Author Archives: Hugh

General BBC-related comment thread!

By | |
112 Comments

Please use this thread for comments about the BBC’s current programming and activities. This post will remain at or near the top of the blog – scroll down for new topic-specific posts. N.B. This is not an invitation for general off-topic comments, rants or chit-chat. Thoughtful comments are encouraged. Comments may also be moderated. Any suggestions for stories that you might like covered would be appreciated! It’s your space, use it wisely.

Post match analysis

By | | , , , , , ,
90 Comments

With the election finally over, let’s take a moment to review the Beeb’s coverage before we move on. This is possibly one for the train spotters, but it’s important not least because of the Beeb’s claim that individual examples of bias aren’t persuasive as they are trying to achieve balance over time. How the Beeb does so is anyone’s guess, as there’s no evidence they monitor it. However, let’s be radical: let’s assume they’re not lying. So let’s look at the coverage of the election (okay, from the moment Palin was selected) on Justin Webb’s blog. And let’s take with the treatment of Palin. To anticipate a few preliminary objections:

  • Why Webb? Well, he’s the North American Editor, so it seems reasonable.
  • Why the blog? I don’t think the Beeb’s going to let me have all the tapes of Webb’s broadcast coverage. And, frankly, I don’t want them. But not to worry: we know that the same rules regarding impartiality apply, so the blog entries should, if Webb’s doing his job, present a balanced and impartial view.
  • Why Palin? Webb’s blogged on her a lot, which means there’s a decent sample. And she’s someone on which there are significantly differing views, which we should therefore expect to see reflected in the coverage. As Webb puts it, she is immensely grating on those who do not like her, but immensely pleasing to those who do.

So let’s look at the balance:

As for Sarah Palin! Her creationist views are bound to become an issue (can you really have a president who denies basic truths about the world?)

So Webb’s coverage of Palin begins, and with characteristic style – ignoring the fact that, as the Beeb’s admitted, she’s not a creationist, and that she’s not running for president. I’m going to chalk that one up as a negative comment.

However, I’m going to exclude those comments that are neutral – and I’m using the term loosely. Comments such as these:

As well as these posts: on the pregnancy; agreeing she is not the new Eagleton; and his entry about lipstickgate.

So what’s that leave us with? Well, here are the postive comments, such as they are:

  • Palins Punches: I liked the parliamentary-style jabs at Obama and they have peppered the news coverage, though I still think she is skating on thin ice.
  • America’s Answer to Thatcher: with that quote about being grating or pleasing (I’m trying to be generous)
  • Two posts about Palin getting more cheers than McCain: Disappointment? and Regan, Clinton, W and Obama. These really seem like digs at McCain, but let’s give him the benefit of the doubt.
  • And an admission that She is not the harbinger of some dark witch-burning retreat into superstition and irrationality.

And on the negative side:

So, on balance, and over time, do you reckon that Webb thinks Palin would have: made a brilliant VP; been an awful one; or do those rules on impartiality and his professionalism make it just impossible to tell?

They did it!

By | | , , , , , ,
143 Comments

I’m going to go out on a limb and say that the result is historic. As for the BBC’s coverage, well thanks for your comments. Iain Dale was also unimpressed, and as evidence of the Beeb’s standing at home and abroad, here’s an American perspective:

The real fun network of the night was BBC America, which picked up the BBC feed being aired back in England. The coverage played like a good-natured “Idiot’s Guide to the American Election,” with references to such states as “North Hampshire.”

After all the hard work, though, it’s only right that the last word goes to the Beeb. And who better than John Simpson (a troll challenge here: can anyone make a convincing case Simpson might have voted Republican?) :

The United States has seen the biggest transformation in its standing in the world since the election of John Fitzgerald Kennedy in November 1960.

This is a country which has habitually, sometimes irritatingly, regarded itself as young and vibrant, the envy of the world. Often this is merely hype. But there are times when it is entirely true.

With Barack Obama’s victory, one of these moments has arrived…

UPDATE: Iain Dale fleshes out his criticism of the Beeb’s coverage here: references to John Bolton’s outburst, “car crash TV”, and a note that this should be David Dimbleby’s last election make it well worth reading.

The Beeb goes to the polls

By | |
215 Comments

So this is it. We’ll soon know whether all the work; all the campaigning; all the speeches; all the infomercials have paid off: Have Webb, Frei and the rest of the Beeb done enough to get their man elected? It’s a big night for students of BBC bias, too. If Obama wins as expected will they be able to hide their glee? If there’s an upset and he loses, will there be tears? There’s 175 BBC staff over there, so too much to cover. Over to you, then…

General BBC-related comment thread!

By | |
78 Comments

Please use this thread for comments about the BBC’s current programming and activities. This post will remain at or near the top of the blog – scroll down for new topic-specific posts. N.B. This is not an invitation for general off-topic comments, rants or chit-chat. Thoughtful comments are encouraged. Comments may also be moderated. Any suggestions for stories that you might like covered would be appreciated! It’s your space, use it wisely.

Economical with the truth

By | |
15 Comments

Another interesting Beeb editorial decision here. It’s the rather ho-hum story that the European Commission accepts what everyone else already knew: that Europe is heading into a recession. In fact, though, there’s one interesting nugget for the UK, which is that it reckons Britain will be hardest hit. I thought that sounded like a good story. And so did the Mail, Guardian, Telegraph and Times – and, of course, The Malaysian Insider. But not the British Broadcasting Corporation, whose audience presumably remain mystified by the slide in the pound.

About time too

By | | ,
98 Comments

David Cameron writes about the Beeb in the Sun today. In it he supports the license fee, but begins thus: I am a slightly rare creature — a lifelong Conservative who is a fan of the BBC. I think that tells you something. And although much of the piece is about the need to cut salaries and the size of the BBC – all good stuff – and the need for a properly independent regulator instead of the Trust (welcome, too), the key passage for readers here is this:

But, I can hear the cry, what about the left-wing bias?

My answer is: yes, the BBC does have what even Andrew Marr called an “innate liberal bias”, principally because it does not have to behave like a commercial organisation and make its money from scratch every year.

That tends to make the BBC instinctively pro-Big State, distinctly iffy about the free market and sometimes dismissive of a conservative viewpoint.

Dave doesn’t really say what he’d do about that, but this does seem to suggest that the issue is now on the table. If I worked at the Beeb, I’d be a bit worried.

General BBC-related comment thread!

By | |
189 Comments

Please use this thread for comments about the BBC’s current programming and activities. This post will remain at or near the top of the blog – scroll down for new topic-specific posts. N.B. This is not an invitation for general off-topic comments, rants or chit-chat. Thoughtful comments are encouraged. Comments may also be moderated. Any suggestions for stories that you might like covered would be appreciated! It’s your space, use it wisely.

Sunday, bloody Sunday

By | | ,
26 Comments

The Sundays bring another round of analysis of the story the Beeb would rather forget – Manuelgate. The Telegraph has two that are interesting: the story that the Tories are considering cutting its funding by £200 million – at least a step in the right direction; and this piece by Bruce Anderson, which makes entertaining reading.

One depressing aspect of it, though, is that he points out that the problem of bias has long been recognised, just never tackled:

When he was in charge, John Birt identified the problem. Many BBC employees socialised only with those who shared their views. They never met anyone who thought that Ronald Reagan was a good president.

He also encapsulates well the argument that may be keeping the Conservatives quiet:

[S]ome Tories see an electoral argument for caution, at least for the time being. The BBC is already hostile. How much more damage would it try to do if it decided that there was nothing to lose?

It seems to me, though, that many at the Beeb have already reached that conclusion.

The Beeb’s favourite paper, the Mail, though, has a more damaging piece, which may shock those relying on text messages to Radio One as a scientific sampling of youth attitudes: An overwhelming 71 per cent of 18 to 29-year-olds believe it was unacceptable for Brand and Ross to leave sexually explicit messages for Mr Sachs and 82 per cent of them think it was wrong for Brand to say that Mr Sachs was ‘thinking about killing himself’, it reports. It also finds support for the license fee is lowest among this demographic.

It’s not a big thing…

By | | , , , ,
24 Comments

But it is irritating that the Beeb consistently reports allegations against those it supports only after they’ve responded to them. So while Obama’s illegal aunt was making headlines in the Sun, Mail, Times, Guardian, Express and over on Channel 4 hours ago, the Beeb only reports once it can lead with Obama’s response: Obama Unaware of Illegal Aunt