Did you see that The Sun has picked up on the rancid bias of the BBC.

Conservative backbencher Douglas Carswell said: “The BBC is in the hands of a left-wing elite. They’re a privileged organisation run for the interests of the few not the many – which is why their views are closer to a broadcast version of the Guardian rather than a popular paper.”  Watchdog Mediawatch-UK director Vivienne Pattison stressed: “Under the BBC charter they are required to be neutral. It’s important – after all, we fund them.”

Too true!

Bookmark the permalink.

16 Responses to SUN SHINES ON BBC BIAS!

  1. Lloyd says:

    I emailed the writer of that article earlier, pointing them in the direction of Craig’s excellent blog, on which he actually attempts (succesfully) to quantify the beeb’s bias.


  2. David Preiser (USA) says:

    I immediately thought of Craig’s work as well when I saw that article, after someone brought it up on another thread.  He used to post comments here about it.  Didn’t know (or forgot) he had a blog.


  3. NotaSheep says:

    As I blogged today – –  this part sems to be similar to Craig’s work: “The Sun’s analysis showed Labour politicians on Question Time were allowed to speak for a full minute longer than Tory counterparts.On March 11 ex-Labour minister Caroline Flint got SIX minutes more than Tory Justine Greenings.And on February 18 Labour veteran Roy Hattersley spoke for nearly three minutes longer than Tory Rory Stewart.” Never mind what’s important is that the truth gets spread.


  4. John Anderson says:

    Is there a link to Craig’s blog ?

    The Tories – and maybe the Sun and Telegraph – ought to be using the measures he had been working on, relatively objective indicators of bias.

    The only one I would add to Craig’s list is – wgen they do “What is in today’s papers” there should be a count of how many times they lead with the Guardian or Indy – as against other much better-selling papers.


  5. Martin says:

    The Daily Telegraph used to have beebwatch where they monitored the bias from the BBC, they really should start it again. Where I wish someone would really take the drug addicts to talk is thier continual claim (lie) that they balance out their programming over the network and over a period of time. This is just not true as the BBC do not keep any detailed audits of who takes part in shows or the amount of time given to each party etc. If the BBC does do this perhaps they can provide some written proof of this.


  6. Millie Tant says:

    The most disgusting part of the disgusting BBC’s cynical propaganda is the targeting of children with this kind of manipulation under cover of innocent entertainment.


  7. hippiepooter says:

    With Tory MPs Graham Stuart and Douglas Carswell being outspoken about BBC bias in the space of a week, are the Tories at last building up a head of steam on the issue?  The neo-Communist scum at the BBC have been rigging debate for far too long.  It’s long overdue the Tories made a move.


  8. Craig says:


    Well, now that you mention that…I’ve been counting how many times the various newspapers have been mentioned during the closing ‘newspaper front pages review’ on Newsnight.

    Since 8/2/10 it works out as follows:

    1. The Guardian26 mentions
    2. The Independent & The Daily Telegraph19 mentions each
    3. The Financial Times17 mentions
    4. The Daily Mail12 mentions
    5. The Times9 mentions
    6. The Sun3 mentions
    7. The Daily Express2 mentions
    And if you count how many times a newspaper has been the first one to be mentioned it works out as:

    1. The Guardian11 first mentions
    2. The Independent5 first mentions
    3. The Times 4 first mentions
    4. The Daily Telegraph & The Financial Times3 first mentions each


    • John Anderson says:

      Excellent work, Craig.  I think the FIRST paper mentioned each day is significant – it kinda sets the agenda or tone.  And your figures show very remarkable bias towards the Guardian and Indy,  confirming my sense that the Today prog has an almost template script –

      “Now let’s look at what the papers say.  The Guardian/Indy leads with …..(enter current anti-Tory rant eg Ashcroft….”


      And maybe a more subtle point.   The BBC has a clear bias in what it deems to be its own top story for the day.   That is then buttressed by citing the Guardian or Indy which run to the same agenda.   And all too often,  the headline they quote is NOT about news per se – it is OPINION,  that anti-Tory spin.


      It might be a bit more balanced if Rod Liddle becomes editor of the Indy after a takeover.   But maybe the BBC would just default to the Guardian even more often,  leaving the Indy as a bit of a pariah – just like the Sun or Mail.


      • John Anderson says:


        Why not pass your figures to eg Iain Dale ?  Something needs to be done to keep the issue running,  to have maybe a slight possibility of warning the BBC off this clear bias.

        On Ashcroft,  for example,  the BBC has been leading on it to a ridiculous degree.   And they can “defend” this by implying that it is also the top story in the print media – by citing the Guardian as first choice each day.

        What is also apparent is how the BBC scorns the mass-circulation papers in favour of their Islington favourites.   I think your figures show very clearly that the BBC and the Guardian are indeed soulmates.


    • Guest says:


      Of course it also goes beyond to actual mentions to the circumstances surrounding them, from a sarky remark about a headline to the choice ‘of’ guest to subsequently comment. Or ‘member of the public’. Martin has also identified an interesting piece on how such comments are located and featured to suit the enhancing of narratives.

      But the main point here is clear, and why the largest national mass media broadcaster favours one of the more niche ex-broadsheets, with a very small circulation, as representative ‘of what papers we wish would say’, would also be a good one for a bleary blazer boy to dismiss on Newswatch.


  9. Craig says:


    Thanks for your kind words. I think of The Guardian as being the inky wing of the BBC.

    I will send the figures to Iain Dale, and The Sun might be interested too – especially is it and its sister The Times fare so badly in comparison to The Guardian.

    Counting the number of mentions on Today is a trickier matter as they usually end each paper reviews with an ‘And finally…” sort of story. That usually boosts up the number of mentions for the right-leaning papers at the expense of The Guardian, which tends to get its mentions earlier – when the heavier, more political subjects are being discussed. I am noting them all down though &, when I have a spare few hours, will count them all up!


    • John Anderson says:

      Yes – the Today slot often ends up with (to my mind) a rather dismissive reference eg to a fun story in the Sun.

      So maybe – for Today – just the figures for which paper do they lead with each day ?  That shows a huge tilt towards the Guardian and Indy IMHO.   That is – 2 papers with a combined circulation of say half a million get much more prominence that broadsheets that sell far more – let alone the millions of sales of the Mail and Sun,  Mirror and Express.


    • hippiepooter says:

      Way to go Craig!


  10. DG says:

    “Watchdog Mediawatch-UK”

    There goes any credibility straight out of the window