BIASED BBC has just had another really successful month, our biggest ever, with in excess of a quarter of a million visits. I wanted to thank you all for supporting the site and for coming here. Along with my fellow writers, I try my best to provide you with daily output and then leave it for you to take the issue wherever you want. What makes this site so good is the quality of the comments and I am in your debt for providing such great insight on a daily basis.
A spin off from the blog has been the “Liveblog” that usually accompanies Question Time. One of the reasons I started this was it allows us all the chance to talk directly in real time to each other and flag up some of the outrageous bias that accompanies that programme. I also know that it’s also a weekly chance to relax a bit and make mock of the BBC and some of the Lilliputians that pop up on the programme! HOWEVER, I am increasingly unhappy about some of the comments being left. These are pure ad hominem, and they distract from the event. We live in a blog world where hostages to fortune cannot be given and there are people out there who wish the site did not exist, or could be classified in ways that would minimise our impact. I also think that we leave ourselves open to the charge of being hypocrites if we demand the highest standard of the BBC whilst lowering our own standards. So, I am unsure if I want to continue the LIVEBLOG, and seek your opinion. I will only continue with it if I can be assured people will not post offensive, possible actionable ad hominem. I am happy with witty comment, I don’t mind mild sexist comments, or even plain silly comments – but we HAVE to stop the nasty stuff once and for all.
“BIASED BBC has just had another really successful month, our biggest ever, with in excess of a quarter of a million visits.”
I have an impression, and that’s all it is, that people are becoming more aware of BBC pathologies and the issue is arising more and more in certain parts of the MSM.
Unfortunately, many Tories (Gove excepted) seem to have little respect for free speech and are blissfully unaware of how much damage is being done.
Postings on other websites referring to BBC bias often draw a lot of negative comment. People really believe that the BBC is a bastion of truth and independence. My guess is that focus group and polling evidence shows exactly the same thing, which is why the Conservatives won’t go for the BBC. It’s a vote loser.
Turning around public opinion will take a long time, but this website’s popularity is a start.
I agree with you, MD. That is broadly how the Beeboid Corporation is perceived and David Cameron knows it full well. It’s “A Great British Institution” and he praises it as such, knowing the esteem and special regard in which it is held. Rather as with the case of the NHS, the Conservatives dare not take it on directly or threaten it as an institution without risking public opprobrium and annihilation at the polls.
I think the BBC is a Great British Institution. That why it pains me so much to see what Gramscians have reduced it too!
Bodge job – sorry – BoJo is certainly under no illusions about BBC bias:-
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/culture/tvandradio/bbc/9263603/Next-head-of-BBC-must-be-a-Tory-says-Boris-Johnson.html
Changing it to a Tory bias is no solutions though.
Does a man – or woman – of strength and integrity exist who recognises the problem of bias and is prepared to act as DG lopping of heads to redress it?
It’s not easy to overcome the legacy of generations of trust and a deep connection to societal memory.
I think there is, however, widespread disillusionment with the quality of the BBC’s entertainment output. Particularly with other channels producing programmes such as Downton Abbey, which used to be the preserve of the BBC.
Yep, people are weaned on the BBC….and regardless of what they may be told about it the default position is that the BBC is great…David Attenborough and all that.
Which was why the BBC fought so hard and spent so much money to keep the Balen Report under wraps.
It must have some seriously reputation damaging stuff in it….something that would change people’s perceptions of just what the BBC is really like.
My guess is that focus group and polling evidence shows exactly the same thing, which is why the Conservatives won’t go for the BBC. It’s a vote loser.
I also get the feeling they are scared of picking a proper fight with the BBC, as they know the damage the BBC will do to them in a fight. The problem that the Tories don’t seem to grasp though is the BBC is going to inflict the damage anyway.
Its called appeasement. “If I leave you alone, you’ll leave me alone, please…”
I hope none of you lot have been moonlighting over at Guido’s – there have been so many criticisms of the BBC on the threads there lately that it’s getting embarrassing.
Whatever could you mean!
Wot? Us?
I hardly bother to go to Guido’s these days, you have to wade through endless moronic, low mentality and often filthy comments.
Ah, but you also get opinions expressed that just happen to get repeated by journos in the msm a day or two later !
When Fawkes first started, on several occasions I got flamed by trolls when I promoted not paying for a TV licence to support bbc bias. Now, that would probably be the default position of posters, on what is, disregarding the lunacy, a very well supported blog.
Which is exactly the point B-BBC’s very own DG, DV, is making!
Not me Guv !
I think Martin posts comments over there under the name “Drop a Daisy Cutter on the BBC”.
thank you for sticking at it for so long, I’ve found you to be informative, intelligent and to the point. I havent had a telly for about 10 years since I got fed up standing up in my own lounge and shouting at the thing almost on a daily basis and I refuse to even listen to any of the radio output. You’ve certainly got stronger stomaches than I have.
The Liveblog does nothing for me, as I gave up watching Question Time a while back. I accidentally strayed on to it last night and wondered why Dimbleby didn’t tell Victoria Coren to shut up and give others a chance to put their point. Perhaps he did in the end but I didn’t hang around to find out. I think I’ve only ever made one contribution there!
I have to say the standard of commentary on the liveblog always seems to my mind to be better suited to the kind of comments you see on Guido’s blog: some very funny ones but largely puerile and these detract from the more serious message this blog tries to put across (largely successfully, I’d say as I agree with Barry’s impression above). I believe it’s hosted on a few sites and perhaps you could simply direct those who wish to participate over to these sites?
RD, I heard a bit of Question Time and Victoria Coren was being so voluble that I switched off. Tried again after a while, with the same result.
As for the Liveblog, I agree. That kind of thing doesn’t help the blog.
Living abroad as I do I can’t follow QT and the few times I’ve looked in at the live chat I’ve found it pretty banal. I agree that it doesn’t do much for this blog in general.
DV I do enjoy the livechat (ok i dont see the comments you do as a mod), in one respect it is a sign of sucsess that you get trolls coming on and trying to spoil it for the rest.
I would appeal that you dont let the trolls win and spoil it for those that do comment within the rules, if you back down over live chat and stop it then whats to stop the trolls trying to do it ith the site?
I will only continue with it if I can be assured people will not post offensive, possible actionable ad hominem.
Don’t use it so won’t miss it.
And as it is, via the ad homs, an Achilles Heel (notwithstanding that any rational person can see the dilemma for any mod, on a free independent blog comprising individuals, between free speech and necessary housekeeping (from good taste to legal accountability)) I’d have to suggest no great loss if more of a problem than worthwhile feature.
And while an appeal to better natures is fine ‘n all, as Helen Boaden discovered, few who are minded to excess will cease by a polite request.
There’s also the Trojan trolls, as many of the worst ad homs I see here often simply ‘appear’ out of the ether from a name I don’t recognise. On occasion I have to wonder if introduced to give the likes of a Dr. Scezandy from Oslo a non-sequitur to huff, puff and flounce away on when cornered by a post on actual facts with a desperate ‘You lot are all ‘ists’ cry that is evidently meant to score a point as the door hits ’em on the way out for the nth time.
Ontablets (above) does however make a good point too.
I don’t know of the technical issues, but again ask if, instead of a heavy-handed clampdown (which then simply plays into the ‘censorship!’ U-turn irony-free mantra the tame trolls like to wield), is it possible to create side bar ‘sin bins’ for content that is already, or becomes overly ‘robust’.
If hardier souls which to cage fight there that would be their call, but no one can object (OK, I know, whole industries and quangos exist to do just that) if making the conscious decision to enter a field of play where sensibilities can get affronted.
There are sites (amazon IIRC?) that have a ‘we found this offensive – view at your own risk’ type of thing.
It’s a get out clause – you promote free speech whilst limiting the troll impact.
I feel that I must have trasnsgressed recently, although I cannot remember saying anything too offensive, because a couple of weeks ago I suddenly went back from instant messaging to having my messages moderated. Last night I couldn’t even get instant messaging at all so I gave up.
Sorry if I said something wrong but I was not aware that I had.
Maybe you’re just late coming in and get stuck at the end of the queue for slots?
I hope the Live Chat stays. Maybe some of the rest of us can make an effort to shame the nastier comments into submission.
Think I should probably hold my hand up here. I do swear and get personal. So apologies for that. The only possible defence is a great deal of anger born of powerlessness in the face of such blatant bias. And last night did seem to get a bit more nasty than usual. I will step back in future and just observe. But please carry on the livechat.
Phil.
Sir, I salute your honesty!
Agree 100% Mr V.
Don`t mean to be a crawler, but I won`t take part if there is stuff that is abusive-by appearance, race or what have you.
I know the temptation to mock the Labour scum, and be venomous to the rent-a thick audience cartoons from the fag-end of a Unison Branch Meeting from way back….but I think on Tony Benn and Enoch Powell…hate Benns politics in large part but he did show up at the funeral of a great man-so personal abuse(and, as you say; hostages to fortune from legal toadies and their stooges) means that it`s a matter of self-censorship.
We can`t afford to lose this oasis. If it is vile, it`s wrong-even if it is all too understandable when the likes of Howes (Darcus AND Geoffrey) provoke us.
Yes, I have been on the Liveblog and am sometimes surprised (dismayed!) to see the level of offensive comments there; but as you mentioned David, there is also a good amount of comical banter. To be honest I don’t use it much because I can’t type fast enough to keep up with the copious volume of appalling bias.
I would say, keep the swearing and any comments that are simply aimed at making fun of appearance/accents etc, off limits.
For my part I cannot always participate because of shift working. When I am on live chat i find most of the stuff to be quite funny with some serious points made ion real time.
I do understand peoples blood pressure rising and don’t take offence easily.
HOWEVER. we need to be on our guard for professional spoilers who will use the live chat to leave bile and later call for the closing of the site.
Maybe the reason some of us resort to personal abuse is because we are so fed up and angry, not just at the piss-poor BBC in general but the whole political class.
Take last nights QT for example, why was that toe-rag Mark Oaten on the panel along with Victoria Coren? What have those two ever done to benefit this country, all they ever do is talk it down and our so-callled state broadcaster allows them on to pontificate to the public.
There’s a lot of anger out there and maybe that comes across in the comments but it’s entirely justified as far as I’m concerned considering what these deceivers have done to my country.
I hope you keep the live blog going, it’s good therapy!
John Pierre, are you being serious? It’s like a call to replace the BBC with a right wing Pravda.
I do not use it myself. Watching QT usually provokes either a blind fury or smouldering resentment in me.
However, why not keep the Live Blog ON THE BASIS that it provides the opportunity to be very rude about the so-called movers and shakers that frequently grace QT.
We do not have eough opportunity to be rude to these people. Their self-satisfied bubbles need to be pricked often.
Hi DV, well done to you for passing this mile stone in exposing moonbatism to the UK public
The more the worthless leftist beeboid scumbags attempt to socially engineer the population into socialist voting, Al Gore worshipping enviro sheep, the more people will say, “what a load of absolute bollox al beeb is”
Re: QT Liveblog – if we self-censor ourselves then THEY have won.
He is not asking for censorship as much as just being responsible for our own manners. Some comments merely reveal the success of the BBC in it’s contribution in lowering of the standards of the British people over many years in playing to the lowest common denominator. It is not only in political matters the BBC agenda influences this nation. Even their entertainment such as Eastenders, and the Kenny Everett show etc was/is a deliberate agenda to coursen and debase the sheeple.
First of all DV, congrats on the quarter mill figure. You’ve done a great job as DG of B-BBC!
Secondly, delighted to see you raise the issue of conduct again, as you do periodically.
I dont use the Live blog much, but when I have done, it’s been apparent that the boorish right is out in unwelcome force. I remember a year or so back, someone commented on Brown’s ill health and wished him dead!
I have to say though, that sometimes the tone that (I believe it is) ASE sets in announcing whose going to be on doesn’t help matters much. More than occasionally he makes very gratuitous personal comments.
As every mainstream, Guardian reading, vaguely left, perma-student, BBC loving, Toksvig fan, Fry acolyte I know keeps a bottle of champers in the fridge for when Baroness Thatcher departs this world I think a bit of Brownian balance is harmless.
Let us you when you’re leaving if you can and I’ll keep a bottle in my fridge for that. God bless the great Margaret… so right about everything.
I started publicly saying the BBC is a leftie bias channel as long ago as the early eighties. I gave up on them, because of their coverage of the Falklands war. They had no idea they were supposed to be the BRITISH Broadcasting Corporation. They still haven’t. In those days I thought I was alone. So glad I now know I am not.