The BBC is largely impartial, the fact you have the Right saying it's Left wing and the Left saying it's Right wing means it is doing its job. It's almost impossible to report on anything with an opinion without any conscious or subconscious biases, but on the whole as an overall Body it is mostly neutral. It's need to be seen as impartial is also pretty funny sometimes (not just with politics but with anything) as it does get some things wrong, but on the whole it is largely impartial and certainly a slower source of news where it corroborates it's facts, in the main.

The BBC is largely impartial, the fact you have the Right saying it's Left wing and the Left saying it's Right wing means it is doing its job. It's almost impossible to report on anything with an opinion without any conscious or subconscious biases, but on the whole as an overall Body it is mostly neutral. It's need to be seen as impartial is also pretty funny sometimes (not just with politics but with anything) as it does get some things wrong, but on the whole it is largely impartial and certainly a slower source of news where it corroborates it's facts, in the main.

 

That is a common false narrative. The BBTory IS right wing and studies have proven this time and time again. It is centre-right and supports the establishment. The right always complain in order to push it further and further right, and thwy're largely succeeding.

That is a common false narrative. The BBTory IS right wing and studies have proven this time and time again. It is centre-right and supports the establishment. The right always complain in order to push it further and further right, and thwy're largely succeeding.

 

Can you link me to the studies which prove it? There's been studies which show a left and right win bias before, which still leads me to be lead to believe on the whole, the organisation is largely impartial.

 

I'm not convinced the organisation is right wing or Tory. Not disputing the fact in a political sense, there is not editorial bias to certain parties, but on the whole I think it is fairly neutral. Bias is heavily subjective for starters.

How on earth can BIAS be subjective? It is is either there or it isn't, ans ir is. I'll find them later, but study after study has clearly shown a centre-right bias towards the establishment. Just watch the news and how they frame any Tory misdeeds, how they covered up for Vlojo at the memorial with OLD FOOTAGE!!, put Corbyn in a Russian hat against a red background, have the most right wing guests and Tory plants on BBToryTime, and just do client journalism for the Tories. That's not to mention the BBTory chief id a massive Tory, as are their nees editors, soooo......

It's utterly crazy to me that I see hardcore Tories on Twitter who seem convinced that Laura Kuenssberg is a "leftie" and a "Labour spokesperson", like how WARPED do you have to be to actually believe that?

 

They do it on purpose so that the bbc are kept in check!

Can you link me to the studies which prove it? There's been studies which show a left and right win bias before, which still leads me to be lead to believe on the whole, the organisation is largely impartial.

 

I'm not convinced the organisation is right wing or Tory. Not disputing the fact in a political sense, there is not editorial bias to certain parties, but on the whole I think it is fairly neutral. Bias is heavily subjective for starters.

 

I think the bbc is a great establishment and by far the most value for money media and tv. But it’s undoubtedly part of the establishment in the UK and the death of Prince Phillip is the perfect example of this but I agree they are damned if they do and damned if they don’t.

 

 

Edit deleted

Edited May 26, 20214 yr by steve201

The biggest problem for the BBC (and any broadcaster committed to impartiality) is that the Tories have completely changed the game. Broadcasters are used to being able to report on an issue by saying "The government says this, the opposition says that". Leaving aside for the moment that the opposition view almost invariably came from the main opposition party with no suggestion that other parties may have a different view, that approach broadly worked as both sides were expressing an opinion.

 

The problem now is that we have a government that lies a lot of the time. "Impartiality" now means pretending that reporting a lie and the opposition view represents some sort of balance. To quote something repeated many times elsewhere "If one person says it is pouring with rain outside while another says it is gloriously sunny, the job of a journalist is not simply to report both statements. Their job is to stick their head out of the window and find out what the weather is really like". The same thing happened in the EU referendum, particularly with things like the infamous bus. That £350m claim was repeated endlessly on BBC new bulletins with no hint that it might not be true.

 

That insistence on "balance" can sometimes create a false impression. Until fairly recently, reports on climate change included a contribution from a politician to "balance" the views of someone who was an expert in climate science. That could create the false impression that opinion is evenly divided when, at least among people who know what they are talking about, that simply isn't true. They did the same for a long time over the safety of the MMR vaccine.

 

The one issue where the idea of impartiality is totally ignored is the royal family. There is never any suggestion on news programmes that some of us would like to see the end of the monarchy.

 

A lot of the complaints of BBC bias from right-wingers relates to general programming with comedy their main target. Satire, by its very nature, is bound to be largely anti-government, whoever is in power at the time. A lot of comedy punches upwards, attacking the powerful. In pre-Thatcher days, the powerful included trade unions so they were often the target of comedy. Now that the unions have been emasculated, they are rarely mentioned in comedy or satire.

 

For all its faults, the BBC remains one of the country's greatest institutions. It is one of the most trusted and recognisable brands in the world. That ought to make the Tories among its staunchest defenders. Instead, it may be the Tories who destroy it and, as a result, end much that is great about British broadcasting.

How on earth can BIAS be subjective? It is is either there or it isn't, ans ir is. I'll find them later, but study after study has clearly shown a centre-right bias towards the establishment. Just watch the news and how they frame any Tory misdeeds, how they covered up for Vlojo at the memorial with OLD FOOTAGE!!, put Corbyn in a Russian hat against a red background, have the most right wing guests and Tory plants on BBToryTime, and just do client journalism for the Tories. That's not to mention the BBTory chief id a massive Tory, as are their nees editors, soooo......

 

Well as you said before you think the BBC is right wing and right wingers think it is too liberal/left wing? The examples you've said don't mean the BBC is institutionally biased, because what you percieve as bias I may percieve different. There are certainly editors of programmes that are biased and show their biases but the BBC is regulated independently and as far as I am aware the regulaters have never said there is a bias??

 

My one big gripe with the BBC is as Sudehead points out below - in their efforts to be impartial, it gives weight to different arguments and gives a platform for extreme views imo, if unintentional.

What’s the comparison in America - ABC? Are they all sold to the highest bidder now?

What’s the comparison in America - ABC? Are they all sold to the highest bidder now?

 

I don't think America has a state broadcaster. ABC is owned by Disney. CBS is WarnerBros, NBC is Universal and Fox is Fox. They're all the big traditional broacasters, although I could be wrong.

What’s the comparison in America - ABC? Are they all sold to the highest bidder now?

PBS I think?

 

ABC is the Australian equivalent.

Been watching the documentary on sky about history from the sixties, seventies etc and there’s episodes about tv in the decade etc and it’s American made by CNN and they said these channels were bought by private companies in the 80s but thought like ABC American Broadcast Company was originally the ‘national’ broadcaster and CBS was like ITV!

Edited May 27, 20214 yr by steve201

The BBC is largely impartial, the fact you have the Right saying it's Left wing and the Left saying it's Right wing means it is doing its job.

This is very /r/enlightenedcentrism galaxy brain lol

 

Even in a polarised environment, it is not a zero sum game. The metric you use to judge that the BBC's news output is valuable is not 'both sides are dissatisfied'.

This is very /r/enlightenedcentrism galaxy brain lol

 

Even in a polarised environment, it is not a zero sum game. The metric you use to judge that the BBC's news output is valuable is not 'both sides are dissatisfied'.

 

Eeexactly! The right wing are ALWAYS dissatisified. They want ALL the power.

The BBC has become a lot more noticeably pro-establishment in the last decade, even if maybe that's just me getting better at noticing bias, it's just as much what they don't say as what they do. But if you think their Tory-associated directors, the slow filling of all top positions with people favourable to the government hasn't had any noticeable effect...

 

Right-wingers just gripe with the BBC because it does liberal culture focuses sometimes, which has very little bearing on their reporting on political power, where it has become far more of a mouthpiece than otherwise.

This is very /r/enlightenedcentrism galaxy brain lol

 

Even in a polarised environment, it is not a zero sum game. The metric you use to judge that the BBC's news output is valuable is not 'both sides are dissatisfied'.

 

There is no evidence the BBC is heavily biased to a certain political party or a wing. If someone has conclusive proof then I'll accept it but as far as I am aware loads of people say it is biased but nobody (and nor an independent regulator) has been able to prove widespread bias.

*laughs in Nationalist*

 

Ok. Sure.

 

 

We will also just ignore the contribution that BBC made to Brexit with their refusal to refute outright lies and their insistence at both siding literally every f***ing debate to the point if you went on their on a platform of „slitting someone’s throat is bad“ there would be 2 „experts“ to counter your point, a throat slitter, and then Laura K to talk about how damaging it is for Labour/Independence that Corbyn/Sturgeon hasn’t said anything on throat slitting yet

*laughs in Nationalist*

 

Ok. Sure.

We will also just ignore the contribution that BBC made to Brexit with their refusal to refute outright lies and their insistence at both siding literally every f***ing debate to the point if you went on their on a platform of „slitting someone’s throat is bad“ there would be 2 „experts“ to counter your point, a throat slitter, and then Laura K to talk about how damaging it is for Labour/Independence that Corbyn/Sturgeon hasn’t said anything on throat slitting yet

 

As Suedehead mentioned before, just because the BBC acts impartial it does not mean they are biased to a certain political view point. I take your point that Kussenberg may be slightly biased based on who her sources are, but that is wholly different to saying the BBC is a Tory Party propaganda machine, because there is no conclusive evidence for it, just people's own biases on the situation.

@1397935112084463620

 

Unbiased impartial broadcaster at work.