sda2.jpg

August 13, 2007

God Save The Beeb

Confessions of a BBC liberal;

It started with the BBC’s own report on impartiality that effectively admitted to an institutional “liberal” bias among programme makers. Previously these accusations had been dismissed as a right-wing rant, but since the report was published even the BBC’s allies seem to accept it.

[...]

Ever since 1963 the institutions have been the villains of the media liberals. The police, the armed services, the courts, political parties, multi-national corporations – when things go wrong they are the usual suspects.

But our hostility to institutions was not – and is not – shared by the majority of our fellow citizens: most of our opinions were at odds with the majority of the audience and the electorate. Indeed the BBC’s own 2007 report on impartiality found that 57% of poll respondents said that “broadcasters often fail to reflect the views of people like me”.

There are four new factors which in my lifetime have brought about the changes that have shaped media liberalism, encouraged its spread and significantly increased its influence and importance.


You'll see lots you recognize.

Posted by Kate at August 13, 2007 8:48 AM
TrackBacks

TrackBack URL for this entry:
http://www.smalldeadanimals.com/mt/mt-tb.cgi/5799

Comments

Brit "liberals" are really fabian socialists. So if the BBC is infected with them you get the expected droning rhetoric and innuendo accusing the usual capitalist subjects of all the ills that plague the cause of class struggle.

I watch the BBC from time to time for their world news but one does have to sift through a thick fog of Pommie spin to get anything from it.

Posted by: WL Manckenzie Redux at August 13, 2007 9:29 AM

Where's Ted "Lefty media bias is a myth" Cerberus?!!! Hey TED, funny how you seem to vanish whenever there's evidence contrary to your world view.

Posted by: The Phantom at August 13, 2007 10:35 AM

So, Anthony Jay only now has the balls to expose his media liberal tribe in the BBC. I agree with a US observer that he and his ilk clearly suffer from 'arrested development' rather than anything sinister for the rest of us. However, now that this tribe member has come clean we should not expect that any British government will have sufficient circulating testosterone to abolish the BBC licence fee and have its continuance rely on what funds it can garner without public misappropriation. The same may be said for the CBC here in Canada: same illness, same treatment. Namely, get them off the public teat too.

Posted by: Jay at August 13, 2007 12:44 PM

Almost 2pm and still no Ted. Come ON Ted, surely there's SOMETHING you could say.

Posted by: The Phantom at August 13, 2007 1:52 PM

teds being a typical liebreal,hiding in the woodpile with the rest when things go wrong lol.

Posted by: Ralph from the east at August 13, 2007 2:07 PM

I swore off the flame thrower, but that doesn't mean I can't keep a Ted-Watch. :)

Ted, baby, you're killing me here. Speak to me! [sob!]

Posted by: The Phantom at August 13, 2007 2:11 PM

Ted, you're all over the Karl Rove thread, and its like 5:15. Throw us a bone here!

Posted by: The Phantom at August 13, 2007 5:14 PM

This is strange. I followed the link and commented at the end. When I started typing there were 35 comments,mostly anti-bbc. I posted my comment and went back to see if it was posted,shazam,now there are only 12 comments. Shades of the globe and mail. Liberal bias or liberal censorship?

Posted by: wallyj at August 13, 2007 8:08 PM

The CBC is the little sister of the BEEB.
The CBC is the direct result of Lieberal/Socialist/Communist Policy implemented by the Lieberal Party Of Canada under the totalitarian rule of P.E.T.What the Lieberals and the CBC have done to Canada for the last 30 years is traitorous and criminal!
The Conservative Party of Canada MUST do a similar audit of the CBC and then take action immediately!
Right after they gain a majority in the next election, that is assuming they manage to get a majority......if they don't get a majority then it will be time to fight or head for the hills with as many guns & as much ammo as you can carry....
I cannot not live under the rule of Dijon and the muslims he made a deal with for his leadership.

Sorry if I sound just a little bitter....

Posted by: sumbuddy at August 13, 2007 8:12 PM

All the comments are back,weird.

Posted by: wallyj at August 13, 2007 8:43 PM

"The CBC is the little sister of the BEEB"
Nicely put sumbuddy". This is not a boast but I am probably the most veteran observer of the BBC.
It was George Orwell who worked for them in WW2. Now Orwell was as honest a human being as one could hope for. Sadly he had to concede that to defeat the fascists, one had to lend oneself to lies.
1984, his epic novel, was partly based on the machinery of a mass propaganda machine- yep, ye olde BBC.
I listened to 'em throughout WW2. Now I am aware of CBC. Consider the supercillious popinjays who are paid our tax dollars. Young men who "know it all". Lefties to the core.
I do not make this statement lightly. Steven Harper and his boys and girls had better watch their back. CBC is beyond corrupt. When the polls suggested the Conservatives might get the nod in the last election, the CBC suddenly started to act a little professional. This with two weeks to go.
This to me, indicated that they were covering their ample backsides. A drastic reduction in their funding might well be in order.

Posted by: Peter at August 13, 2007 10:13 PM

The overwhelming reason that the conservatives are not in majority territory is because they are up against thier political opponents and the unofficial opposition,CBC/CTV. Both networks continually emphasize anything positive for the libs while ignoring anything positive for the conservatives.On the other hand ,anything negative about the conservatives is emphasized while anything negative about the libs is buried or completely ignored. A good example of cbc bias is to compare the hours of coverage and stories on the liberal leadership race and convention to the same for the conservatives. I would guess it is about 20 to 1.

Posted by: wallyj at August 14, 2007 12:00 AM

What a fascinating read! I take heart, however, from the finding that 57% of respondents didn't feel that broadcasters reflect their (the respondents) opinions. If we could find a pollster to ask a straight question, I'd bet we'd find similar results in Canada.

Posted by: Candace at August 14, 2007 2:49 AM
Site
Meter