Siemens promises UK investment, despite Brexit."* _This one I remember as it relates to the Siemens plant in Hull._

I count 10 other (economic) headlines that include "despite Brexit."

Some may well turn out to be prophetic, but where an economic result is being announced, rather than a predication, why prefix it with despite Brexit?

And as I posted earlier, a cross-party committee has already found and reprimanded the Beeb for its bias.
		
Click to expand...

Re the 2 quotes highlighted....

NI one...That quote features in an a Beeb article about an article the Head of Invest NI wrote in the Huffington Post. The article was 'Brexit and Northern Ireland: Fact vs. Fiction'! So the reference to Brexit is absolutely legitimate - in fact, it would lack credibility if it did not mention 'despite Brexit'!

Re the Siemens one.. Again, there is absolute relevance, as prior to the referendum, Siemens inferred that it would need to review its investment in UK should the vote be for Brexit. The fact that this particular investment has been given the go-ahead - in spite of Brexit - is actually news, with the 'despite Brexit' being an essential part of it!

The search for the articles highlighted a number of other news media also using 'despite Brexit' in their articles on the same subject. So in fairness you shouldn't just be complaining about the Beeb's use of the phrase!

I'm certain that the vast majority of such articles are validly including 'despite Brexit', but there may be a few that aren't! I agree that the expression does get a bit tedious to hear though!

As for the Beeb being reprimanded.... To me, that demonstrates how the procedures, both Parliamentary and within the BBC, actually work - and do provide a measure of 'control' of any overly one-sided reporting! To do the same for the likes of The Sun, Daily Mail, Telegraph, Guardian etc, would likely require significantly more effort via non-independent bodies!



SwingsitlikeHogan said:



			Actually in the examples you give the BBC's very occasionally using 'Despite Brexit' could be considered to be supportive of Brexit - because 'Despite Brexit', and all the Project Fear Doom-mongering - look at all the positive things happening that counter that negativity.
		
Click to expand...

SILH beat me to this!

+1!


----------



## SwingsitlikeHogan (Nov 27, 2017)

Foxholer said:



			Re the 2 quotes highlighted....

NI one...That quote features in an a Beeb article about an article the Head of Invest NI wrote in the Huffington Post. The article was 'Brexit and Northern Ireland: Fact vs. Fiction'! So the reference to Brexit is absolutely legitimate - in fact, it would lack credibility if it did not mention 'despite Brexit'!

Re the Siemens one.. Again, there is absolute relevance, as prior to the referendum, Siemens inferred that it would need to review its investment in UK should the vote be for Brexit. The fact that this particular investment has been given the go-ahead - in spite of Brexit - is actually news, with the 'despite Brexit' being an essential part of it!

The search for the articles highlighted a number of other news media also using 'despite Brexit' in their articles on the same subject. So in fairness you shouldn't just be complaining about the Beeb's use of the phrase!

I'm certain that the vast majority of such articles are validly including 'despite Brexit', but there may be a few that aren't! I agree that the expression does get a bit tedious to hear though!

As for the Beeb being reprimanded.... To me, that demonstrates how the procedures, both Parliamentary and within the BBC, actually work - and do provide a measure of 'control' of any overly one-sided reporting! To do the same for the likes of The Sun, Daily Mail, Telegraph, Guardian etc, would likely require significantly more effort via non-independent bodies!



SILH beat me to this!

+1!
		
Click to expand...

Mind - we might soon be hearing _Despite a Desprit Brexit_ more often - sadly...


----------



## Hobbit (Nov 27, 2017)

SwingsitlikeHogan said:



			Actually in the examples you give the BBC's very occasionally using 'Despite Brexit' could be considered to be supportive of Brexit - because 'Despite Brexit', and all the Project Fear Doom-mongering - look at all the positive things happening that counter that negativity.
		
Click to expand...

Please don't be obtuse. The context in which they were used makes it pretty clear what the Beeb's stance was at that time. And, to repeat for the 3rd time, the Beeb have been reprimanded for their bias and lack of impartiality.

There was a great piece in which David Dimbley asked Rees-Mogg to prove it, so he did, and quoted a number of examples. That's the same David Dimbleby that took a swipe at Rees Mogg for his Eton education only for Rees Mogg to reply that he had been in the same class as Dimbleby's son.


----------



## SwingsitlikeHogan (Nov 27, 2017)

Hobbit said:



			Please don't be obtuse. The context in which they were used makes it pretty clear what the Beeb's stance was at that time. And, to repeat for the 3rd time, the Beeb have been reprimanded for their bias and lack of impartiality.

There was a great piece in which David Dimbley asked Rees-Mogg to prove it, so he did, and quoted a number of examples. That's the same David Dimbleby that took a swipe at Rees Mogg for his Eton education only for Rees Mogg to reply that he had been in the same class as Dimbleby's son.
		
Click to expand...

Not being obtuse - simply interpreting the words in a sightly different way - as those wishing to see BBC bias do in their interpretation of BBC words - I could no doubt say that *they* were being obtuse.  The words 'Despite Brexit' are biased if you view the BBC as institutionally biased against Brexit.  Their reporting will be biased in some aspects and by some reporters or commentators on occasions - but that is the way of it.  My belief is that on most issues the BBC is generally fair and evenhanded.


----------



## Hobbit (Nov 27, 2017)

SwingsitlikeHogan said:



			Not being obtuse - simply interpreting the words in a sightly different way - as those wishing to see BBC bias do in their interpretation of BBC words - I could no doubt say that *they* were being obtuse.  The words 'Despite Brexit' are biased if you view the BBC as institutionally biased against Brexit.  Their reporting will be biased in some aspects and by some reporters or commentators on occasions - but that is the way of it.  My belief is that on most issues the BBC is generally fair and evenhanded.
		
Click to expand...

So "despite Brexit" is a success then. If you believe the Beeb is, in the main, fair and unbiased why are you continually bleating that Brexit isn't working and that it is the biggest unmitigated disaster that will ever befall us? Are the Beeb being dishonest or guilty of poor reporting?


----------



## IanM (Nov 28, 2017)

mmm - another rap on the knuckles for the BBC this week then for a blatant lie....  

Hogan in here too eh?  Nice


----------



## Doon frae Troon (Nov 28, 2017)

http://www.heraldscotland.com/news/15688340.UK_watchdog_backs_down_in_tax_row_with_SNP/

Seems BBC is not the only British organisation getting it's knickers in a twist.


----------



## IanM (Nov 29, 2017)

*BBC Regional Programming*:

Something good happens in Wales = hurrah for the Welsh Labour Government

Something bad happens in Wales  = those nasty blooming Tories

Every night you'll see some version of the "Goodness Gracious Me" Sketch where "Indian" is replaced by "Welsh!"   Barry John invented the light bulb you know!


----------



## Doon frae Troon (Nov 29, 2017)

IanM said:



*BBC Regional Programming*:

Something good happens in Wales = hurrah for the Welsh Labour Government

Something bad happens in Wales  = those nasty blooming Tories

Every night you'll see some version of the "Goodness Gracious Me" Sketch where "Indian" is replaced by "Welsh!"   Barry John invented the light bulb you know!
		
Click to expand...

When something good happens in Scotland the BBC can usually be counted on to spin it into an SNP BAAAAD story [despite Brexit] followed by the Labour and Tory parties lying through their teeth to try and claim credit.

When something bad happens the Labour and Tory parties go straight into SNP BAAAAAAD mode despite, in many cases, either voting for it at Holyrood or having it in past manifestos.
The single Scottish Police Service and the VAT bill being a prime example of that.


----------



## IanM (Nov 29, 2017)

It does seem blatant.   Hopefully a future Tory Govt will kill the BBC off.......


----------



## Liverpoolphil (Nov 29, 2017)

IanM said:



			It does seem blatant.   Hopefully a future Tory Govt will kill the BBC off.......
		
Click to expand...

The BBC employs a great deal amount of people all over the world , it also provides a service for people all over the world - i for one was grateful for the BBC world Service at times - there are millions upon millions that rely on the BBC for both their television and their radio and have no wish to pay the vast fortunes to watch Sky or have to deal with adverts to watch ITV

Now itâ€™s clear you have a clear hatred of the BBC ( not sure why when itâ€™s just a media company ) but it provides a very good service for a damn sight more - is it perfect , nope but itâ€™s better and cheaper than any other media outlet and I think your hopes will be dashed. If itâ€™s that offending the answer is simple - donâ€™t watch it or read the website or listen to the radio


----------



## Deleted member 18588 (Nov 29, 2017)

Liverpoolphil said:



			The BBC employs a great deal amount of people all over the world , it also provides a service for people all over the world - i for one was grateful for the BBC world Service at times - there are millions upon millions that rely on the BBC for both their television and their radio and have no wish to pay the vast fortunes to watch Sky or have to deal with adverts to watch ITV

Now itâ€™s clear you have a clear hatred of the BBC ( not sure why when itâ€™s just a media company ) but it provides a very good service for a damn sight more - is it perfect , nope but itâ€™s better and cheaper than any other media outlet and I think your hopes will be dashed. If itâ€™s that offending the answer is simple - donâ€™t watch it or read the website or listen to the radio
		
Click to expand...

But still pay for it!

That is the problem for the BBC whether the discussion is about perceived bias, the salaries of executives or the amount of sport or whatever is shown. 

It's not just a media company, it is a form of taxation.


----------



## Old Skier (Nov 29, 2017)

Liverpoolphil said:



			The BBC employs a great deal amount of people all over the world ,
		
Click to expand...

No they don't, most working overseas work for other agencies and are self employed as are most of the big front line staff we see and hear on the BBC


----------



## Doon frae Troon (Nov 29, 2017)

MetalMickie said:



			But still pay for it!

That is the problem for the BBC whether the discussion is about perceived bias, the salaries of executives or the amount of sport or whatever is shown. 

It's not just a media company, it is a form of taxation.
		
Click to expand...

Many staunch Nationalists in Scotland refuse to pay the licence fee, using other news outlets to get 'delayed news'.
I believe that there has been very few, if any, recent prosecutions by the BBC in Scotland
This is despite countless threats of court action.

I think it is quite hard to prove someone was actually watching live BBC in this complex communication age.


----------



## ColchesterFC (Nov 29, 2017)

Doon frae Troon said:



			Many staunch Nationalists in Scotland refuse to pay the licence fee, using other news outlets to get 'delayed news'.
I believe that there has been very few, if any, recent prosecutions by the BBC in Scotland
This is despite countless threats of court action.

I think it is quite hard to prove someone was actually *watching live BBC* in this complex communication age.
		
Click to expand...

Hasn't this recently been changed so it's not only watching live that requires a license but also accessing catch up services as well?

EDIt - just Googled it and it seems it does cover I-Player and catch up

http://www.tvlicensing.co.uk/check-if-you-need-one/topics/Live-TV-and-how-you-watch-it


----------



## Liverpoolphil (Nov 29, 2017)

MetalMickie said:



			But still pay for it!

That is the problem for the BBC whether the discussion is about perceived bias, the salaries of executives or the amount of sport or whatever is shown. 

It's not just a media company, it is a form of taxation.
		
Click to expand...

Donâ€™t pay for it then and donâ€™t use it - you can only watch non BBC catch up stuff but you not pay the telly licence or tax as you call it if you donâ€™t want too


----------



## Deleted member 18588 (Nov 29, 2017)

Doon frae Troon said:



			Many staunch Nationalists in Scotland refuse to pay the licence fee, using other news outlets to get 'delayed news'.
I believe that there has been very few, if any, recent prosecutions by the BBC in Scotland
This is despite countless threats of court action.

I think it is quite hard to prove someone was actually watching live BBC in this complex communication age.
		
Click to expand...

Whether or not you watch BBC you are still required by law to have a TV licence if you view any live television programme, whoever the broadcaster. 

Yet the licence fees are  used exclusively to fund the BBC.


----------



## Deleted member 18588 (Nov 29, 2017)

Liverpoolphil said:



			Donâ€™t pay for it then and donâ€™t use it - you can only watch non BBC catch up stuff but you not pay the telly licence or tax as you call it if you donâ€™t want too
		
Click to expand...

Rather than offering a "like it or lump it" answer could you not offer a more mature argument. 

Why, if I only want to watch live programming from other broadcasters, do I have to fund the BBC?


----------



## Liverpoolphil (Nov 29, 2017)

MetalMickie said:



			Rather than offering a "like it or lump it" answer could you not offer a more mature argument. 

Why, if I only want to watch live programming from other broadcasters, do I have to fund the BBC?
		
Click to expand...

Because unfortunately there are far too many people in the uk that want something for nothing so if you allowed people to not pay the licence fee but then not use one single BBC service that includes radio and website or indeed any BBC service ( youâ€™re not just paying for the telly ) how many do you think would then go on and actually use it ? Only have to look at how many stream illegally football or films etc to show people donâ€™t want to pay for stuff and would rather it free 

So unfortunately you will be a victim of other peopleâ€™s dishonesty 

And when you think of the amount of content the BBC is superb value for money and advert free


----------



## Old Skier (Nov 29, 2017)

MetalMickie said:



			Yet the licence fees are  used exclusively to fund the BBC.
		
Click to expand...

Some funding goes to the likes of Ch4.


----------



## Deleted member 18588 (Nov 29, 2017)

Liverpoolphil said:



			Because unfortunately there are far too many people in the uk that want something for nothing so if you allowed people to not pay the licence fee but then not use one single BBC service that includes radio and website or indeed any BBC service ( youâ€™re not just paying for the telly ) how many do you think would then go on and actually use it ? Only have to look at how many stream illegally football or films etc to show people donâ€™t want to pay for stuff and would rather it free 

So unfortunately you will be a victim of other peopleâ€™s dishonesty 

And when you think of the amount of content the BBC is superb value for money and advert free
		
Click to expand...

Sorry but that doesn't cut it. 

I  can  see no reason (other than it being a tax) why there should be a universal licence fee. 

Why should any of us fund the viewing choices of others?


----------



## Hobbit (Nov 29, 2017)

MetalMickie said:



			Sorry but that doesn't cut it. 

I  can  see no reason (other than it being a tax) why there should be a universal licence fee. 

Why should any of us fund the viewing choices of others?
		
Click to expand...

Have you never watched the BBC? Blue Planet? The Open coverage? Putting programme together doesn't happen without spending money, and they don't rake in millions from advertising. Â£3 a week for access to whatever is cheaper than Â£25 a week for Sky, and Sky are also raking in millions from advertising.

Are we mugs for paying Â£100 a month to Sky whilst they are also raking in all the advertising money?


----------



## Doon frae Troon (Nov 29, 2017)

Hobbit said:



			Have you never watched the BBC? Blue Planet? The Open coverage? Putting programme together doesn't happen without spending money, and they don't rake in millions from advertising. Â£3 a week for access to whatever is cheaper than Â£25 a week for Sky, and Sky are also raking in millions from advertising.

Are we mugs for paying Â£100 a month to Sky whilst they are also raking in all the advertising money?
		
Click to expand...

I have no problem with paying my licence but I would like the BBC to be politically neutral and share the funding in fair proportions around the UK.
As an example BBC Scotland showing England Ladies playing Kazakhstan at prime time really is extracting the urine.


----------



## Deleted member 18588 (Nov 29, 2017)

Hobbit said:



			Have you never watched the BBC? Blue Planet? The Open coverage? Putting programme together doesn't happen without spending money, and they don't rake in millions from advertising. Â£3 a week for access to whatever is cheaper than Â£25 a week for Sky, and Sky are also raking in millions from advertising.

Are we mugs for paying Â£100 a month to Sky whilst they are also raking in all the advertising money?
		
Click to expand...

Don't have Sky so the comparison is not relevant in my case. 

Personally I would have no issue with the BBC becoming subscription based or accepting adverts. 

After all they spend  so much time these days trailing their own programmes it's almost like advertising in any event. 

I don't dispute that they produce some (not a lot) good stuff . It's the universal method of their funding that I am opposed to.


----------



## User62651 (Nov 29, 2017)

Doon frae Troon said:



			I have no problem with paying my licence but I would like the BBC to be politically neutral and share the funding in fair proportions around the UK.
*As an example BBC Scotland showing England Ladies playing Kazakhstan at prime time really is extracting the urine*.
		
Click to expand...

Think that would only be an issue if Scotland ladies were playing at the same time and weren't being shown. England ladies are a British team, it's BBC so not a problem imo.
We have to be fair here, proportionately we're 8% of UK so we could expect our tv schedule to have 8% 'Scottish' BBC programmes, another issue but why does BBC Alba get so much alloction when only 1% of Scots speak gaelic?


----------



## Doon frae Troon (Nov 30, 2017)

BBC Scotland in full fleck and spittle mode with screams of the new Forth crossing to be closed until September.

The reality is occasional overnight lane closures that might cause a two minute delay to journeys.


----------



## Foxholer (Nov 30, 2017)

Doon frae Troon said:



			BBC Scotland in full fleck and spittle mode with screams of the new Forth crossing to be closed until September.

The reality is occasional overnight lane closures that might cause a two minute delay to journeys.
		
Click to expand...

http://www.bbc.co.uk/complaints/

Make a proper Complaint then - on the Complaints site - rather than simply whingeing on here!

You'll almst certainly get a more sympathetic response too!


----------



## Doon frae Troon (Nov 30, 2017)

Foxholer said:



http://www.bbc.co.uk/complaints/

Make a proper Complaint then - on the Complaints site - rather than simply whingeing on here!

You'll almst certainly get a more sympathetic response too! 

Click to expand...

You are joking......the BBC complaint system is absolutely farcical.


----------



## Liverpoolphil (Nov 30, 2017)

Doon frae Troon said:



			BBC Scotland in full fleck and spittle mode with screams of the new Forth crossing to be closed until September.

The reality is occasional overnight lane closures that might cause a two minute delay to journeys.
		
Click to expand...

https://www.google.co.uk/amp/s/www.bbc.co.uk/news/amp/uk-scotland-edinburgh-east-fife-42165899

The BBC are reporting that itâ€™s overnight lane closures


----------



## patricks148 (Nov 30, 2017)

Doon frae Troon said:



			BBC Scotland in full fleck and spittle mode with screams of the new Forth crossing to be closed until September.

The reality is occasional overnight lane closures that might cause a two minute delay to journeys.
		
Click to expand...

the bbc scotland news i saw this morning said closed till next Thursday, then later that southbound traffic diverted over the old bridge


----------



## Doon frae Troon (Nov 30, 2017)

Liverpoolphil said:



https://www.google.co.uk/amp/s/www.bbc.co.uk/news/amp/uk-scotland-edinburgh-east-fife-42165899

The BBC are reporting that itâ€™s overnight lane closures
		
Click to expand...

Yesterdays first BBC news post, when the story broke, was as I stated.
They have obviously toned it down so as not to look like even bigger numpties


----------



## backwoodsman (Nov 30, 2017)

Oh, l do like a good thread ...

Person 1 says that example A, using words, x,y & z proves BBC bias. Person 2 then says that very same example, using the very same words, in fact proves the opposite.

So.... don't we need some informed person to explain what example A, and words x, y & z actually mean?

Then person 3 says that explanation is biased and person 4 says its not.

So ... get some better informed person to put the explanation or opinion in context and ... round we go again.

Everyone now happy? Nah, never will be. Perception of bias has always depended on where one is looking from - and alway will.

Right, that's me done - off to the playground to tell someone that their dad smells ...


----------



## SocketRocket (Nov 30, 2017)

BBC in good form today.  Because we had 230,000 net migration over the last year they describe it as a Brexidus, they were indicating we were seeing a mass exit of EU migrants reflected in the figures.   And there was I thinking that a net increase of 230K meant we had 230,000 more than people leaving.


----------



## Doon frae Troon (Nov 30, 2017)

SocketRocket said:



			BBC in good form today.  Because we had 230,000 net migration over the last year they describe it as a Brexidus, they were indicating we were seeing a mass exit of EU migrants reflected in the figures.   And there was I thinking that a net increase of 230K meant we had 230,000 more than people leaving.
		
Click to expand...

Yes, a very strange way of reporting figures.

Simple answers here    https://www.ons.gov.uk/peoplepopula...rt/november2017#net-migration-falls-to-230000


----------



## backwoodsman (Dec 1, 2017)

SocketRocket said:



			BBC in good form today.  Because we had 230,000 net migration over the last year they describe it as a Brexidus, they were indicating we were seeing a mass exit of EU migrants reflected in the figures.   And there was I thinking that a net increase of 230K meant we had 230,000 more than people leaving.
		
Click to expand...

There you go, you see. Interpretation. There was me listening to a fairly bland piece with them saying that net migration in the year  had fallen to 230k (down by a third IIRC) and that probable cause of the slowed increase was was the value (ie relative weakness) of the Â£ against the Euro. 

Hey ho.


----------



## Doon frae Troon (Dec 1, 2017)

BBC, Andrew Neil, Apology.

Never thought I would see those three together.

https://www.thecanary.co/uk/2017/11...-fake-tory-statistics-general-election-video/


----------



## IanM (Dec 1, 2017)

BBC breakfast.... big article about shortages of heathcare, then panicking over a drop in net migration to ONLY a quarter of million people.... 

Must be lots of people without desks in their offices!


----------



## Lord Tyrion (Dec 1, 2017)

IanM said:



			BBC breakfast.... big article about shortages of heathcare, then panicking over a drop in net migration to ONLY a quarter of million people.... 

Must be lots of people without desks in their offices!
		
Click to expand...

I did have to double take that as well An extra 1/4 million is a new cities worth of people. Huge numbers.


----------



## Doon frae Troon (Dec 14, 2017)

https://mobile.twitter.com/RTUKnews/status/939465155129221121/video/1

Well he should know.


----------



## Doon frae Troon (Dec 14, 2017)

Tomorrows BBC Scottish news headlines will be either.

[a]Tax hike on the rich. [30%]
or
*Tax cut for the poor [70%]

My money is on [a]

Update.....and there is Jackie Burd right on cue with a preview of tonight's headlines.
They never disappoint*


----------



## ColchesterFC (Dec 14, 2017)

Doon frae Troon said:



			Tomorrows BBC Scottish news headlines will be either.

[a]Tax hike on the rich. [30%]
or
*Tax cut for the poor [70%]

My money is on [a]

Update.....and there is Jackie Burd right on cue with a preview of tonight's headlines.
They never disappoint*

Click to expand...

*

The BBC reports I'm seeing are headlined with "Scottish income tax changes unveiled".

In the details it says that anyone earning less than Â£33k per year won't pay more tax. Are you suggesting that someone earning Â£35k a year is "rich"? 

And you also seem to have your figures wrong. The Scottish finance minister has said that 55% will be paying less and 45% will be paying more not the 70/30 split you have suggested.*


----------



## Doon frae Troon (Dec 14, 2017)

ColchesterFC said:



			The BBC reports I'm seeing are headlined with "Scottish income tax changes unveiled".

In the details it says that anyone earning less than Â£33k per year won't pay more tax. Are you suggesting that someone earning Â£35k a year is "rich"? 

And you also seem to have your figures wrong. The Scottish finance minister has said that 55% will be paying less and 45% will be paying more not the 70/30 split you have suggested.
		
Click to expand...

There you go.
I think you are quoting the BBC Scotland figures

https://www.snp.org/the_scottish_budget_what_you_need_to_know


----------



## ColchesterFC (Dec 14, 2017)

Doon frae Troon said:



			There you go.
I think you are quoting the BBC Scotland figures

https://www.snp.org/the_scottish_budget_what_you_need_to_know

Click to expand...

I was quoting from the Scottish finance minister, Derek Mackay. Here you go.......


Mr Mackay said the move to a five-band income tax system will mean no one earning less than Â£33,000 in Scotland will pay more tax they do now. And he told the Scottish Parliament that those earning above that figure would only pay a "proportionate amount more" than they currently do.His figures showed that 55% of Scottish taxpayers will pay less compared to south of the border under the new system - with 45% of people paying more.

Someone in Scotland earning Â£150,000 will pay Â£1,774 more than if they lived elsewhere in the UK, with someone earning Â£40,000 paying Â£140 more.

http://www.bbc.com/news/uk-scotland-42356953

So one of those sets of percentages is incorrect.


----------



## Doon frae Troon (Dec 14, 2017)

ColchesterFC said:



			I was quoting from the Scottish finance minister, Derek Mackay. Here you go.......


Mr Mackay said the move to a five-band income tax system will mean no one earning less than Â£33,000 in Scotland will pay more tax they do now. And he told the Scottish Parliament that those earning above that figure would only pay a "proportionate amount more" than they currently do.His figures showed that 55% of Scottish taxpayers will pay less compared to south of the border under the new system - with 45% of people paying more.

Someone in Scotland earning Â£150,000 will pay Â£1,774 more than if they lived elsewhere in the UK, with someone earning Â£40,000 paying Â£140 more.

http://www.bbc.com/news/uk-scotland-42356953

So one of those sets of percentages is incorrect.
		
Click to expand...

I would trust the SNP before BBC Scotland any day. 
I listened to the full budget speech and I am pretty sure MacKay never said those words [or the 70/30% words either.]
He would have used the words 'my figures' not 'his figures'.

BTW Â£35k is more than three times the starting figure for paying tax so I guess it is fairly rich.
Maybe not in the London suburbs though, probably a few months rent on a two bedroom flat down there.


----------



## ColchesterFC (Dec 14, 2017)

Doon frae Troon said:



*I would trust the SNP before BBC Scotland any day. *
I listened to the full budget speech and I am pretty sure MacKay never said those words [or the 70/30% words either.]

BTW Â£35k is more than three times the starting figure for paying tax so I guess it is fairly rich.
Maybe not in the London suburbs though, probably a few months rent on a two bedroom flat down there.

In your quote notice the word 'his', would he not have said 'my'.
		
Click to expand...

I would trust neither of them. Been trying to find an independent source to look at the figures myself but so far can only find details of average salaries which isn't helpful. The search for verification continues.


----------



## Doon frae Troon (Dec 15, 2017)

ColchesterFC said:



			I would trust neither of them. Been trying to find an independent source to look at the figures myself but so far can only find details of average salaries which isn't helpful. The search for verification continues.
		
Click to expand...

It is probably not as simple a it looks.
It seems that those on Â£50k pa will pay less tax whilst those on Â£40k and Â£60k will pay slightly more. [Compared to last years taxes]


BTW.......BBC Scotland went with a neutral view on it's headline [someone must have had a word]


----------



## HughJars (Dec 15, 2017)

SocketRocket said:



			I  am finding it difficult to watch the BBC News anymore.  The BBC put a  negative spin on anything this country does these days and especially  Government policy.    OK, the Government may not be perfect but the BBC  never question anything people say that agrees with their own Liberal   elite views.   It seems to me they cannot take a neutral view on  anything political and are attempting to brainwash us into a certain  political way of thinking.   
 BBC, please just give us the facts and let  us make our own minds up.
		
Click to expand...

Deary Me.

Kuensberg
Robinson
Neill
The entirety of BBC Scotland

It's like Tory central.


----------



## Doon frae Troon (Dec 20, 2017)

https://www.scotsman.com/news/bbc-c...gland-games-as-scottish-productions-1-4639281

Often wondered why we had Sodding Chipbury United playing Run Forrest Rovers on prime time BBC Scotland.
Now we know.


----------



## Hacker Khan (Feb 17, 2018)

SocketRocket said:



			I  am finding it difficult to watch the BBC News anymore.  The BBC put a  negative spin on anything this country does these days and especially  Government policy.    OK, the Government may not be perfect but the BBC  never question anything people say that agrees with their own Liberal   elite views.   It seems to me they cannot take a neutral view on  anything political and are attempting to brainwash us into a certain  political way of thinking.   
 BBC, please just give us the facts and let  us make our own minds up.
		
Click to expand...

Strange that someoe who has an opposite political opinion can have completely the opposite view as yours. Andrew Adonis is currently having a twitter rant against the BBC, some highlights below. 

_BBC on ropes. Sport largely gone to Sky. Quality drama gone to Netflix. BBC news increasingly Brexit, weak & simply Govt press releases. If Netflix set up a sharp, balanced News service, what would be left besides local radio, a desert island & a few good foreign correspondents?

Farageâ€™s 32nd appearance on BBC Question Time next Thursday is final straw in the BBCâ€™s degeneration into a Brexit propaganda station. Time for weak @Ofcom to do its job & uphold impartiality.

Interesting on the saga of Mr Farage & the German passport. Could someone ask him on his 32nd BBC Question Time on 1 March. Maybe Mr Dimbleby could ask his favourite guest? @bbcquestiontime

Just written to Lord Hall, DG of BBC, asking if he thinks Mr Farageâ€™s 32nd appearance on BBC Question Time, as ex leader of party on 2% in the polls, is consistent with his duty to uphold impartiality. Iâ€™m also seeking retraction of BBC claim this week that the EU is a â€˜corpseâ€™

I havenâ€™t been invited on @bbcquestiontime for 8 years. They donâ€™t have space with the reserved slots for Farage & other Brexiters.

BBC largely created Farage. They continue to promote him because it makes â€˜good tellyâ€™ & they donâ€™t want him criticising BBC on LBC! Pushing politics to the Hard Right out of fear & cynicism. @bbcquestiontime

Anyone tell me how often Farage has been on BBC Question Time in last 2 years & whether anyone has appeared more often? Time for @ofcom to look at Brexit bias of BBC, esp BBCâ€™s constant promotion of Farage, whose party now has 2% support! @bbcquestiontime

BBC BIAS: yesterday the BBC ran big story on website with headline describing the EU as a â€˜corpseâ€™. I and others complained. The BBCâ€™s economics editor told us to chill because his point of reference was Douglas Carswell quote from 2012. We asked for it to be changed. It wasnâ€™t._


----------



## SocketRocket (Feb 17, 2018)

HughJars said:



			Deary Me.

Kuensberg
Robinson
Neill
The entirety of BBC Scotland

It's like Tory central.
		
Click to expand...


Your Joking


----------



## SocketRocket (Feb 17, 2018)

Hacker Khan said:



			Strange that someoe who has an opposite political opinion can have completely the opposite view as yours. Andrew Adonis is currently having a twitter rant against the BBC, some highlights below. 

_BBC on ropes. Sport largely gone to Sky. Quality drama gone to Netflix. BBC news increasingly Brexit, weak & simply Govt press releases. If Netflix set up a sharp, balanced News service, what would be left besides local radio, a desert island & a few good foreign correspondents?

Farageâ€™s 32nd appearance on BBC Question Time next Thursday is final straw in the BBCâ€™s degeneration into a Brexit propaganda station. Time for weak @Ofcom to do its job & uphold impartiality.

Interesting on the saga of Mr Farage & the German passport. Could someone ask him on his 32nd BBC Question Time on 1 March. Maybe Mr Dimbleby could ask his favourite guest? @bbcquestiontime

Just written to Lord Hall, DG of BBC, asking if he thinks Mr Farageâ€™s 32nd appearance on BBC Question Time, as ex leader of party on 2% in the polls, is consistent with his duty to uphold impartiality. Iâ€™m also seeking retraction of BBC claim this week that the EU is a â€˜corpseâ€™

I havenâ€™t been invited on @bbcquestiontime for 8 years. They donâ€™t have space with the reserved slots for Farage & other Brexiters.

BBC largely created Farage. They continue to promote him because it makes â€˜good tellyâ€™ & they donâ€™t want him criticising BBC on LBC! Pushing politics to the Hard Right out of fear & cynicism. @bbcquestiontime

Anyone tell me how often Farage has been on BBC Question Time in last 2 years & whether anyone has appeared more often? Time for @ofcom to look at Brexit bias of BBC, esp BBCâ€™s constant promotion of Farage, whose party now has 2% support! @bbcquestiontime

BBC BIAS: yesterday the BBC ran big story on website with headline describing the EU as a â€˜corpseâ€™. I and others complained. The BBCâ€™s economics editor told us to chill because his point of reference was Douglas Carswell quote from 2012. We asked for it to be changed. It wasnâ€™t._

Click to expand...

Please can you show some supporting evidence that Nigel Farage has made this number of appearances.   I can only find a two year link showing Caroline Flint as the most visited person with Farage similar to people like Dianne Abbot on eleven.


----------



## bluewolf (Feb 17, 2018)

SocketRocket said:



			Please can you show some supporting evidence that Nigel Farage has made this number of appearances.   I can only find a two year link showing Caroline Flint as the most visited person with Farage similar to people like Dianne Abbot on eleven.
		
Click to expand...

https://www.google.co.uk/amp/s/poli...f-question-time-appearances-this-century/amp/

Here you go. Not sure of its fact credentials though.


----------



## SocketRocket (Feb 17, 2018)

bluewolf said:



https://www.google.co.uk/amp/s/poli...f-question-time-appearances-this-century/amp/

Here you go. Not sure of its fact credentials though.
		
Click to expand...

Depends where you look.  I have read that Farage has only been on QT once since the referendum and from recollection that sounds about right to me.

This link is probably as reliable as yours: https://order-order.com/2017/09/28/bbc-question-time-panels-dominated-by-remainers/


----------



## bluewolf (Feb 17, 2018)

SocketRocket said:



			Depends where you look.  I have read that Farage has only been on QT once since the referendum and from recollection that sounds about right to me.

This link is probably as reliable as yours: https://order-order.com/2017/09/28/bbc-question-time-panels-dominated-by-remainers/

Click to expand...

To be fair. I lasted less than 2 whole sentences before I realised exactly where that was from. If I had to bet a mortgage payment in the acccuracy of either article, I know where my money would be....


----------



## shagster (Feb 17, 2018)

the ukip idiot has been on QT 31 times upto the end of 2016
the 11th most and a yearly average of 1.9, the highest average of any of the top 15 panellists
a very disproportionate number for a non entity


----------



## Hacker Khan (Feb 18, 2018)

SocketRocket said:



			Depends where you look.  I have read that Farage has only been on QT once since the referendum and from recollection that sounds about right to me.

This link is probably as reliable as yours: https://order-order.com/2017/09/28/bbc-question-time-panels-dominated-by-remainers/

Click to expand...

The point was more showing out how different political persuasions can both come to completely different conclusions of the BBC based on exactly the same broadcasts.  I suppose how you/Guido Fawkes and Adnois seemed to have interpreted the stats may give a clue why. Makes me feel the BBC have got it about right if they manage to make both sides feel they are biased against them.


----------



## SocketRocket (Feb 18, 2018)

shagster said:



			the ukip idiot has been on QT 31 times upto the end of 2016
the 11th most and a yearly average of 1.9, the highest average of any of the top 15 panellists
a very disproportionate number for a non entity
		
Click to expand...

I just dont get the point. He was obviously on the panel many times prior to the EU referendum as he was the main protagonist of Brexit, he has been on there once since.  He really is not an idiot though and it does you no credit to suggest he is.


----------



## shagster (Feb 19, 2018)

i use the term idiot as in
coceded referendum then within minutes changes mind
calls for second referendum then changes mind
i could go on
but as mentioned, disproportionate number of times for a non entity of a party


----------



## Hobbit (Feb 19, 2018)

shagster said:



			the ukip idiot has been on QT 31 times upto the end of 2016
the 11th most and a yearly average of 1.9, the highest average of any of the top 15 panellists
a very disproportionate number for a non entity
		
Click to expand...

I genuinely detest the man but he was the leader of a political party for the vast, vast majority of the times he was on. I'm sure the Beeb would love to have May & Corbyn on 30 times in the next few years.

And bear in mind, that the panel for each show will have included Remainers too, otherwise Farage would have had no one to argue with.


----------



## Old Skier (Feb 19, 2018)

Biggest problem with the BBC News is at times they want to make the news and not just report it.  The current hew har over student fees was a good example, interviewing students in the student bar with pints in front of them claiming that the fees are too much didn't really help their argument but it certainly started the conversation in the club house.


----------



## SwingsitlikeHogan (Feb 19, 2018)

Old Skier said:



			Biggest problem with the BBC News is at times *they want to make the news* and not just report it.  The current hew har over student fees was a good example, interviewing students in the student bar with pints in front of them claiming that the fees are too much didn't really help their argument but it certainly started the conversation in the club house.
		
Click to expand...

I believe that this is quite rare.  The investigative journalism aspect of the BBC may be 'looking to make news' - investigative journalism by it's very nature does that, but perhaps you conflate BBC investigative journalism with BBC News reporting of the same.


----------



## IanM (Feb 19, 2018)

Students need jobs to fund their studies???    SO???   That's been the reality for normal folk for years.  

I guess the BBC Luvvies might be a bit shocked about this.....  it is a bit dangerous educating the sons of factory workers (like me) - they work hard, do well and end up not voting Labour


----------

