Andrew Bridgen MP in the Telegraph:
Why I am going to war with the BBC
In its mission statement, the BBC says that it “exists to serve the public, and its mission is to inform, educate and entertain.” It exists, therefore, to report the news in an impartial manner – not to make the news or to push a particular agenda.
I would contend that the BBC is now working outside its remit. Far from being an impartial spectator to events, it has become an active participant in our national debate, whose influence is unauthorised and unwelcome.
Current and former employees have acknowledged what you might call the “Guardianisation” of the BBC’s editorial line. You only have to consider a range of topics such as climate change, the EU and immigration to see that the BBC treats those who have concerns about such issues with an institutional disdain.
But its meddling with the news agenda has recently reached new heights, especially concerning the TV election debates. Even the BBC’s own former Chairman, Lord Grade – a man who recently brought about an amendment in the House of Lords to protect the corporation’s income stream – expressed outrage at the corporation’s threats to “empty chair” the Prime Minister if he did not cave to its demands.
Finally, and most importantly, there is the TV licence fee. This month we had a debate on the decriminalisation of non-payment of the fee in Parliament. This was due to the amendment put down in the House of Lords, which was then supported by five ex-BBC employees parroting the BBC PR machine’s line that this will cost millions of pounds of revenue should decriminalisation be legislated. The debate was riddled with dubious warnings that local radio stations and Cbeebies will have to close if the BBC did not retain the ability to send people to jail for being too poor to pay for their TV licence.
This month has also seen the suspension of the Top Gear host Jeremy Clarkson for an alleged fracas with a producer. It has been speculated that the programme’s brand is worth tens of millions of pounds in annual income to the BBC. Should Jeremy Clarkson finally be forced out of the BBC, a reported aim of senior BBC executives, how will that revenue gap be filled?
Remember this: the BBC – thanks to its ex-employees in the Lords – has achieved a delay in possible decriminalisation of non-payment of the licence fee for another two years. On current trends, that will see 100 more people put in prison and over 300,000 citizens criminalised, simply because the BBC judges it to be a price worth paying for the maintenance of their revenue stream.
You really do have to question the moral approach of an organisation that applies such standards to the public they are supposed to be there to serve. It will also be revealing to see how Jeremy Clarkson is dealt with compared with Russell Brand, who in spite of his disgusting behaviour towards Andrew Sachs is now a leading presenter on Comic Relief. Perhaps this is because his extreme Left-leaning views are more palatable to BBC executives.
By leading the debate and setting the political agenda on the decriminalisation of the licence fee, I have set myself on a collision course with the might and influence of a £5 billion worldwide media organisation, which has attacked my family business, falsely reporting “facts” and attributing comments to me which I did not make.
I am fearful of retribution from the BBC after having been picked last week, out of a possible 46 East Midlands Seats, as a focus for the regional news programme in the upcoming election, effectively granting my opponents a disproportionate amount of prime BBC airtime to attack me.
The BBC has a budget more than double the size of the Foreign Office – and is an empire of an organisation. I believe serious questions must be put to the BBC at Charter Renewal about their agenda and their transparency.
This must be done without fear of its monolithic PR machine, which wields so much power. “Auntie”, as she was once affectionately known, is no longer with us. Instead we are faced with one of the last vestiges of corporatism, a leviathan that seeks to change our national culture and which holds even our highest elected representatives in contempt. The BBC has shown it is willing to ride roughshod over our democratic processes, so it must be tackled.
Andrew Bridgen is MP for North West Leicestershire
I laughed at that bit about the BBC supposed to be serving the Public…Craig at ‘Is the BBC biased?’ quotes this arrogant gem from a BBC correspondent:
A classic case of BBC bias:
Douglas Fraser used his blog to debate the statistics and the political context, and ended with the following very characteristic bit of BBC reporting – giving the appearance of impartially outlining alternative interpretations but actually strongly steering the reader towards a very particular view point:
‘So why the mismatch between public opinion and political consensus? Perhaps it is merely a desire for a point of difference.
Perhaps it is because it is a less salient issue for Scots: having less experience of ethnic minorities in their neighbourhoods, they care less about it than other issues.
You could argue that MSPs at Holyrood are out of touch, and in an elite which finds immigration useful in providing the low-price labour to support its lifestyle.
Or you could see MSPs as leading public opinion, setting out Scotland’s distinctive attitude to foreigners and incomers, on an evidence base about demographic change with which few others are familiar.
That version of Scotland’s outlook on the world may not be based on public opinion. But it’s a positive story to tell.’
Andrew Bridgen speaks a lot of sense. God knows what he’s doing wasting his time in the commuservative party. He should defect to UKIP, the party of common sense, not Common Purpose like the torys and BBC
Yes of course he’s right; singing to the choir.
During the 1970s the trades unions became so powerful they were widely perceived as being a sinister, undemocratic force able to brush aside the will of the elected government.
The miners’ strikes of 1972 and 1974 saw union power confront the government and led to a general election over the issue of “who governs Britain”.
Today the sinister, undemocratic force at large in Britain is the BBC.
The BBC is dominated by politically correct metro-liberal zealots on a mission to create a left wing paradise on earth.
The BBC distorts and censors news to create a society in its own image. It is an intolerable situation, but which political party has the courage to confront it?
Popular services should be privatised and a very small public service rump retained.
A cursory history of the BBC shows that they back the traitor and the weekend rebel.
The Falklands, Death on the Rock type stuff, the IRA and Mary Whitehouse?…they`ve been wrong and giving succour to the Soviets, Iran, Galtieris junta since 1979…maybe earlier?
And since Al Queda and Alistair Campbell got to work on them. they`ve been craven apologists for Moaty, for Duggan, for Savile and for Brand.
Wrong side every time-we`ll have our revenge on the traitors and poltroons very soon God willing!
I agree with much of what you say but you are wrong about leaving even a vestige of public service. The BBC would grow from the remnant as soon as Labour came to power. No it must be destroyed so it can never threaten our democracy again.
Alan/Andrew Bridgen,
“ But its meddling with the news agenda has recently reached new heights, especially concerning the TV election debates. Even the BBC’s own former Chairman, Lord Grade…”
That would be Tory Peer & Conservative Party member Lord Grade.
Bridgen also (conveniently) forgets to mention that I.T.V., Channel 4 & Sky where also part of the negotiations.
“Should Jeremy Clarkson finally be forced out of the BBC, a reported aim of senior BBC executives, how will that revenue gap be filled?”
Note use of the word “reported”, as in; “not actually”.
Of course senior BBC executives can’t stand Clarkson; that must surely be the reason why they’ve employed him for the last 27 years.
“I am fearful of retribution from the BBC after having been picked last week, out of a possible 46 East Midlands Seats, as a focus for the regional news programme in the upcoming election, effectively granting my opponents a disproportionate amount of prime BBC airtime to attack me.
Note use of the word “effectively”, as in; “not actually”.
Andrew Bridgen is obviously scared he’s likely to lose his seat in the upcoming election so has started with the excuses already.
Unable to contemplate that he or his opinions might be at fault; who else to blame…?
Ah yes… welcome to BiasedBBC.
dont feed the troll
Troll,
“dont feed the troll”
Of course, because this blogs definition of “bias” is hearing any opinion you don’t like the sound of.
Remind me; how long has this blog been going & what has it achieved? You do realise that BBC journalists used to engage in debates here before they were forced out by abuse or petty point scoring?
Do you think it’s better now?
I must confess I’m absolutely delighted that the majority of posters here are too dumb too realise how stupid they are. Although I do feel sorry for a dwindling number of three or four regulars who persevere despite the odds (they know who they are).
Carry on “Troll Controll and Extermination ltd”; you don’t even realise you’ve lost already.
Hugs xxx
Dez, the BBC has an agenda. It has an editorial position and dominates the British media – ironically whilst damning their arch enemies who have a much smaller market share. My point is why quibble trollishly at the level of trivia , the fact of the BBCs existence alone as a huge feather bedded monopoly should be enough to cause huge concern. Their activism is obvious in virtually every thing they do, the Today Programme sets the political agenda, their light entertainment ‘educates’ the population and it indulges in massive bias by omission of views and opinions it deems inappropriate. It serves its own ends rather than the public. It is like a huge national restaurant chain where everyone has to pay but a very few zealots get to decide the menu. No chips and plenty of quinoa. Oh and forget meat. It is impervious to criticism from the public whom in general it despises and patronises and serves primarily as the mouthpiece of leftist activism. It’s journalism is lazy based on press releases and ‘reports’ from interested parties such as the huge fake Charity industry.
worst of all despite its self promotion it is shit. The BBC is a parody of itself and each step it takes to the left makes it worse and takes it further from the people it supposedly serves. Gordon Brown encapsulated the BBC attitude to the Population perfectly – who allowed that bigotted woman to speak. Dan Hodges in the torygraph summed it up well anybody who wants to discuss racism ‘ honestly ‘ is a racist. This goes for every BBC meme we all know the BBC position on every single issue from algae in the sea to Zimbabwean music
Yes, we are biased on religion and politics, admit BBC executives
Good spot. But remember that article is 9 years old. Since then it’s got very much worse.
It’s a culture of political corretness. An intolerant left-liberal facism.
The BBC thinks broadcasting has a mission to guide, nudge and encourage society to be better, to promotie a homogenous, left-of-centre perspective on the worlld and more importantly, expunge contrary or critical views.
Its tools are distortion and manipulation of information to shape what people think.
The leftward course has accelerated under Lord Hall-Hall. How many Labour Party rejects and his leftie friends has he employed at licence-payers’ expense WITHOUT complying with employment laws obligating him to advertise the posts. Nice, isn’t it, when he can break the law by giving his mate James Purnell a £325,000 per year job without giving anyone else a chance to apply for it. Hall is so arrogant he didn’t even pay lip service to the law. That’s how unaccountable the BBC has become.
… that article is 9 years old. Since then it’s got very much worse.
The leftward course has accelerated under Lord Hall-Hall.
It’s a positive-feedback disaster for the Beeb. As long as the moves were low-key, under-the-radar, most people didn’t notice what was happening. But they notice now, and as the Beeb step up the pressure in response, they notice that too. The Teflon-coat on UKIP has them stumped. The Beeboids dutifully read the latest scandal story, and then add ‘But nothing seems to affect their polls’. They seem ready to reach for a tissue.
Actually, he wasn’t trolling. He was simply offering a different perspective from the main one here. I don’t think his arguments were especially good. For example, it is perfectly possible for BBC executives to have employed Clarkson but to not really like him, especially when we remember we are not talking about just one executive. And the word effectively and the word actually do not have opposite meanings – that point fails entirely.
Scott is more or less a troll. He very often resorts to personal attacks and stupidity, but I don’t think it does this site any good to be aggressive to all contrary opinions.
Oh, and, of course, it should have escaped no one’s notice that being a member of the conservative party today is no guarantee one is more conservative than left-liberal. Indeed, there is a sizeable and influential group of the Tory party – including its leadership and the PM himself – who are closer to Labour and the Lib Dems than they are UKIP, who are closer to be actually conservative (whatever the quality of their organisation). So, that a Tory defends the BBC is no evidence it is no biased against small -c conservatism.
it is impossible to defend the imprisonment of people for failing to pay a tax on owning a television set. It is an absurdity that disgraces the political class .
It does no favours to the BBC either as it is impossible to take their sanctimonious campaining seriously about anything as long as imprisonment for failing to pay the tax remains.
Any argument to the contrary is without merit.