Today on Radio 4's World at One at around 13.25 Mark Mardell was introducing a item on laddish behaviour at universities that involved sexist behaviour against women of which the PM had expressed concern.
During the introduction he said, as an aside, that the PM made no mention of the Bullington Club(BC)
As I understand it the BC was indeed male only and in the main the members were only involved in childish high jinks, after a boozy meal, none of which were directed at women.
If I'm basically right, as I believe I am, then Mark Mardell's comments, made on a serious BBC news programme were totally unacceptable, inappropriate, unprofessional and showed bias.
Friday, 22 January 2016
Sunday, 17 January 2016
# 386 -war - This is how the BBC respond to complaints.
I complained to the BBC that Caroline Quinn's Radio 4 program called ' How to make a Brexit' on Tuesday 8th January was bias in favour of the EU.
Dr Richard North did a detailed analysis of the programme's bias, on his blog EU Referendum, and the applicable post is here:-
http://eureferendum.com/blogview.aspx?blogno=85884
Here is a copy of my complaint:-
I have been complaining over 25 years about the BBC's bias over its reporting of the EU as you show clear bias for remaining in. This programme clearly set out to show every possible obstacle to us leaving and did not offer a balance by giving equal coverage to the many advantages to us leaving and how it can he safely achieved. It also contained many distortions of the truth and outright lies. Something I know you will argue is that over time your reporting on the EU is balanced even if this or other programmes weren't. However it is impossible for you to make this point as your reporting over time is also heavily biased in favour of remaining with the status quo that is in the EU. Your Royal Charter demands balance and yet on the EU and much else your reporting is very one sided. Again it is known that you have received soft loans, of many millions, from the EU and your reporting on this subject, of national importance, is a disgrace and clearly biased in the EU's favour. This programme should be removed from the 'I' player, as you did with a far less controversial programme by Quentin Letts on the Met Office which did challenge the science of Climate Change, or you should broadcast a programme that concentrates on how we can safely leave the EU and why it is to our advantage to do so. The main contributor to the programme should be the leading EU expert Dr Richard North whose popular campaigning blog 'EU Referendum' is at the forefront, through his Flexcit plan, of explain how we can and why we should leave the EU. I await your reply with what you propose to do about this disgracefully very biased programme which clearly set out to support the case for us remaining in the EU.
Here is the BBC's reply to my complaint which as I suspected talks about balance over time but appears to address a programme I didn't actually complain about!!!
Dear Mr Warry
Reference CAS-3640767-3TQG85
Thanks for contacting us about our midnight News Bulletin on Radio 4 as broadcast January 02, I understand you felt the programme was biased in favour of the EU.
I appreciate the time you have taken to share your concerns with us and I am sorry about the delay in responding to you.
BBC news editors are charged to ensure that over a reasonable period they reflect the range of significant views, opinions and trends on particular issues. The BBC does not seek to denigrate any view, or to promote any view. It seeks rather to identify all significant views, and to test them rigorously and fairly on behalf of the audience.
In dealing with any controversial matter the BBC is required to give a fair and balanced report. Balance cannot simply be judged on the basis of the time allocated to the representatives of either side of an argument however. One spokesperson may make his or her points concisely while another needs rather longer to explain a point of view.
Account also needs to be taken of the way a subject is covered over a period of time; perfect balance is difficult to achieve on every single occasion while overall it is a more achievable goal.
Nevertheless, all complaints are sent to senior management and programme makers every morning and I included your points in this report. These reports are among the most widely read sources of feedback in the BBC and ensures that your complaint has been seen by the right people quickly. This helps inform their decisions about current and future programmes.
Thank you once again for contacting us.
Kind regards
Ashleigh McFarlane
BBC Complaints
While I've learnt that complaining to the BBC is a pretty pointless exercise I will be writing back pointing out their error. However this does PROVE BEYOND REASONABLE DOUBT that the BBC is beyond censor with a total disregard for balance and knows that it can get away with broadcasting its 'Guardianist' view of the world uninterrupted.
Until the public at large rise up and protest then the BBC wins and we lose.
Dr Richard North did a detailed analysis of the programme's bias, on his blog EU Referendum, and the applicable post is here:-
http://eureferendum.com/blogview.aspx?blogno=85884
Here is a copy of my complaint:-
I have been complaining over 25 years about the BBC's bias over its reporting of the EU as you show clear bias for remaining in. This programme clearly set out to show every possible obstacle to us leaving and did not offer a balance by giving equal coverage to the many advantages to us leaving and how it can he safely achieved. It also contained many distortions of the truth and outright lies. Something I know you will argue is that over time your reporting on the EU is balanced even if this or other programmes weren't. However it is impossible for you to make this point as your reporting over time is also heavily biased in favour of remaining with the status quo that is in the EU. Your Royal Charter demands balance and yet on the EU and much else your reporting is very one sided. Again it is known that you have received soft loans, of many millions, from the EU and your reporting on this subject, of national importance, is a disgrace and clearly biased in the EU's favour. This programme should be removed from the 'I' player, as you did with a far less controversial programme by Quentin Letts on the Met Office which did challenge the science of Climate Change, or you should broadcast a programme that concentrates on how we can safely leave the EU and why it is to our advantage to do so. The main contributor to the programme should be the leading EU expert Dr Richard North whose popular campaigning blog 'EU Referendum' is at the forefront, through his Flexcit plan, of explain how we can and why we should leave the EU. I await your reply with what you propose to do about this disgracefully very biased programme which clearly set out to support the case for us remaining in the EU.
Here is the BBC's reply to my complaint which as I suspected talks about balance over time but appears to address a programme I didn't actually complain about!!!
Dear Mr Warry
Reference CAS-3640767-3TQG85
Thanks for contacting us about our midnight News Bulletin on Radio 4 as broadcast January 02, I understand you felt the programme was biased in favour of the EU.
I appreciate the time you have taken to share your concerns with us and I am sorry about the delay in responding to you.
BBC news editors are charged to ensure that over a reasonable period they reflect the range of significant views, opinions and trends on particular issues. The BBC does not seek to denigrate any view, or to promote any view. It seeks rather to identify all significant views, and to test them rigorously and fairly on behalf of the audience.
In dealing with any controversial matter the BBC is required to give a fair and balanced report. Balance cannot simply be judged on the basis of the time allocated to the representatives of either side of an argument however. One spokesperson may make his or her points concisely while another needs rather longer to explain a point of view.
Account also needs to be taken of the way a subject is covered over a period of time; perfect balance is difficult to achieve on every single occasion while overall it is a more achievable goal.
Nevertheless, all complaints are sent to senior management and programme makers every morning and I included your points in this report. These reports are among the most widely read sources of feedback in the BBC and ensures that your complaint has been seen by the right people quickly. This helps inform their decisions about current and future programmes.
Thank you once again for contacting us.
Kind regards
Ashleigh McFarlane
BBC Complaints
While I've learnt that complaining to the BBC is a pretty pointless exercise I will be writing back pointing out their error. However this does PROVE BEYOND REASONABLE DOUBT that the BBC is beyond censor with a total disregard for balance and knows that it can get away with broadcasting its 'Guardianist' view of the world uninterrupted.
Until the public at large rise up and protest then the BBC wins and we lose.
Friday, 15 January 2016
#385 - war- Question Time panel too right-wing?!
I don't think the BBC QT panel last night was too right-wing but even if it was it makes a change from the mainly left-wing leaning panels over the years.
http://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/2016/01/14/bbc-question-time-criticised-by-viewers-for-right-wing-unbalanced-panel_n_8984288.html
http://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/2016/01/14/bbc-question-time-criticised-by-viewers-for-right-wing-unbalanced-panel_n_8984288.html
Monday, 11 January 2016
# 384 - war - Airtime given to David Bowie's death.
The six o'clock news on BBC1 is 30 minutes followed by the weather and then the regional news up to 7.00pm.
The death of David Bowie has just taken up the first 15 minutes of the news. Covering this type story, as the lead item and for so long, is without precedent and is a classic example of the BBC's dumbing down.
In the past the pop and film star story or major sports item came at the end of the news lasting, I would guess, up to a maximum of around five minutes.
Many at the BBC I would suggest grew up listening to David Bowie and have assumed we are all as interested as they are in his life's story.
Especially as I heard Jeremy Vine is to host a special programme on David Bowie this news item should have been briefly covered at the end of the news.
The BBC proves daily it is unfit for purpose.
The death of David Bowie has just taken up the first 15 minutes of the news. Covering this type story, as the lead item and for so long, is without precedent and is a classic example of the BBC's dumbing down.
In the past the pop and film star story or major sports item came at the end of the news lasting, I would guess, up to a maximum of around five minutes.
Many at the BBC I would suggest grew up listening to David Bowie and have assumed we are all as interested as they are in his life's story.
Especially as I heard Jeremy Vine is to host a special programme on David Bowie this news item should have been briefly covered at the end of the news.
The BBC proves daily it is unfit for purpose.
Wednesday, 6 January 2016
# 383 - war - Barry Humphries on BBC bias.
In the below link Barry Humphries says this:-
Humphries claims in an interview with Radio Times that during talks with the BBC, prior to an appearance as Dame Edna on Michael McIntyre’s Christmas show, a “faceless, nameless person” at the BBC told him if he wanted to say something about Mr Corbyn “you also have to say something about Mr Cameron”. Humphries suggests the irony of their concern for balance, saying: “As if there wasn’t any bias at the BBC at all!”
http://www.thedrum.com/news/2016/01/05/barry-humphries-calls-out-puritanism-bbc-over-ban-corbyn-jokes
Now consider the above in the light of the BBC's balance on Climate Change where they seldom if ever include the opposite view during their broadcasts on the subject.
The hypocrisy is so blatant I could crush a grape!
Humphries claims in an interview with Radio Times that during talks with the BBC, prior to an appearance as Dame Edna on Michael McIntyre’s Christmas show, a “faceless, nameless person” at the BBC told him if he wanted to say something about Mr Corbyn “you also have to say something about Mr Cameron”. Humphries suggests the irony of their concern for balance, saying: “As if there wasn’t any bias at the BBC at all!”
http://www.thedrum.com/news/2016/01/05/barry-humphries-calls-out-puritanism-bbc-over-ban-corbyn-jokes
Now consider the above in the light of the BBC's balance on Climate Change where they seldom if ever include the opposite view during their broadcasts on the subject.
The hypocrisy is so blatant I could crush a grape!
Sunday, 3 January 2016
# 382 - war - The BBC is no friend of our monarchy.
The BBC has previous form in pushing a republican agenda through its attempts to undermine and discredit our monarchy.
Back in October 2007 the BBC One controller Peter Fincham resigned after the trailer for a documentary purported to show the Queen walking out of a photo shoot "in a huff." This was NOT true and the clip used of her complaining was filmed BEFORE the photo shoot and related to something completely different.
So it is no surprise to me to read in the papers today that a new BBC Two drama, Royal Wives at War, alleges that the Queen Mother tried to woo Edward VIII before settling for George VI.
This ludicrous claim has been generally derided by a number of historians and even experts featured in the film have distanced themselves from this claim.
Still this the BBC in 2016, a law unto itself, unmanageable, generally anti 'Establishment' and with left wing luvie tendencies so strong I'm surprised it doesn't just keep going around in circles.
Finally it was also interesting to read in the same paper that Julian Fellowes believes the BBC " lives in a 70's bubble" and despite its public subsidy shows no sympathy for people who do not share its metropolitan world view. He went on to say that ITV just let him get on with making Downton Abbey will he feels sure the "BBC would have not been happy if the drama did not reflect their own political and philosophical viewpoint."
Back in October 2007 the BBC One controller Peter Fincham resigned after the trailer for a documentary purported to show the Queen walking out of a photo shoot "in a huff." This was NOT true and the clip used of her complaining was filmed BEFORE the photo shoot and related to something completely different.
So it is no surprise to me to read in the papers today that a new BBC Two drama, Royal Wives at War, alleges that the Queen Mother tried to woo Edward VIII before settling for George VI.
This ludicrous claim has been generally derided by a number of historians and even experts featured in the film have distanced themselves from this claim.
Still this the BBC in 2016, a law unto itself, unmanageable, generally anti 'Establishment' and with left wing luvie tendencies so strong I'm surprised it doesn't just keep going around in circles.
Finally it was also interesting to read in the same paper that Julian Fellowes believes the BBC " lives in a 70's bubble" and despite its public subsidy shows no sympathy for people who do not share its metropolitan world view. He went on to say that ITV just let him get on with making Downton Abbey will he feels sure the "BBC would have not been happy if the drama did not reflect their own political and philosophical viewpoint."
Friday, 1 January 2016
# 381 - war - BBC bias against christianity.
I received this e-mail yesterday highlighting a small but significant piece of BBC bias over its coverage of Christian worship. I am in no doubt that while the BBC does offer a limited coverage of church services they do so against their own instincts.
Hello Niall
I found your blog while searching on climate change bias as remember someone once found the secret list of members of the committee which formulated BBC policy. Can't find it now of course. Anyway I was visiting a housebound friend before attending church on Christmas Day and she was watching the only service (as far as I know) on TV. I was shocked that they faded it out before the end so the whole of the last verse of Hark the Herald was omitted http://www.bbc.co.uk/iplayer/episode/b06t09r9/christmas-day-eucharist-christmas-day-service-live-from-bath-abbey-2015 . Presumably it over-ran slightly but if that had been a football match or other sport all subsequent programmes would have been re-scheduled. The only chance those who could not attend church had to watch a service was spoilt.
They regularly do this with the Radio 4 morning service on Sundays - fading out the organ voluntary just so they can trail some following programmes. A friend and I have frequently complained but of course they take no notice. So organists who have practised hard for this moment are dismissed as unimportant. The BBC is run by philistines.
Kind regards
I found your blog while searching on climate change bias as remember someone once found the secret list of members of the committee which formulated BBC policy. Can't find it now of course. Anyway I was visiting a housebound friend before attending church on Christmas Day and she was watching the only service (as far as I know) on TV. I was shocked that they faded it out before the end so the whole of the last verse of Hark the Herald was omitted http://www.bbc.co.uk/iplayer/episode/b06t09r9/christmas-day-eucharist-christmas-day-service-live-from-bath-abbey-2015 . Presumably it over-ran slightly but if that had been a football match or other sport all subsequent programmes would have been re-scheduled. The only chance those who could not attend church had to watch a service was spoilt.
They regularly do this with the Radio 4 morning service on Sundays - fading out the organ voluntary just so they can trail some following programmes. A friend and I have frequently complained but of course they take no notice. So organists who have practised hard for this moment are dismissed as unimportant. The BBC is run by philistines.
Kind regards
Brenda
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)