The gradual destruction and right-wing bias of the BBC

First topic message reminder :

The BBC is to be made to suffer due to the failures of private funded commercial television, in a series of government policies aimed at smashing the BBC and forcing the quality down, the latest announcements have gone almost unoticed.

A new kind of TV station is coming soon to the UK, "City TV" will be a a very localized kind of TV station which will have coverage areas similar to local radio stations, often covering just one city like Manchester, Liverpool or Glasgow, though some will cover two or three neighbouring towns, like Newcastle + Sunderland or Leeds + Bradford for example.

Part of the start up costs and initial funding of these new commercial TV stations will come from the BBC, which actualy makes me extremely angry because many of us who live in more rural areas will never recieve one of these new stations, yet we will be paying towards them - WHY ?

Why is public money been used to help a private commercial concern to become viable ?

THE PREASSURE WHICH THE BBC SUDENLY FINDS ITSELF IN

The licence fee has been frozen for six years - resulting in a massive real terms cut

The BBC is been forced to take over all the funding of the World Service

The BBC is been made to fund the whole of "Monitoring Services" which was partly funded by the government

The BBC must contribute to the running costs of Channel S4C, the Welsh language channel

The BBC must contribute to the setting up of and initial running costs of the new City TV stations

Everyone keeps saying how much money this will save, not least the chancellor George Osborne, but no one seems to mention how quality and output will deterioate and worsen, the fact that we are going to sacrifice the quality of the BBC in the name of savings has never been mentioned.

Allready it has been announced only this week that many BBC local stations will merge output, effectively losing the local element to local radio, so whats the point of local radio if its NOT local. ?

Naturaly this will give the commercial stations an advantage, that is if you dont mind listening to a choir singing about a local drain cleaning company, or some DJ telling you that now is the time to buy your Christmas gifts - on the 1st November.

Soon the BBC will stop making programmes for daytime viewers, as a result of the financial preassure forced on the BBC by this government, day time viewing will in future consist mostly of repeats.

I suspect that the government is attempting to drive the BBC down to levels associated with SKY, a tv network which makes no tv programmes and where public service means nothing, or possibly they wish to make the BBC like ITV - a network so strapped for cash that they no longer make childrens programmes and can barely afford to carry on providing local news.

Yes, I think the BBC and the current government do think we're all stupid - let's hope we're not

Reminds me of how easy it apparently was for Mr Murdoch to insert his personal representative A Coulson into Number 10 as Press Commissar.

Ivan wrote:I hope that one day we'll find out why the BBC requirement for impartiality went out of the window as soon as this vile government came to power. Why the blackout on the passage of the NHS Act of 2012? Why no mention of protests outside Tory conferences? Why is it spun as a failure when Labour gains 291 councillors one year and over 330 the next? Is there a plan to discredit the BBC to soften it up for privatisation? Or have the Tories already handed it over to Murdoch on the quiet?

Ivan the reason the BBC is not reporting so many things is because they are getting told by Tory HQs what they can say and what they can report, on the threat of cutting there budget or selling off the BBC to the Tories mate Murdoch.       If they had already handed the BBC over too Murdoch there is a few within the BBC that would have leaked it, but what you have said about the BBC is the reason that I now watch the RT chanell that way I do get to hear news plus what is going on in Westminster.

I think that's true - previous governments, whatever their other failings, have had a measure of respect for the neutrality of the BBC - this lot has no respect for anything but their bank balances

Any "difficulties" which the BBC may be encountering in its relationship with the present government have less to do with POLITICS than with the commercial interests of competing broadcasters - who support the Tories for not entirely altruistic  reasons. As Redflag comments above.

The problem for the BBC will be when the Tories decide to sell it off to there mate Murdoch, who has been after it since 2010 if you all cast your mind back I think the Minister in charge was no other than the (C)hunt.

Then the people in the BBC who have repeated many many LIES of the Tory party since 2010 knowing they were repeating Tory LIES will apply to the general public for support to stop the sell off sorry but I will not but will look forward to saving £145.50 per year or have the option not to take up Murdochs offer of a contract TV.

BBC blows £750m on Conservative manifesto pledge

By James Wright:-

The BBC Trust has been blasted for shouldering the £750m costs of a Conservative manifesto pledge to maintain funding for over-75s’ licence fees. The chairwoman of the BBC Trust, Rona Fairhead, has been accused of letting herself be “steamrolled” by Osborne, but it is much more likely that she did it as a favour. Fairhead has entrenched ties to the Tory government. In fact, she and Osborne are old friends. Fairhead worked for the Tories as a cabinet office member, until being appointed by the previous Tory culture secretary – Sajid Javid – as the new head of the BBC Trust. She is still business ambassador for Cameron.

Fairhead has also sat on the board of HSBC directors for a long time. What is even more shocking are claims that she was actually appointed chairwoman of the BBC Trust to keep a lid on Cameron’s involvement in covering up a £1bn fraudulent HSBC scam on British shoppers. Whistleblower Nicholas Wilson made various freedom of information requests which confirmed that Fairhead’s appointment did not follow proper procedure. She was rushed to the position after the application date closed, with no mention of her on any contemporary media shortlist.

The Tory licence fee policy is clearly political, as over-75s are among the citizens who most support the party. In short, the Tories have rinsed normal licence fee payers to the tune of £750m in order to implement a policy for their own political gain. This was met only by feigned resistance from their chess piece at the head of the BBC Trust, Rona Fairhead, and will lead to a public service which is squeezed even further.

http://www.thecanary.co/2016/01/21/mp-blasts-bbc-blowing-750m-conservative-manifesto-pledge/

The Guardian, 31 August 2014

http://www.theguardian.com/media/2014/aug/31/rona-fairhead-bbc-trust-chair

Why is the BBC biased?

"Nobody ever talks about Cameron's policies using the language of extremism. You might think that what has been done to the NHS, what has been done to council housing, what has been done in terms of waging war, is extreme action. But the language of extremism is used against the left, not against the right or Conservatives." (Dr Des Freedman)

Worth a listen:-
https://audioboom.com/boos/4069941-why-is-the-bbc-biased

Government will choose most members of BBC board, says Whittingdale

From an article by Mark Tran:-

The culture secretary has been accused of attempting to “bend the BBC to his political will” after it emerged he plans to have the government directly appoint most members of a new body to run the corporation. John Whittingdale said only two or three members of a 13-strong unitary board, which would replace the BBC Trust model, would be BBC executives while the rest would be government appointees. The only BBC executives on the new body will be the director general, the head of finance and possibly one other.

Labour’s shadow secretary of state for culture, Maria Eagle, said: “With the independence of the BBC clearly at real risk from this government’s mendacity, independent appointment processes must underpin the formation of a new unitary board, including its chair. It is unacceptable that ministers are ignoring what the public want from the BBC, and that they are so desperate to bend it to their political will.”

http://www.theguardian.com/media/2016/mar/13/government-choose-bbc-board-john-whittingdale

By a remarkable coincidence, Mr. Whittingdale's principal personal assistant was formerly in the employ of Sky.

How strange that we didn’t hear about this during last year’s election campaign. I suspect that if Ed Miliband had said it, we’d have heard about it 24 hours a day……  

Nick Robinson: “Cameron threatened on election bus to close down BBC”

From an article by Jane Martinson and Jasper Jackson:-

Cameron threatened to close down the BBC in comments made to journalists on a campaign bus during the election, according to the corporation’s political editor at the time, Nick Robinson. He said it was hard to know whether the comments, which colleagues who were on the bus relayed to him, were a joke or a veiled threat. But the journalist, who faced sustained criticism from Alex Salmond during the Scottish referendum campaign, said they had had a real impact on the organisation and added to the pressure felt by BBC staff.

Senior Tories piled pressure on the BBC during the election campaign by commenting on its coverage and on the broadcaster’s future as it approaches negotiations over its next charter.

In an interview with ‘The Guardian’, Robinson said he had “thought quite a lot” about Cameron’s comments since first writing about them in his book about May’s election. He said they had been interpreted by BBC staff as a veiled threat and “another bit of pressure”.

For the whole article:-
http://www.theguardian.com/media/2015/jun/21/nick-robinson-cameron-threatened-close-down-bbc-election-bus

The spectacle of this Tory government hacking away at established public services has not been discreet, they continue the process of dismantling any organisation with the potential to become a focus for organised opposition. The Trade Unions were emasculated by the simple expedient of shutting down labour-intensive heavy industries, local authorities are starved of money, and the NHS steadily being whittled down towards a safety-net minimum.

It's not inconceivable that there may be a small bet running between Jeremy Hunt and John Whittingdale to see whether the BBC can be neutered before the NHS is scattered to the winds.

http://www.msn.com/en-gb/news/uknews/influential-think-tank-to-call-for-wholesale-privatisation-of-bbc-to-combat-its-left-wing-bias/ar-BBslVcT?li=BBoPRmx

Why has there been no reporting on the BBC (but plenty on Channel 4 News) of the alleged Tory overspending on three by-elections in 2014 and the general election last year? Let's try and guess....  

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/ChkOWgAWsAAhJZE.jpg


https://pbs.twimg.com/media/ChkPVGBXIAETjnF.jpg

So far, at least, they're not backing this guy ....

"In the week in which our secretary of state, John Whittingdale, described the disappearance of the BBC as a 'tempting prospect', I’d like to say a few words in defence of that organisation.

Most people would agree that the BBC’s main job is to speak truth to power – to report to the British public without fear or favour, no matter how unpalatable that might be to those in government. It’s a public broadcaster – independent of government – not a state broadcaster, where the people who make the editorial decisions are appointed by the government – like they do in those bastions of democracy: Russia or North Korea.

All of this is under threat, right now. The secretary of state has talked about putting six government nominees – a working majority – onto the editorial board of the BBC. The editorial board – the body charged with safeguarding the editorial independence of the BBC from, amongst other things, government interference – will be appointed by the government.

As a sign of things to come, the secretary of state has lately been telling the BBC when to schedule its main news bulletin, what programmes it should make and what programmes it shouldn’t make. Do you want this? This is really scary stuff – not something I thought I’d see in my lifetime in this country."

Peter Kosminsky

It really is as though we've been invaded, isn't it?

When does the book-burning project commence...?

Going from watching Netflix to normal TV can be a difficult experience; not only do you have to wait for a show to start at its designated time but there are adverts and lots of them.

Despite the rumours, Netflix has remained adamant about adverts never featuring on the service, something of a relief to subscribers.


http://www.independent.co.uk/arts-entertainment/tv/news/netflix-adverts-cuts-6-days-fom-your-life-a-year-a7023621.html

The waiting is (nearly) over ....

http://www.msn.com/en-gb/news/uknews/bbc-to-be-required-to-produce-distinctive-content-rather-than-chase-ratings/ar-BBsXELm?li=BBoPRmx

The politicians' box of tricks rarely produces surprises. Carefully leaked-in-advance Sturm und Drang rumours of terrible consequences precede the actual contents of whatever White Paper emerges in fact, so that a feeling of relief is engendered.

In the rest of the World, most national broadcasters are a Department of Government, so unless we convey to our own MPs our distrust of that arrangement, it will become the rule here too. Our loss.

The joke is that when Thatcher privatised the state-owned Post Office Telephones, the new British Telecom lost its monopoly on providing telecommunications apparatus and was forbidden from competing in fields such as Television, though thirty years on it is a major player.

Maybe all we need to do is wait, for things to come full circle.

After the announcement of Whittingdale’s plans to undermine the BBC, some tweeters have offered suggestions as to what programmes we might expect on #aconservativebbc:-

Desert Island Trusts

Byker Gove

The Great British Sell Off (NHS Edition)

The Darling Buds Of Theresa May

Don't Call The Midwife (you can't afford one)

The One Party Show

Friday night feature film: Jeremy Corbyn, Enemy Of The State

Dodge The Question Time

To The Manor Osborne

Jackatory

Second Homes Under the Hammer

Our Enemies In The North

Candid Cameron

Snide And Prejudiced

Electoral Crimewatch UK

Ashes To Ashcroft

Both Feet in the Grave

Junior Doctor Who

Children Very Much In Need

One Man And His Hog

Absolutely Fatuous

I'm Sorry We Haven't A Clue

Country Pile

Mock The Weak

Memo to the BBC: balance is not fairness when one side is lying

From an article by Peter Preston:-

"100 professional fact-checkers from 41 countries gathered in Buenos Aires last week for a great International Fact-Checking Network convention. Why were they sunning themselves in Brazil when we needed them here, urgently, to guide us through a swamp of spin and sleazy mendacity? So what are the facts and where are the checkers? They exist all right: in some newspapers, from Full Fact on the web (scoring hits on 'The Mail' and 'The Telegraph' last week), from Channel 4 News on TV and screen. But do they have the impact they need to keep the politicians in check?

Sarah Wollaston MP was a Leaver till the rubbish about that £350m turned her stomach. She’d long protested to Leave campaigners that the figure was a dud, but they’d told her that was fine by them: peddling calculated garbage got you an extra BBC slot for rebuttal under fairness and balance rules. The calculated ploy worked yet again. There was Wollaston, leaving in disgust on the 7am news. And there was Redwood, under F and B guidelines, instantly on tap to explain why the lie was really a sort of truth. Repetition is the name of the game: tell a porky and the next sausage comes free.

Rebuttal isn’t fact-checking. Rebuttal is also another opportunity to refurbish a deliberate untruth: which is why, so far, BBC sifting of facts from fibs has been rather spotty and feeble. So let the TV checking be upfront, on screen and definitive. Let one resounding correction end the debate. Stop slime in its tracks. Take moral control and make truth sovereign again."

http://www.theguardian.com/media/2016/jun/12/bbc-fairness-not-balance-one-side-lying-brexit

Indirectly of course, BBC editorial policy has long been governed by the need to be "impartial" on the side of government. Who pays the Piper calls the tune, and the sanctity of the TV Licence fee is very much subject to the desires of government - not the people who pay it.

(bbc)

" Here is the news as approved by Conservative Central Office. Those viewers preferring the truth may wish to try the 'red button'..."

Comments by John Van Reenen, outgoing director of the Centre of Economic Performance and a professor of economics at the LSE:-

The BBC was particularly awful throughout the referendum debate. It supinely reported the breathtaking lies of the Leave campaign, in particular over the ‘£350 million a week EU budget contribution’. Rather than confront Leave campaigners and call the claim untruthful, BBC broadcasters would say things like: "Now this is a contested figure, but let’s move on". This created the impression that there was just some disagreement between the sides, whereas it was clearly a lie. It’s like saying: "One side says that world is flat, but this is contested by Remain who say it is round; we’ll let you decide". The public broadcaster failed a basic duty of care to the British people. There was a need to tell people the truth for probably the most important vote any of us will have in our lifetimes. And the BBC failed.

The BBC also failed to reflect the consensus view of the economics profession on the harm of Brexit. A huge survey of British economists showed that for every one respondent who thought there would be economic benefits from Brexit over the next five years, there were 22 who thought we would be worse off. Yet time and again, there would always be some maverick Leave economist given equal airtime to anyone articulating the standard arguments.

http://blogs.lse.ac.uk/politicsandpolicy/the-aftermath-of-the-brexit-vote-a-verdict-from-those-of-those-experts-were-not-supposed-to-listen-to/

"... and the times, they are a'changing"
(Popular song, Robert Zimmerman/Bob Dylan)

Today, on BBC 1 TV evening news, Laura Kuenssberg (Laurak@BBC.com), who had been booed at Labour meetings, finally headed a report on the current Tory Party which was distinctly critical.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/correspondents/laurakuenssberg

Normal service will be resumed as soon as possible.

I'm holding my breath - maybe there's been a little shift in the wind

I see that some of the Brexit apologists are choosing to suggest that the Chancellor and the OBR simply have the figures wrong.

In the face of uncomfortable facts, they are simply shutting their ears and eyes and shouting ' it can't be right'. If that is all they have left as a justification for their enthusiasm , things may get interesting as the scrutiny gets more and more searching...

Some headlines from the financial pages:

Avoid being ripped off on Black Friday
Chinese firm buys Skyscanner for £1.4b
‘London homes 14 times of earnings’
Brits face 'dreadful' decade
China jumps on Trump threat
Fury at 'gloomy' Brexit predictions
How Autumn Statement affects you
Iceland sues Iceland supermarket
Ex-Sainsbury's boss's Brexit prediction
Car production down in 14 months
EU leaders 'not bluffing' over Brexit terms, warns Malta's PM

But Christmas is on the way, and in this Country at least we don't have to eat turkey twice within 56 days of each other.

Some people are scratching their heads to understand why UKIP gets so much coverage on the BBC. They ask why Nigel Farage has been on 'Question Time' 32 times (far more than any other individual) and will be on again next Thursday, despite the fact that he has failed on seven occasions to get elected to the Westminster Parliament. Maybe this provides a clue:-


https://pbs.twimg.com/media/CysxXSCWEAA6mdN.jpg

I expect that the BBC feels that with the demise of Morecambe & Wise there is a need to maintain a high quality comedy output ...

Courtesy of Colman O Dubhghaill ‏(Twitter ID: @gilliverroad):-


https://pbs.twimg.com/media/C0O0cBYXcAA9Y1x.jpg

Tricky one, that. How much censorship is correct, in the context of free speech? Is it better to know from where such vile thoughts emanate, or keep it all underground where it will quietly fester until there is a damaging explosion?

Much the same argument applies to the current attitude being struck by Nigel Farage - UK Gauleiter in waiting.

Perhaps I’m just a simple soul, but I don’t have a problem with this. Freedom isn’t licence, it carries with it responsibility. We don’t have the freedom to say anything we like; for a start, we have laws about slander and libel. Since 1998 we have also had the Crime and Disorder Act, which covers hate crimes and incitement. If that law can be applied to Islamic fundamentalists who want to wipe us off the face of the planet, it can also be used to prosecute hate preachers such as Katie Hopkins and now Rod Liddle - I won’t soil this forum with the filth which he posted in ‘The Sun’ today.

I don’t think it’s the place of the state broadcaster to give the oxygen of publicity to such people. The BBC has already created the ogre known as Nigel Farage, treating him as a mainstream politician, giving him an absurd amount of airtime, and thus normalising his odious views.

Now George Osborne's pal James Harding has appointed right-wing journalist Sarah Sands editor of 'Radio 4 Today'.


https://pbs.twimg.com/media/C3aoGTcXUAAq70B.jpg

The right-wing tide is lapping relentlessly at our feet, and like King Canute, there seems to be nothing we can do about it.

A new drama scheduled for BBC 1 "in February" (postponed from last Summer) is entitled SS-GB, based on the 1978 novel of that name by Len Deighton, depicting a Britain under Nazi occupation in 1941.



Unless it's postponed again.