‘Overall, television coverage of the whole election has not covered itself, or anything else, in glory. Too often it has bought the line fed to it by pollsters and pundits on one hand and been childishly confrontational on the other.
This should be the last time that Television attempts to force the political reality into a preassigned format.
The BBC needs fewer gimmicks, more real journalists and a new helmsman; ITV needs to be less deferential to the BBC; Channel 4 needs to grow up.’
AA Gill in the Sunday Times today.
Listening to the BBC news in the car and I heard that Mandelson had pilloried Miliband for not laying out Labour’s plan for economic growth… the web report doesn’t quote him on growth but limits itself to this….
Comparing Labour’s economic strategy to a polo mint “with a great hole in the middle”, he said it gave the impression it was “for the poor, hate the rich, ignoring completely the vast swathe of the population who exist in between who do have values like ours”.
Mandelson’s words reminded me of something from earlier in the week that I let go by at the time, a Nicky Campbell debate on Tuesday in which he asks ‘Are the politicans failing to talk about the issues that are important to you?’
Now if he had asked that back say in January you might have thought yes, let’s stick our oar in and make ourselves heard but two days before the election, you have to be kidding!, and is the BBC really trying to lay the blame for a lack of debate over a wide range of subjects at the politician’s door?
Surely it was the BBC’s job to broaden the debate and ask those relevant questions about subjects the politicians want to skirt around such as education, foreign policy and immigration…and yes Labour’s plans for growth….the one subject they did want to get their teeth into was the Tory’s plans for welfare reforms and the £12 bn of savings/cuts….funny that.
The BBC had a bad election as I said before….it showed clear bias in what subjects it concentrated on, who got the headlines and who it sought to undermine….but it also had a bad election in its role as a news and current affairs broadcaster just from a professional point of view, failing to explore all the issues and challenge the politicans of all colours and creeds about them. It had a very lazy election.
Just as Mandelson says Labour was intent solely on bashing the rich and presenting itself as the party of the poor the BBC followed the same agenda telling us that inequality was THE major political narrative of our time. How often did the BBC report from the poorest areas of a city or region, from foodbanks or concentrated on Zero Hour Contracts when such contracts make up a very small portion of the employment market and around 2/3rds of people on them are happy to be so? This was the BBC that painted the bleakest picture of the NHS as a failed or failing enterprise rather than having a balanced look at what it provides…certainly it is under strain but not as a result of Coaliton changes. Then we had the ‘living wage’, non-doms, the bedroom tax and the apparent lack of productivity.
All Labour policy concerns given headline status by the BBC.
What did the Tories get? The sole big Tory splash that I can remember the BBC going big on was the Tory NHS announcement…but that of course was only to try to rip it apart with claims that the promise was unfunded. However, despite a couple of interviews when Miliband was on the rack over his NHS plans, the BBC machine ignored the fact that Labour’s own plans were unfunded…the Mansion tax and tax avoidance money making schemes ridiculed by most commentators.
Labour promised to spend £2.5 billion above whatever the Tories promised….and yet even that £2.5 bn was, as said, unfunded….so how on earth would they fund the rest?
That takes us to growth and Labour’s lack of plans to increase it…central to funding all its promises, and especially in addressing the ‘living standards crisis’, unless they aimed to fund it all by soaking the rich…..where were the BBC questions asking about this important factor in Labour’s utopian dream? How was Labour going to fund that improvement in living standards that was the backbone of its attack on the Tories?
The IFS, led by a man with links to the Labour party, told us that Labour could make very few cuts, borrow more and still cut the deficit…just how would that work? The BBC didn’t ask. Even when the BBC did quote something from the IFS that criticised both parties the criticism of Labour was soon massaged out of the news.
The BBC failed both in its remit to be impartial and also just from a professional stand point…failing to explore the issues, failing to challenge the Parties on subjects they didn’t want to talk about and failing to really get what the Public thought important into the debate…which is all a bit ironic as the BBC claims it was at the heart of it all…
Election 2015: TV debates ‘most influential’ for voters
More than a third of voters were influenced by the TV debates between the political leaders in the run-up to the election, a survey has found.
According to a Panelbase survey of 3,019 people, 38% were influenced by the debates, 23% by TV news coverage and 10% by party political broadcasts.
The research group said TV was “by far the most influential media source”, outscoring newspapers and social media.
Of those surveyed by Panelbase, 62% said TV coverage overall had been the most influential in informing them about the general election, the parties and their policies – helping them form their opinions.
TV wielded far more power on those surveyed than newspapers at 25%, websites at 17%, radio at 14%, and speaking to family and friends at 14%.
A paradox there….if TV coverage is so influential why is there not a Labour government? Perhaps the answer is that we would have had an even bigger Tory majority if the BBC had been less, far, far less, biased.
I listened to 5 live for the first time in months, last night. I tuned into the Nolan Show for a while, and i couldn’t believe what I was listening to. It was a total post mortem on the Labour parties defeat at the election, and how are we going to survive for another 5 years under the nasty Tories. One left wing commentator after another.
I think that the left, including the bbc are living inside a bubble. This bubble in effect been created by believing their own propaganda that much, that no other opinion matters to them. The strange thing is that whilst millions of us saw through their every day left wing rants and total support for the Labour party on the run up to the election, and therefore voted accordingly for an electable government, there bubble still hasn’t burst. They can’t accept the public vote, and are blaming the public for the way they have voted.
Some of the left wing comments on that show last night were down right nasty, and totally unacceptable for a so called Impartial organization. They seem to be getting even more extreme in their views after the election. Pure bitterness!
Its time for this government to take action against the bbc. Now!!!l l
Cameron needs the BBC to protect him against UKIP and to shill for his EU ‘renegotiation’; the Beeb hates the Conservatives but hates UKIP even more. I will be amazed if he takes on the Beeb, he could have raised the biased audience matter at any time over the last five years but he waited for Farage to do it for him.
I think we, the country, have been very lucky. Several factors have led to a Conservative majority – not least the efforts of the BBC.
If I am being kind all the time spent on air for the past few weeks by the BBC discussing hung parliaments was wishful thinking on their part. Perhaps they were hoping it would give them endless stories to fill the airwaves for a week or two.
But perhaps the Beeb’s publicity for Nicola Sturgeon saying she (well technically not her as she isn’t a Westminster MP) would lock the Tories out of Downing Street; the thought of a hung parliament repeated endlessly came together to frighten people into voting Conservative; plus the curious movement of LibDem seats to Blue . Five years of party pols by the BBC on behalf of Labour had an effect. Just not the one the BBC wanted. But I do believe that the endless discussion of hung parliaments in the last week or two on the BBC had the greatest effect of all at getting the blue vote out.
Sturgeon’s “Lock the Tories Out – I hate the Tories – we all hate Tories” rhetoric was irresistible for the BBC – no wonder they backed her to the hilt. It will have brought back sepia toned memories of student common rooms “kicking the Tories out”. There were times when I was half expecting the old “Tory Scum your time has come” slogans to be wheeled out. It was pathetic.
In their own left wing echo chamber the arguments have all been won – there is no need for debate, dissenting opinions must be shouted at until they desist. If you want to alienate people you shout them down, tell them they’re evil, treat them as scum. The Left, and by extension the BBC were guilty of all these tactics.
It should come as no surprise that people were fed up of the abusive, condescending tone that was deployed every time anyone had the temerity to admit to being a Tory, and finally people just didn’t bother admitting it to the pollsters and instead waited for the anonymity of the ballot box to express their opinion. and stick two fingers up at the metropolitan elite.
The biased BBC are inconsolable over the demise of their beloved Labour party. Their whole focus this weekend has been about how Labour might rise from the ashes of Babylon, wheeling out Labour has-beens to reminisce and provide patently ludicrous analysis that is simply irrelevant to the majority of voters. Cannot believe we’re coerced into funding this rancid drivel. The reality outside of the trendy lefty circle in London is simple; the English have rejected far-leftism and socialism, and for good bloody reason. Long live Britannia!
For several years now I’ve needed not just a pinch but a whole tub of salt to cope with the Beeb, after stopping my husband watching Newsnight (his blood pressure & my sanity) I now not only take the tub of salt but invert everything they say and do . Even then I only believe 10% of it. I look on the Beeb as total fantasy and entertainment of the dark side.
The discomfort of the liberal left and it’s chief mouthpiece is because it denied reality for too long. Fortunately as it turned out as I am sure Milliband was misled by the liberal media.
Let the BBC go on it’s delusional way. Let Polly and Owen and the rest continue to blather. Keep Newsnight as dull and incoherent as before. The new right has a long way to go but the world has turned.
I hope Cameron has the sense to understand this.
The shires voted to the right. What London and the other city hellholes did is not that important.
The new mood is Europe wide . Wait and see. The marxist left thought it had got us beaten but the marxist left is delusional and cowardly.
Keep the BBC as it is .I know it costs us money but it will help to bury the left for generations.
Funny that when Peter Mandelson scoots about in an electric car,the BBC can`t get enough of him.
Or when he silkily sneers at an Osborne on a yacht maybe?
yet when the truth must out-and he (this once) tells the truth-why, it`s about as welcome as a wet fart in a spacesuit!
Still eh….look at the list of the great and good who`ve nailed Labours lousy project to bring Greece to us here.
Dominic Lawson,Janet Daley, Nick Cohen, AA Gill, Andrew Roberts, Rod Liddle,Niall Ferguson-and that`s just the few I know of!
Even John Prescott got someone to chalk him out something with big words-but was at least a fair effort at English in parts.
Wish these folk would now shut up and let Owen, Ken and all following Labour candidates for the spittoon speculum…Dianne and Polly…continue to blather on the BBC and not read what the grown-ups are trying to tell them.
In fact, I`m now glad that the BBC provide a sunset home for socialism-hope Osborne cites it as a fat mansion and taxes them to buggery!
But why do we pay for them all?
The 8pm news headlines blurts out that the LIb Dem election for their new plinth pony is now announced.
Hold your breath now!
The ballot papers are due out later in the week and the results to be announced on June 16th or such?
They`re taking the piss-won`t take five minutes to separate the Shit Candidate-from the Shite candidate!
My bets?
Mark Oaten(Shite and Shit)
Lembit Opik( Sheisse)
Lord Rennard of Crinkly
Chris Huhne(Shit Go Faster skid Marx)
Cyril Smiffy( Fat Shite)
But funnily enough-all candidates above are preferable to Ed Davey…
I’ll be honest, apart from the Election Night programme with Dimbleby et al, I truly have not watched BBC TV for many years and only occasionally listen to R4, generally until my blood pressure reaches dangerous levels and I get so sick of their untruthful spiel (e.g. Today + World At One + P.M.) that I soon switch off. I had often tried to explain to family and friends my dislike of the way the BBC has “turned” over my lifetime (now well over 70 years old) from being an impartial reporter of worldwide news, to become an actual broadcaster of left-wing views rather than news, but all attempts were usually met with a shrug: a “what-can-we-do-about-it?”, or a “Hush! – there’s a reality/celebrity programme on … ” and I truly thought all was lost.
These people, my friends and family, seemed to believe every single bit of “news” they ever heard over 24 hours from the BBC TV and radio, and then my own observations to them were met with remarks about, “Well, what about Murdoch … etc., … blah, blah, blah … ”
I was really afraid that on election night the results would come in and reflect the constant brainwashing of the past innumerable years by our national broadcaster, probably since “Thatcher” was in power. (Which is still a good laugh line on most BBC R4 “comedy” shows, especially those broadcast at 18:30, right after the 6 o’clock news. – Coincidence?).
And then! – Election night – “Hail, Glorious Morn!” Just what on earth happened? All my fears faded into dust as once again the Great British Public, in the privacy and sanctity of the polling booth, put their cross where they though it would do best, or perhaps where it might do least damage.
In any case, they refused to follow the lead of their masters in Broadcasting House and just as so often in the past, the British public thought for themselves. I am relieved at the outcome of this election though I still deeply fear for the future of this country.
This may perhaps be the last General Election I shall see and I am glad the result has given me great satisfaction.
Great news for all contributors to this website!! I have just heard that John Whittingdale has been appointed Secretary of State for Culture, Media and Sport. He has always consistently spoken out about the iniquities of the BBC’s licence fee, in particular about the need to decriminalise the so-called offence of not having a licence, as well as the need to reduce the amount currently paid for the licence, in view of the smaller number of people who now watch that channel. His eventual aim would be to abolish the licence fee and replace it with a fairer source of funding. The luvvies must be quacking in their little cotton socks as a result of hearing this news. The bias displayed by the BBC during the election campaign will not have gone unnoticed by the Conservative Party.
I sometimes wonder if Al Beeb is on a ‘death wish’ bearing in mind the bias, esp during the election?
Or on the other hand, perhaps some of the employees are looking for really good redundancy payments when the organisation downsizes ?
‘His eventual aim would be to abolish the licence fee and replace it with a fairer source of funding.’
What do you think he favours in securing this fairer source?
i did a rough and ready analysis of bBBC on the back of a Telegraph
article a few months back which analyzed the size of their management team.
A rule of thumb suggests 1:8 is a general average.
bBBC seemed to fall well short of this number possibly as low as 1:2.
This would suggest a top heavy organisation.
The review might consider;
1) just what is the span of control
2) in which newspapers have recruitment spends been concentrated and why?
1)