# 393 - war - Tony Blackburn.

Personally I believe Tony Blackburn's side of the story compared to the BBC's but regardless of the 'Story' it is also clear that the manner of his dismissal did NOT follow the normal Personnel Department (now Human Resources) protocols.

I hope Tony Blackburn takes the BBC to an Industrial Tribunal, for unfair dismissal, and wins his case and is duly compensated appropriately.

As I keep saying the BBC, like many large organisations, is completely beyond reforming itself and there is no will in the government to take the action necessary to radically cut the BBC down in size.

The sure fired way to sort out the BBC is to stop the licence the fee and let it compete in its own right. This is what I advocate as the ONLY way to reform the BBC.

However having said that I would be happy to see a full and detailed review of other options which might allow partial government funding on the basis of a continued 'Public Service' broadcasting remit.

 

# 392 - war - Pro EU bias.

The first item on the 9 o'clock news this morning on Radio 4 was on the EU, as I suspect it will be for the next few months.

During the piece they only interviewed or more correctly played a recording of one person.

He was an MP and was of course for remaining in - there was NO balance to this at all.

# 391 - war - BBC bias in favour of the EU.

The BBC has a history of being in favour of the EU from whom they have millions of pounds in soft loans.

The Sun makes a good point recently that to show fairness, during the forthcoming campaign, the BBC should monitor their output on the EU to ensure balance.


The BBC has refused to do this which is of course very convenient for them and I give you one very simple example from today's broadcasts to show how their reporting will almost certainly be bias in favour of the EU.

On the Andrew Marr show, BBC 1 9-10am, Cameron easily got double the time of Farage to make his case. Later on the 11 o'clock news on Radio 2 during the first slot on the EU the only person interviewed was Cameron.

Finally EVERY time the BBC mentions the Prime Minster and his views in a broadcast without equal airtime to the Leavers to challenge his views then they ARE showing bias in favour of the EU.

# 390 - war- How the BBC never asks the right questions.

The last item on the Today programme on Tuesday at 08.55 discussed a survey that put English eight  year olds at thirteenth on a league table of happiness out of 16 countries and topping the league was Romania.

Now the obvious question to me was that most of the countries above us are not dominated by the luvie brigade and have traditional families, discipline and generally provide an environment where children feel more secure.

I've just started a great book called 'The liberal delusion' by John March which sets out to expose the disastrous consequences of our liberal attitude to children. This is one in which no child must fail or be disciplined and all children are considered little angels and if and when they do wrong it is not their fault but 'societies'.

That is why we are thirteenth but you would never get the luvie BBC to admit that the social liberal attitudes they promote are a large part of the problem.   

# 389 -war - 'Leave' nutters versus reasonable' Remainers'.

On Tuesday night News at Ten on BBC 1 the first item was naturally on the EU.

During the 'vox pop' section they interviewed a male 'Leaver' (50+) in a pub sat next to a woman who rather nervously said he would take up arms and die for this country and he didn't want us importing criminals.

Next in another location, in the interest of balance of course, they interviewed two attractive reasonable ladies (35ish?) who said they would prefer to stay in the EU.

This is the sort of blatant bias the BBC plays day in day out. 

# 388 - war - Damning Culture Media and Sport select committee report.

11 February 2016

The Culture, Media and Sport Committee's report on the BBC Charter review says the BBC is an "extraordinary national and global institution" with a "vast amount to contribute as an international standard of excellence in public service broadcasting", but that in a fast-moving world it needs a radical overhaul of its governance arrangements. 

• Report: BBC Charter Review
• Report: BBC Charter Review (PDF 673KB)
• Inquiry: BBC Charter Review 
• Culture, Media and Sport Committee

Its Director General is "effectively accountable to no one" but also lacks the support for difficult editorial decisions or to drive change through the organisation.

BBC's accountability and transparency

Improving the BBC’s accountability and transparency will help it to continue to innovate and create superb programming, while addressing a culture that is still perceived by many as arrogant and introspective.
This was most recently illustrated by the "lobbying letter" episode: the Committee says it was completely unacceptable for the BBC to be secretly using stars to campaign "independently" on its behalf, and particularly disappointing that BBC executives refused either to investigate or disavow the episode and instead defended the BBC's actions.

Committee findings and recommendations

• The BBC Trust has lost confidence and credibility and should be abolished. However, the problem that the Trust was intended to solve remains
• The BBC’s Board needs to be reformed as a unitary board and strengthened, with the addition of an independent Chair
• It awaits the results of the Clementi review, but in its judgement wider accountability should be the task of a separate section of Ofcom
• A new complaints procedure would see all complaints handled initially by the BBC itself, with both industry and editorial issues subsequently escalated to Ofcom
• The redefined BBC Board should re-examine the business case for BBC Worldwide and, if it decides to retain the wholly-owned subsidiary model, it should be subjected to greater transparency and accountability and kept under kept under review by Ofcom
• There remain concerns about the BBC Studios proposals on four fronts: State Aid rules, transparency and accountability over pay, the relationship between BBC Studios and BBC Commissioners, and the BBC’s regional presence
• The lack of transparency around salaries, and concerns over levels of pay for executives and talent alike, must be addressed

# 387 - war- Mark Mardell's subtle unprofessional bias.

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. 

# 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.

#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

# 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.