Via ‘Is the BBC biased’:
In my 12 years with BBC News, I worked for many of the people who, for the past quarter century, have decided what the BBC broadcasts. Three of them went on to become Director-General. Almost without exception, they were decent, honest and fair, thoroughly convinced of their own political even-handedness. So why have they apparently been incapable of recognising, let alone addressing, the corporation’s rampant left-wing bias?
Unless the Right can think of ways of making the BBC’s feedback loops work effectively, or the BBC spontaneously recognises its responsibilities to license-fee payers who don’t share its equalitarian instincts, Europe’s most significant left-liberal broadcaster will continue – shamelessly – to dress to the left.
That last paragraph gets to the crux of the problem….it’s OK if they’re left wing as long as there are processes in place that prevent that from colouring the BBC’s output with a pinkish tinge…unfortunately any such processes which the BBC might have in place are completely inadequate and ineffective, probably because those overseeing the processes are themselves of the same mindset…..the output is irrevocably left wing, Labour supporting.
You only had to look at Justin Webb’s reaction to criticism of the BBC recently to realise the problem…..they just don’t accept that they are doing anything wrong.
It doesn’t help of course that the BBC Trust is on the inside and sees its job more to protect the BBC than to scrutinise, check and moderate any such tendencies.
From Private Eye this week:
SPOT THE DIFFERENCE
“Big, Bloated and Cunning … The BBC ought to be a creative force for entrepreneurship. In reality it stifles innovation. It has planned to expand local news services when local papers are struggling to survive … Its websites, which might seem like a handy and innocuous extension of its news-gathering, have destroyed jobs, livelihoods and creativity by dumping free content on to markets where its rivals have no public subsidy.”
Leader published by James Harding, Editor of The Times, 26 February 2010
“The BBC must, if it is to be a public service broadcaster, deliver on its obligation in local news. I say this because there is what I consider to be a mistaken view that the BBC should rein in its local news coverage for fear of aggravating the economic woes facing local newspapers … Let me be clear, the problems facing the local newspaper industry are not the BBC’s fault.”
Lecture given by James Harding, now BBC Director of News and Current Affairs, 13 January 2014
It would be nice if the BBC focused on news that was local to the nation.
“Massive storms wrecking the country? Should we let the public know what’s going on?”
“Forget that! Nelson Mandela’s pet parrot is making a speech!”
Enter Roger Harrabin to explain how all the evidence shows the storms are caused by rampant global warming. No thanks, I’ll stick to Mandela’s parrot, it might have something meaningful to say!
The chairman of the Media, Culture and Sport Select Committee John Whittingdale said that the BBC had a “failure of management at every level” and that there was “something fundamentally wrong with the BBC management structure”, he has also said that the Government and the BBC should discuss an alternative to the licence fee.
Oh, God, not the “management structure” routine again. The problem is the personnel. They can restructure and streamline and reorganize and redistribute the management structure for the next fifty years and it won’t make a blind bit of difference to the real problem of biased journalism. What it will help is on-air talent and management keeping a tighter lid on their internal scandals, and that’s about it.
Management structural failure didn’t cause the Bureau of Investigative Journalism to smear McAlpine. Management structural failure didn’t cause them all to be Warmists and compromise all broadcasting with an agenda. Management structural failure didn’t cause them to hire a battalion of Left-wing ideologues in the US. Management structural failure wasn’t responsible for the BBC having two environmental activists as their titled editors and correspondents for environmental issues. Management structural failure wasn’t responsible for elevating Justin Webb from North America editor to the coveted Today seat as reward for openly insulting Sarah Palin and telling you the US was probably too racist to elect a black President. Management structural failure didn’t cause the lameness of their Jubilee broadcast. Management structural failure didn’t cause them to go overboard with Mandelapalooza and speak contemptuously of audience complaints about the excessiveness. Management structural failure didn’t cause the Dr. Who producers to put in a gratuitous anti-Thatcher Belgrano reference in a Christmas special. Management structural failure didn’t Management structural failure isn’t to blame hiring a series of Left-wing ideologues as topical editors for Newsnight. Management structural failure wasn’t responsible for allowing the long-term use of the ghoulish Body Count Narrative for the Israel/Palestinian conflict(s). Management structural failure isn’t the cause of BBC News Online editors using various dishonest maps of Israel and the surrounding areas. Management structural failure didn’t cause what Helen Boaden stated was a “deep liberal bias” on immigration. Management structural failure wasn’t responsible for Nick Robinson’s rather dishonest special documentary on the “Truth” about immigration. Management structural failure wasn’t the problem behind all those fat payoffs. Management structural failure wasn’t the problem behind Radio 4’s attempt to hire Will Self as a sort of intellectual leader for the channel. Management structural failure isn’t to blame for Evan Davis talking over non-Left guests and doing those “In other words…” mischaracterizations of his guests’ statements, while letting those with the approved thoughts speak freely, without interruption or the need for him to attempt a restatement. Management structural failure isn’t the reason why the BBC sent Mark Mardell to that Navy yard to ask if that shooting would finally force the US to have a national discussion about guns. Management structural failure didn’t lead to Franz Strasser’s dishonest series of reports about immigration in the US. Management structural failure isn’t the problem causing Gavin Esler to load his Dateline panels to the Left. Management structural failure isn’t the cause of the Left-wing groupthink on so many issues.
Restructuring the management wouldn’t have prevented Katty Kay from fretting about the Jewish Lobby in her Q&A session with BBC viewers. Restructuring the management wouldn’t have made Mark Mardell be a little more open minded about anything. Restructuring the management won’t stop the “It all started when Israel hit back” perspective in their reporting. Restructuring the management wouldn’t have prevented that ridiculous Anjem Choudary segment on Today or made it any less idiotic and disingenuous. Restructuring the management won’t prevent Nicky Campbell from scolding a black Christian woman about her religious beliefs while openly stating his refusal to do the same to a Muslim woman. Restructuring the management won’t stop them continually failing to inform you of that certain guests or vox pops aren’t independent innocent by-standers at all but are actually activists for whatever cause. Restructuring the management won’t prevent them from using Labour and Left-wing advocacy terminology in their reporting on certain issues. Restructuring the management wouldn’t have lessened the blind worship of The Obamessiah. Restructuring the management won’t do anything to fix the disingenuous and idiotic editorial “suggestion” that they always refer to “the Prophet Mohammed” lest people get confused about which Mohammed they’re talking about. Restructuring the management wouldn’t have prevented the awful CBBC 9-11 and Bin Laden situation. Restructuring the management wouldn’t have done anything to improve the atmosphere and culture at the BBC which makes anyone with right of center views feel they need to keep their heads down and their beliefs as secret as a Jew in Castille circa 1500.
The problem at the BBC is the people, not management structure. The managers (and editors and other people with personnel responsibilities) failed over and over again, and are apparently continuing to fail now. Restructuring and shifting the nameplates to other doors in other buildings will fix nothing other than perhaps the paper trail to cover up internal scandals and/or better satisfy the next round of Sir Humphrey Appleby-style investigations into those scandals. The real problems of bias and, apparently, abuse and hostile work environments are due to the Beeboids themselves. Only a serious purge and complete overhaul of hiring standards and practices can even begin to address this.
It’s like that noise about executive pay being too high. It’s all a distraction from the real problems endemic at the BBC, and the true cause behind most of it.
‘They say “management retructure”, we say “rearranging Titanic deckchairs”…. let’s call the whole thing off!’
Outstanding post, Mr Preiser!
Surely the answer is to scrap the License Fee , allow almost every household in the country to keep its £145 pa and to make the BBC a subscription service costing £145 pa. If people wanted to spend their money tuning into the BBC they would be no worse off and those who don’t want to can keep their money.
Can anyone see what is actually wrong with that other than it impacts the ‘free’ propaganda organ of the liberal left?
I think a better solution would be a menu system. There are still BBC programmes which I would pay for but I’m damned if I would willingly pay for the mix of agitprop and drivel than constitutes 90 per cent of its output.
The advantage of an a la carte approach is that it would pretty soon prove just how unwanted so much of the Corporation’s output really is.
Yes I agree with you an a la carte subscription system would be the best of all worlds.
Sounds eminently fair and sensible. But pay based on chosen preferences without uniquely funding the propaganda… never going to happen.
By coincidence:
http://tradingaswdr.blogspot.co.uk/2014/01/be-careful-what-you-wish-for.html
Interesting comment in reply. Maybe time for a new Flokker Staffel needs to be created to ‘address’ incorrect thought there too?
Almost without exception? Who might Scott Grønmark be thinking of?
Just noticed this too:
http://tradingaswdr.blogspot.co.uk/2014/01/cuckoo.html
‘In a sort of clear the decks move, ahead of the hearing at the start of February, the BBC has revealed that Linwood, suspended in May last year, actually left Auntie’s employment in July – but neither side told us.’
Imagine if any other outfit, public or private, ‘cleared the decks’ in such a way, in complement to £300kpa types either being astoundingly uncurious, forgetful and/or prone to unminuted corridor whispers near daily?
One way to gauge the BBC is to see when and where they want money spent or saved .
Hospitals have to work to a budget – the BBC liberal /left say they are making cuts that imperil peoples lives .
Train companies have to run as cheaply as possible – the BBC say they are putting costs before passengers .
Factories have to be competitive – the BBC say they are putting profits before the environment .
A council has to spend millions to evict illegal travellers – the BBC queries if it is cost effective .
The BBC realises the value of money for left wing causes .
If the BBC is a reflection of the entire civil-service (or the Post Office) it should smaller and privatised – it will never function properly as it is. Until the BBC is split into smaller accountable bodies like the smaller companies it continues to ‘swamp’ the TV and Radio industry. The BBC also ‘owns’ very little now since it’s move to Salford (which it rents), everything is ‘contracted out’ (including even the BBC regional transmitters and it’s London South bank studios are all now privately owned). The only thing the BBC owns now is ‘intellectual property’ and it’s (biased) ’employees’: i.e. News and TV and Radio Broadcasting rights, TV and Radio magazine ‘spin-offs,’ etc. a past Library of ‘Golden Era’ of TV and Radio programs. In addtition the London Property portfolio that the BBC ‘presumes’ to own is also ‘public taxpayers’ by right (and not ‘BBC management by right’) one could argue. Simply removing the BBC license fee will focus on the ‘profitability’ and future ‘liability’ of an institution that is well beyond it’s ‘sell-by-date’.
South Bank Studio`s or London Television Centre are owned by ITV Plc . BBC Elstree Studio`s are theirs ,home of Eastenders & other programmes ,use to be ATV`s London production centre .
Thanks for that Dick, what the BBC ‘owns’ is far from clear though. The BBC transmitters were sold to USA in 1997. (Which sold them back to the UK in 2004, (National Grid plc). In 2005 the name changed to National Grid Wireless, then called ‘Merlin Communications’. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arqiva
But ‘Merlin Communications’, became ‘VT Merlin Communications’ now on London’s South Bank, (called now Media Management Centre) Presumed ITV now(?). From 8th July 2010 (The Babcock International Group), now owns all the current BBC broadcast transmitters and functions. Perhasp for ITV and freeview too./http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/VT_Communications
Any Engineers out there who can fill in any missing bits the BBC contracts ‘out’?