A few of the other blogs have also picked up on the Beeb’s treatment of Osborne:
Iain Dale points out that Osborne hasn’t actually broken any rules, and wonders why the BBC Business Editor is taking such an interest in what looks like a politics story.
Guido thinks he has the answer to that.
And Melanie Phillips at the Spectator really seems to have had enough.
Happy reading!
UPDATE: As a JBH in the comments points out, Stephen Glover also has a piece in the Mail today questioning the Beeb’s coverage, and The Sun also picks up on the complaints about bias.
Melanie is absolutely to the point: Nick Robinson has now publicly admitted that the BBC is reluctant to cover Labour scandals, but ever eager to run with allegations involving Tories, even if both stories have the same cast of characters.
There is a name for this lack of even-handedness.
It’s called BIAS.
Here are Robinson’s actual words. (Pity the sidebar is already so full…)
The Tory party have been encouraging Tory newspapers and others, including the BBC • and we have resisted it so far • to make a lot of Peter Mandelson’s stay on a Russian billionaire’s yacht
This is second lead on BBC 1PM news.
Mentions osbourne and mandelson -cue shot of Dave Cameron on a bike/Mandelson in his buisness attire.Quite balanced [initially] however, the new statement by Brown asking for an investigation and a second statement by Rothschild…oh and a load of crap spouted by the beast of bolsover at PMQ’s about “you wont see Mr Brown cadging money from russian billionaires” sort of sums up the the “mood music” at the BBC -in fact they summed this up at the end of the attack piece:-
“these are indeed vexing times for the conservatives”
Followed by a grinning beeboid “and next, Denver,a traditionally republican state is being won over by barack obama”
What utter bollocks.
Perhaps worth linking to Nick Robinson’s blog also.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/nickrobinson/2008/10/duelling_gentle.html#commentsanchor
I would estimate over 90% of comments take him to task for perpetuating this non-story.
Particularly interesting is Robinson’s comment that a donation from Deripraska’s British company wouldn’t have been illegal. So, as one commenter has said, the story is all about the possible soliciting of a legal donation.
BBC aren’t going to like the most recommended comments on this:
http://newsforums.bbc.co.uk/nol/thread.jspa?sortBy=2&forumID=5532&edition=1&ttl=20081022133055&#paginator
People obviously seeing through this.
you wont see Mr Brown cadging money from russian billionaires
Really, but we have just seen the evidence that Brown and Blair lied through their teeth over the Ecclestone donation which was actually given to successfully buy a change in Government policy. Almost no coverage of this on the BBC who think that a story about the possible soliciting of a legal donation is somehow more important.
Could someone explain to me why Oleg Deripaska is to be shunned and his invitations declined by all right thinking folk, while other billionaires (many of them Russian) are considered sources of inward investment and are fawned over?
Mandy is going to get it when they ask about the EU aluminium quotas being altered post his meeting with a Russian who sells you guessed —aluminium
5 live are going nuts on this one also. Looks like gollum of hoy is certainly mixing his potion of slime for the bbc. Thing is – people really are seeing through this complicit bias. Why no calls for a public inquiry of the bbc? Why are the other private tv channels not demanding screaming about this disgusting reporting ?
and this from..
Shadow Arts Minister Ed Vaizey, who said: a few days ago
“I want to put it on record that I am a firm supporter of the licence fee, as is the Conservative party.
http://conservativehome.blogs.com/parliament/2008/10/conservative-mp.html
my brain hurts..
ada wong.:
and this from..
Shadow Arts Minister Ed Vaizey, who said: a few days ago
“I want to put it on record that I am a firm supporter of the licence fee, as is the Conservative party.
How brazen does the BBC have to be before the Conservatives promise to do something about them and the telly tax after the next election?
Tory lurkers – are you still unconvinced about the necessity to do something about al-Beeb? If not, what will convince you?
The Police referred the papers on the Peter Hain case to the Crown Prosecution Service on 3rd July.
Even allowing for generous summer hols, the CPS must surely be ready to decide?
What’s the betting it’s all timed to coincide with Osborne’s difficulties?
The BBC have put the question of whether there should be an inquiry over George Osborne on HYS today. In the ‘recommended’ section a lot of the responders are attacking the BBC for doing so – amazed it is still there – read it while you can.
Why is the Pestilence allowed to report – never mind set the BBC agenda – on anything to do with Osborne at all? Osborne was behind the push to get the Serious Fraud Office to investigate him over his banking “scoops”.
It’s pretty pathetic that even the Telegraph now thinks he’s just a reporter doing his job. It’s all in the aid of Mr. Brown and Labour.
Does anyone want to bet money on Osborne being the first topic on Question Time tomorrow and not the, you know, recession?
On HYS the BBC really are getting chewed up about covering this so much, and the government is getting a good kicking too. Last time I checked they had stopped comments about an hour after PMQs.
I’m enjoying this About time the public see’s the Tories in a negative way! They are sly and smug – David Cameron and George Osbourne’s faces in parliament were priceless!!
Only a complete imbecile would fail to recognize that the Osbourne witch-hunt has Mandy’s mucky little paw prints all over it.
jack | 22.10.08 – 5:53 pm | #
Good for you mate, it’s always nice to have something to smile about, especially when you’re looking down the barrel of a deep recession.
Can we ban Jack yet?
jack | 22.10.08 – 5:53 pm |
I’m enjoying this About time the public see’s the Tories in a negative way!
you obviously dont watch the bbc much then.
David ‘1.37
The new HYS about Osbourne has now changesd its tune just have a look at this
http://newsforums.bbc.co.uk/nol/thread.jspa?forumID=5532&edition=1&ttl=20081022193507
How is this BBC bias?? Was it not all over most of the front pages this morning? Frankly, I’d be surprised if it wasn’t headlines on the BBC. Bias? Nope.
billybob: Yo’re another troll knob. Last week Mandelson was all over the papers as well about the same Russian. So where was the BBC then? Even that wanker Nick Ribosno admitted the BBC DIDN’T report the story because they didn’t want to hurt Mandelson. Bias? You bet.
Retty – the most recommended comments are still rather anti-BBC and most seem to be on Osborne’s side. But it seems as though a recent splurge of the opposite viewpoint has started to come in. Still plenty of decent ones, mind.
billybob | 22.10.08 – 7:45 pm |
are you just stupid or do you work for the bbc.
Earlier today, with some time to kill and a pile of newspapers to leaf through, I donned my anti-radiation suit and picked up the Mirror.
Apart from the fact that it is written to an even lower standard than the Sun what impressed me most was how similar the core of this rabidly pro-ZaNuLabour ranting rag was to the line on Osborne taken by the BBC.
It’s only when you see it in black and white that you realise how far the BBC has sunk.
“are you just stupid or do you work for the bbc.”
I’m not sure they have much room for us Conservatives Ada! 🙂
David:
Retty – the most recommended comments are still rather anti-BBC and most seem to be on Osborne’s side. But it seems as though a recent splurge of the opposite viewpoint has started to come in. Still plenty of decent ones, mind.
David | 22.10.08 – 7:53 pm | #
You make it sound as though people with the opposite view point are wrong and not worth listening too. Free country I can say what I like.
David:
Can we ban Jack yet?
David | 22.10.08 – 7:04 pm | #
I would be disgusted if I was banned, although it wouldn’t surprise me. If I was banned it would be because I expressed my free thoughts in a free country! What would that say about you?!
If anyone has the view that the BBC is not bias in all cases or that Labour is doing well in government they are called trolls, its actually called free speech.
“If I was banned it would be because I expressed my free thoughts in a free country! What would that say about you?!”
Not much. Your original claim has always been that the BBC is not biased. But your joy today has shown you to be a person delighted that the BBC is biased. As such, your comments are opposed to the goals of this site. It says plenty about you that you continue to hand around here, but not me.
“If anyone has the view that the BBC is not bias in all cases or that Labour is doing well in government they are called trolls, its actually called free speech.”
Labour are not doing well in government – deal with that. The free speech nonsense is irrelevant on the internet. Running websites takes effort and money. If people think your conduct is harmful to their exercise they have every right to ban you. Think of it like you going into someone’s house and lecturing them on your own viewpoints. You wouldn’t take it if I did it; why should we accept it here?
I don’t have the power to ban you. I was merely advancing a suggestion.
So lets get this right. That f***king fat one eyes c**t demands an inquiry into some non story involving George Osborne.
Shouldn’t we be demanding WHY the RAF didn’t fit foam supression systems to the fuel tanks of their military aircraft operating in Iraq?
Now I wonder WHY the RAF didn’t do it? Could it be because that fat one eyed c**t refused to give them the money to do it?
Anyone want to take a bet it will be ITV or Channel 4 that perhaps asks that question and NOT the BBC?
Come off it Martin, any inquiry into that matter would conclude that it was not in the public interest to attribute blame to any one person or organisation.
This is a blogspot blog its free. I run a website and I pay I don’t ban people from expressing themselves. Labour is doing well in government thats my opinion you can have your I have no objection too that!
billybob | 22.10.08 – 8:09 pm |
if your a conservative, god help us.
jack,
I don’t think anyone is going to ban you for expressing your opinion. It’s only trolling – you know, dropping a stink bomb just to start a fight and not engaging in actual debate about BBC bias, thread hijacks, etc. – that’s worth banning.
NotaSheep: You can bet Mandelson would come up with some story ot blame the Tories over it and the BBC would run it.
Jack: the word you’re looking for is biasED (it’s an adjective, not a noun).
And that’s ‘to’ with one ‘o’. Moron.
Bob, Do excuse me for a few typing errors unlike some people I have better things to be doing than checking every word for spelling errors. Anyway I have been thinking, this blog could be re-named worship the right, Love Cameron. It would be much more appropriate. If the BBC supposedly leaned towards the Conservatives I doubt this blog would exist!
“unlike some people I have better things to be doing than checking every word for spelling errors”
And yet you have the time to keep coming here and posting your nonsense.
And of course this site would still exist if the BBC loved the Conservatives. They’d still actively promote their multicultural, metrosexual, anti-reglious (except Islam) agenda.
“if your a conservative, god help us.”
God will help all of us. Pray for McCain.
Incidentally, Melanie was bang on:
As I said yesterday, there is no question but that this is a big story. At the very least • and there is doubtless more that we do not yet know — Osborne and Feldman displayed appalling judgment in having anything to do with this man at all.
http://www.spectator.co.uk/melaniephillips/2540051/sleep-with-dogs-you-get-fleas.thtml
Not to mention Tebbit’s comments. I fear this new breed aren’t a patch on the old guard.
jack: Actually quite a few of us here think Cameron is a dick head. And yes I’d object to Tory bias as well.
Look here it is in plain simple terms.
The job of the BBC is to REPORT the news, the facts, what people say.
I’m NOT interested in what some twat of a reporter ‘thinks’ or who they have dinner with or what political party they support and want to big up.
How hard can it be to be a journalist?
I’m an engineer by trade. I write reports for clients. They are not interested in my ‘personal opinions’ they are interested in facts and observations. If I state something I have to back it up with hard data, otherwise it’s worthless.
Far too many beeboids trawl left wing hate sites (like Webb and Frei) and spout this shite as facts on their blogs or in their TV pieces.
The print media can write what it likes as I can just not buy their rag.
With the BBC you have no choice.
“As I said yesterday, there is no question but that this is a big story.”
As big as Mandelson and the boat? As big as Labour and Eccelstone? As big as the recession? As big as the collapsing pound? It might be a big story for some – I personally think it’s all tosh – but its importance compared with those stories the BBC is pretty much ignoring is what is significant.
Paxman frothing mightily about Osborne on Newsnight- you know the usual rich, privileged etc.
I would be more inclined to take him seriously in his self righteous tribune of the people mode if his reported income , mostly from our taxes, was not so vast as to be inconceivable to most of us.
Can he not see how absurd he sounds or is he like all the rich media libs so out of touch that he might as well be from the planet Zog.
Jack,
The Majority of posters here dislike bias and unfairness and to say we are Tories is akin to a smear!
It would be very convenient for you as a defender of the BBC to see those who complain of bias as coming from just one political perspective when in fact that is simply not the case!
This forum would exist if the BBC were biased to the right and for you to suggest otherwise only highlights your own political partisan nature.
This forum is all about bias and partisan political support, it uncovers dishonesty and rubbish reporting of the facts.
Most of the posters on here hate the degeneration of a once proud organisation into a grubby dishonest and propaganda driven mouthpiece.
I feel sure that because you cannot defend the increasingly blatant dishonesty of the BBC you find it esay and very convenient to pin the blame on the messenger
Come on Jack, more facts would helpful
and less kneejerk blame shifting would push the debate forward!
A not to all BBC/Labour supporters,
FWIW & IMHO, the nature of partisan politics has caused most if not all of the problems we face today, right and left political dogma and partisan loyalty comes before the welfare of the nation!
I would ban ALL political parties in Parliament/fully elected upper chamber(HOL) and make it a legal requirement for MPs/Lords to put the interests of their electorate first using their own moral code rather than the pathetic football team supporters type mob mentality.
Every MP should be as independent as possible and this should be encouraged not punished as it is now, there are MPs out there right and left(Claire Short&Norman Tebbit are among my favourites)who stand out from the unthinking and obedient mob and stick to their consciences rather than the ‘party line’ as it stands these few brave individuals are derided and isolated rather than nurtured and supported!
Parliament is now reduced to a pathetic childish rabble fighting for petty power and privlige and personal gain rather than the welfare of the people and nation it was elected to represent!
Most of the posters on here would attack the BBC for a right wing bias should it ever occur.
For once I agree with both Martin & Cassandra.
One of the problems that the BBC has got itself into is the eliding of news reporting with opinion pieces. Unlike Martin I am often interested in reading/hearing the opinions of a variety of people, that is what I can get from newspapers where Op-Ed pieces are frequent and usually badged as such. I also know which paper is likley to carry Op-Ed pieces that agree with my political views. However dear old Auntie now doesn’t know the difference and so it is almost impossible to listen to any news reporting without it being overlain by the opinion of the reporter.
Objective and disspassionate news journalism in the BBC appears to be dead.
As the bbc are now so openly and blatently biased, its probably a very oportune moment to get volunteers together for a ‘Biased BBC’ information stand, to follow Question Time round – the usual thing, hand out flyers, get the local press and regional tv and radio in on the act. I think it would generate considerable interest !
Arthur Dent: If I want to hear the opinion of someone I’ll look for it.
Newspapers are the place for opinions, not BBC news.
If you’re going to have political ‘commentators’ that for example you find on US cable news, then there should be political balance.
The BBC does not practice political balance in its output.
As a simple example, last week on Radio 5 Simon Mayo gave Vince Cable 20 minutes to spout total nonsense about the economy. I couldn’t work out if Cable was there as a Liberal politician or an economics spokesman for the BBC.
Since no Tory was allowed to have a 20 minute slot for the rest of the week, I could only take it as bias.
This sort of BBC bias must end. I’m still waiting for the BBC to respond to me as to HOW they monitor political balance across their output if they don’t insist that it’s done for every interview or show.
The BBC appears not to have any method of auditing political balance.
Today’s leader in The Current Bun
http://www.thesun.co.uk/sol/homepage/news/sun_says/article244723.ece
Does anyone ever complain that the BBC is biased against the left ? No ! QED.
Grant, not quite true. See this piece on Medialens:
http://www.fifth-estate-online.co.uk/comment/bbcandmedialens.html
Peregrine 10:46
Thanks , interesting article. I notice that the author lumps the BBC in with the Guardian as “liberal media ” !