Heads Buried in The Sand like Ostriches…or is it Emus?…Can never remember which….the BBC always refuses to bring itself into the discussion when talking about ‘The Media’. It produced a programme on the media’s influence on politics last year….but didn’t mention itself once.
The BBC considers itself a ‘Torch Bearer for Truth’ and I suppose that as such it believes it can do no wrong and so actually defies engagement on a rational basis with any suggestion that it is not only the most powerful media organisation in Britain but also the most influential.
Such a reluctance by the media to step into the lime light and accept its responsibilities has been noticed by others….as quoted by Julian 
Petley, a left wing academic who abhors censorship but launches abusive attacks on what he construes as right wing writers who don’t adhere to his ideology.
However in his confused rant here…he comes up with a couple of quotes that sum up the BBC itself rather than the targets he was aiming for (the Right Wing Press):
‘As John Lloyd argues in What the Media are Doing to Our Politics: ‘the media have an unwritten rule not to divulge their power … They make and re-make the versions of the world with which we live – and yet when the news media represent the world, they largely excuse themselves from it’. Or as David Walker puts it in his contribution to the New Politics Network pamphlet Invisible Political Actors, journalists ‘rarely write about themselves or their own political responsibilities, and they almost never write about the organisations and interests of the organisations they themselves write for’. From the way in which most journalists write and speak about their work, one would never guess that they are employed by what are now some of the most powerful institutions in society. Furthermore, because they refuse to acknowledge their power they also refuse to acknowledge the responsibility and accountability that go with power – whilst at the same time, of course, constantly insisting on their right, and indeed their duty, to scrutinise and hold to account all other power holders. Consequently, as Will Hutton put it in the Observer, August 17th 2003: ‘Britain’s least accountable and self-critical institutions have become the media’.
The BBC to a ‘T’…lacking any self awarenes or any inclination to confront the problems so often highlighted by its critics….and so powerful that no one dare tackle it head on.
pointing the finger
in all good islamic victimhood bookshops … now
ps
will the “unicorn” of islamo-FAUX-bia ever end.
Reading what the Left say about the “Right” tells you nothing about the Right, but it tells you a lot about the Left.
When they describe their opponents as greedy, hate filled, and selfish they are projecting. The Right judge themselves (and find themselves wanting) against objective standards, but for the hardcore Left the very concept of failing short of objective standards of truth, beauty, and goodness offends their narcissism.
This inversion is there right at the beginning of the Left in the writings of Rousseau and Marquis de Sade – both of whom were vile. It is why societies in which Leftists gain absolute power become cesspits of lies, hatred, and injustice.
Someone at Biased BBC talking about a lack of self-awareness in others? Loving the multiple levels of irony…
You’re not a patch on Jim Dandy.
I was referring to the narcissism of the Left Mr Matthewman.
I think the Left are fully aware that they are shits; which is why McMental keeps trying to convince us that he has a moral compass.
I think the technical term is malignant narcissism.
In your case the bias or otherwise of the BBC is entirely irrelevant to you. The only thing that matters to you is your feelings – presumably (I am guessing here) your resentment of people who disapprove of your sexuality.
The fact that most people on here attack Islam (and its apologists in the BBC) precisely because it is intolerant goes right over your head.
The day you comprehend that most of the people on here are fighting for your freedom to be Mr Matthewman, regardless of their opinion about your sexuality, is the day you begin to have some understanding (however slight) of why (again I am presuming) your forefathers thought that your freedom is not only worth worth fighting for, but worth dying for, because they were interested in (and felt humble before) something greater than themselves.
To: Scot M.
Firstly, the fact that this blog exists must tell you there is a problem. The fact that is growing in size unsupported by public money, unlike the BBC which is funded by a TV tax totalling billions, which has to be paid regardless of whether you watch the BBC or not, must underline the fact that people believe there is bias and it sticks in our craw to have to pay for it.
Secondly you talk of; “lack of self-awareness”. This blog is I think very aware of what it stands for but I have never seen the BBC seriously ask the question of itself or involve the public in a meaningful debate on the its direction, let alone allow discussion upon the bias rooted deep within its bowels.
Thirdly this blog is honest. It tells you in its title that it believes the BBC is biased. It is certainly cannot be described as in your clever little phrase “multiple levels of irony…” How can honesty be ironic?
The BBC on the other hand, purports to be un-biased, whereas we believe it is biased to the extent that it is re-writing history on every level that you can think of and is therefore unpatriotic. Now you may not think you believe in patriotism but I guess you might believe in looking after your family? So, the question really is; how big is your family? I believe my British family has been debased and changed without my and the British people’s authority and the BBC is criminally hiding this from its customers for reasons best known to itself.
In short sir, you have my sympathy, for I believe that your judgment is prejudiced by those with whom you have consorted. I truly hope that one day you will see the reality that is so clear to those with an open mind and then speak with more consideration and intelligence.