Please use this thread for comments about the BBC’s current programming and activities. This post will remain at or near the top of the blog – scroll down for new topic-specific posts. N.B. this is not an invitation for general off-topic comments, rants or chit-chat. Thoughtful comments are encouraged. Comments may be moderated.
Another subject where the balance of opinion within the BBC is not hard to discern, is smacking. The following story
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/7061603.stm
in which the relevant Minister rules out a smacking ban, contains links to two organisations, the NSPCC, and the Children are Unbeatable alliance both of which support a ban. The link to the NSPCC is fair enough • they are at least mentioned in the story. But Children are Unbeatable are not. The Conservatives are mentioned in the story, on the other side of the question, but are not linked. (Throughout the weekend • one of the front page Politics stories from Thursday to Sunday night – the BBC website featured, far more prominently than the story of the Minister’s decision itself, a story about somebody called the Children’s Commissioner vehemently condemning this decision.) Moreover, the featured comment from DHYS is this one :
A child should be able to look to its parents for love and protection • Stephanie
Stephanie’s views are in a distinct minority on the DHYS forum, however. There are pages and pages of pro smacking comments at the top of the most recommended list.
And amongst the see also links to other BBC stories is this one from 2004 :
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/3727295.stm
Majority ‘support’ smacking ban
reporting a poll result (achieved by an obviously slanted question) by our old friends the Children are Unbeatable Alliance.
This time the featured comment is this one :
Children should be protected from assault just as adults are – Adam, Brighton
selected from those comments which ” reflect the balance of opinion we have received so far.” However these comments are 19-5 pro smacking, presumably indicating a roughly 4-1 balance of commentator opinion in favour of smacking – roughly, in fact, what real polls on the subject (with non slanted questions) show. But it’s one of the anti ones that makes it to the featured slot on the news page.
Is this terribly important ? No. It’s just another example of relentless BBC propagandising on behalf of a progressive cause.