TRUST?

Just how influential might the BBC be compared to other media organisations? Biased BBC contributor Alan explains…

“59% of public trust the BBC for news. 5% Sky News. No other source gets a value above 2%…the Sun and the Times get a trust value of a mere 1% each.

So, lots of influence for Murdoch there.If Murdoch and his stable had been so influential with politicians who were ‘running scared’ of him how is it that he didn’t support Europe or immigration and Labour did?  Two major policy areas and yet Labour sailed on regardless of coverage in the Sun and Times.

However let’s not forget that Miliband’s present communications chief, Tom Baldwin, was placing stories favourable to Labour and anti-Tory in the Times…..funny the BBC don’t mention that…..Alistair Campbell was known to liaise with Baldwin in endless attempts to ­discredit the Labour government’s enemies, the results of which regularly ended up prominently in The Times — a paper once admired for its thundering independence.’

Why do people trust the BBC Because it is accurate, impartial, truthful, reliable and unbiased. However this information is provided by the BBC from a survey commissioned by itself.…using 650 people….for a submission to the Plurality Review.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/media/2012/jan/05/bbc-ofcom-media-plurality-review

‘In its response to the consultation, the BBC said it accepts that “any assessment of plurality might take into account its share, voice and role in audiences’ news diet”, but argues that despite its role as the largest supplier of news, it should not face curbs to protect the rest of the market, and should only have its role questioned during the period in which its royal charter is up for renewal. The BBC document cites new research conducted for the broadcasting, showing that it attracts “72% of all television news minutes consumed, despite only broadcasting 27% of news minutes broadcast”.’

“The BBC uses its leading position not to advance its own interests and opinions but to ensure that a diversity of news and views is presented to all in a fair and balanced way.”
Said the BBC of itself.

The BBC have decided that the measure to use when judging plurality is not actually how many journalists or tv and radio stations  you have, or indeed even the number of viewers and listener and readers, but the revenue you make…or in the case of the BBC the revenue they are gifted by order of law.

Wonder why that is….oh…..Murdoch makes lots and lots of cash, more than the BBC.  Therefore he is unfit to run a media business and his operation should be hamstrung. Thereby in fact reducing plurality and choice.”

TRUST OR DISTRUST?

B-BBC contributor Alan observes


“I almost choked whenI read the below….had George Monbiot, the Guardian’s greenie guardian,suddenly come out as a climate sceptic, scourge of BBC environmentalcorrespondents and dissolute politicans?

http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2012/feb/27/britain-rebuilt-in-aid-corporate-power?INTCMP=SRCH

‘This column is a plea for distrust. Distrust is the resource on whichdemocracy relies. Distrust inspires the scrutiny and accountability withoutwhich representation becomes a lie. Distrust is all that stands between us andbamboozlement by people who, like the BBC’s Black and Harrabin, channel theinstincts of the billionaire owners of newspapers and broadcasters.’

Actually no, there was no mention of Black, Harrabin or the BBC….I made thatup…..but I think if he’s so keen on this distrust thingy, accountability,democracy and bringing the media to book then it should apply equally toall….not just the select political and commercial rivals of those who controlmost of the mainstream media….ie the BBC and friends.

ALL THE NEWS NOT FIT FOR THE BBC…

I see that the BBC is pushing the story that a former US attorney general can be sued by an American citizen held as a witness suspected of having information in a terrorism case, a court has ruled.”

“Abdullah al-Kidd (Typical US citizen) accuses John Ashcroft, attorney general from 2001 to 2005, of violating his constitutional rights in 2003, when he was held for 16 days. The court said detention of witnesses without charge after the 9/11 attacks was “repugnant to the constitution”. The US Department of Justice said it was reviewing the court’s order. A three-judge panel of the 9th US Circuit Court of Appeals also said the government’s policy was “a painful reminder of some of the most ignominious chapters of our national history.”
Now then, let’s just focus on the nature of the 9th US Circuit Court of Appeal because the BBC doesn’t. This Court is profoundly liberal and is the most struck down of all US Courts. It is stacked with outrageous liberal judges such as Stephen Reinhardt – the man who advocates that the Pledge of Allegiance is “unconstitutional.” This Court is notorious for it’s liberal agitation but the BBC primly leaves out all reference to that – after all, any form of retro Bush bashing is always good.
I’m also just waiting on the BBC to run the story that Obama’s Green Czar, Van Jones, is not only a renowned communist but also a 9/11 truther. Isn’t that news in BBC circles?

TRUST?

A logo for the British Broadcasting Corporation (BBC) is seen at its Broadcasting House  in central LondonWell then, did you see the claim that support for the BBC has risen in the last five years with almost four out of five people believing it is an institution to be proud of? How interesting. I wonder who commissioned the poll? ICM/Guardian. I see, well, that’s as impartial as you get, right? Asked if the BBC was trustworthy, almost seven in 10 of the 1,001 adults questioned said yes, up from six in 10.

OK – let’s produce our own poll, and let’s see if we can get more than ICM’s 1001 adults answering.