The BBC - Impartial or not?
Scroll to see replies
j4mes_bond25
Now, why doesn't it surprise me when a Yank say so 
Just cos BBC portrays the true picture of American politicians & their sleazy politics along with their filthy & illegal acts of torturing innocents .........
Just cos BBC portrays the true picture of American politicians & their sleazy politics along with their filthy & illegal acts of torturing innocents ......... "America is often portrayed as an ignorant, unsophisticated sort of place, full of bible bashers and ruled to a dangerous extent by trashy television, superstition and religious bigotry, a place lacking in respect for evidence based knowledge. I know that is how it is portrayed because I have done my bit to paint that picture..." BBC's Washington correspondent Justin Webb
Vienna
"America is often portrayed as an ignorant, unsophisticated sort of place, full of bible bashers and ruled to a dangerous extent by trashy television, superstition and religious bigotry, a place lacking in respect for evidence based knowledge. I know that is how it is portrayed because I have done my bit to paint that picture..." BBC's Washington correspondent Justin Webb
Did he say that on air?
Vienna
"America is often portrayed as an ignorant, unsophisticated sort of place, full of bible bashers and ruled to a dangerous extent by trashy television, superstition and religious bigotry, a place lacking in respect for evidence based knowledge. I know that is how it is portrayed because I have done my bit to paint that picture..." BBC's Washington correspondent Justin Webb
I'm glad you agree with the BBC & the TRUTH
Beekeeper
Did he say that on air?
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/programmes/from_our_own_correspondent/4400865.stm
j4mes_bond25
Now, why doesn't it surprise me when a Yank say so Just cos BBC portrays the true picture of American politicians & their sleazy politics along with their filthy & illegal acts of torturing innocents .........
Just cos BBC portrays the true picture of American politicians & their sleazy politics along with their filthy & illegal acts of torturing innocents ......... So true. The coverage of Hurricane Katrina for example. Why such criticism for actually exposing the poor preparation and response of the authorities? Isn't that what journalism is about?
Ferrus
Only the British have the political maturity to have an independent state media
Oh the arrogance.
In May 2005, Robin Aitken, a former BBC correspondent accused the BBC of "institutionalised leftism" in a book he is writing provisionally entitled Taking Sides: Bias at the BBC. His book will expose what he saw as the BBC's systemic political bias and give detailed examples.
Mr Aitken worked for the BBC for 25 years including Radio 4's Today programme during the Iraq war. He told The Daily Telegraph: "The scandal is that left wing voices are not balanced by right wing voices. If that is not reformed, then it's hard to justify allowing the BBC to hold on to its monopoly.
Mr Aitken says many BBC staffers are active members of the Labour Party and the Liberal Democrats. He adds: "In 25 years I met only a smattering of Tories in the organisation."
Mr Aitken, who describes himself as a "middle-of-the-road Conservative", explained how in his view BBC coverage had been biased during his time as a journalist there.
"Personal reflections by BBC correspondents around the world"
I see nothing wrong with correspondents offering their opinions in editorials, and I don't expect you do either?
I'm actually suprised you guys don't know about this stuff....I mean, to me, it's fairly obvious...the BBC just sells people what they want in the end...and if that means perpetuating negative stereotypes.......then they give the rest of the world what it wants. It has a fairly low base of supprt in the US hisorically, so what does it have to lose? Nothing.
Beekeeper
"Personal reflections by BBC correspondents around the world"
I see nothing wrong with correspondents offering their opinions in editorials, and I don't expect you do either?
I see nothing wrong with correspondents offering their opinions in editorials, and I don't expect you do either?
"I know that is how it is portrayed because I have done my bit to paint that picture..."
Who to, his kids?
I see nothing wrong with correspondents offering their opinions in editorials
And editorials are personal and impartial?
djchak
I'm actually suprised you guys don't know about this stuff....I mean, to me, it's fairly obvious...the BBC just sells people what they want in the end...and if that means perpetuating negative stereotypes.......then they give the rest of the world what it wants. It has a fairly low base of supprt in the US hisorically, so what does it have to lose? Nothing.
Its difficult for the people to recognise the negative stereotyping when they are the ones its being 'sold' to!
djchak
They are NOT impartial. I would trust CNN International over them.
You see I would argue that the quality of reporting done by the BBC was higher than CNN by a mile. Since CNN is owned by AOLTimeWarner, it has to make a profit as all news programmes in America are expected to by their networks, as they compete for audience ratings.
Because CNN News has to make a profit, it must appeal to a wider audience to do this. Therefore it becomes more and more populist and succumbs to the sort of "Daily Mail" reporting syndrome, where the appeal is based on telling the public what they want to hear, not what the need to know.
Now, I suspect that you believe the BBC to be unimpartial simply because it takes pains to actually report on "Camp X-ray" and extaordinary rendition as well as the hugely unequal distribution of wealth in US society, and you are not at ease with this because you feel that it portrays the US in a bad light, unlike CNN however that only tells you what you want to hear.
Johnny
You see I would argue that the quality of reporting done by the BBC was higher than CNN by a mile. Since CNN is owned by AOLTimeWarner, it has to make a profit as all news programmes in America are expected to by their networks, as they compete for audience ratings.
Because CNN News has to make a profit, it must appeal to a wider audience to do this. Therefore it becomes more and more populist and succumbs to the sort of "Daily Mail" reporting syndrome, where the appeal is based on telling the public what they want to hear, not what the need to know.
Now, I suspect that you believe the BBC to be unimpartial simply because it takes pains to actually report on "Camp X-ray" and extaordinary rendition as well as the hugely unequal distribution of wealth in US society, and you are not at ease with this because you feel that it portrays the US in a bad light, unlike CNN however that only tells you what you want to hear.
Because CNN News has to make a profit, it must appeal to a wider audience to do this. Therefore it becomes more and more populist and succumbs to the sort of "Daily Mail" reporting syndrome, where the appeal is based on telling the public what they want to hear, not what the need to know.
Now, I suspect that you believe the BBC to be unimpartial simply because it takes pains to actually report on "Camp X-ray" and extaordinary rendition as well as the hugely unequal distribution of wealth in US society, and you are not at ease with this because you feel that it portrays the US in a bad light, unlike CNN however that only tells you what you want to hear.
Uh-huh. On what basis do you claim that "it takes pains to actually report" factually? I suspect the BBC could say, for instance, that "civil war" had broken out in Iraq, or have their Middle East reporters cry for Yasser Arafat, or pretend that Bush hadnt pleaded with Blanco to let the National Guard into Louisiana days before Katrina and you would still swallow it.
Lets play a game. I bet I can find more cases of out and out BBC inaccuracy and bias than you can from CNN.
Vienna
Oh the arrogance.
In May 2005, Robin Aitken, a former BBC correspondent accused the BBC of "institutionalised leftism" in a book he is writing provisionally entitled Taking Sides: Bias at the BBC. His book will expose what he saw as the BBC's systemic political bias and give detailed examples.
Mr Aitken worked for the BBC for 25 years including Radio 4's Today programme during the Iraq war. He told The Daily Telegraph: "The scandal is that left wing voices are not balanced by right wing voices. If that is not reformed, then it's hard to justify allowing the BBC to hold on to its monopoly.
Mr Aitken says many BBC staffers are active members of the Labour Party and the Liberal Democrats. He adds: "In 25 years I met only a smattering of Tories in the organisation."
Mr Aitken, who describes himself as a "middle-of-the-road Conservative", explained how in his view BBC coverage had been biased during his time as a journalist there.
In May 2005, Robin Aitken, a former BBC correspondent accused the BBC of "institutionalised leftism" in a book he is writing provisionally entitled Taking Sides: Bias at the BBC. His book will expose what he saw as the BBC's systemic political bias and give detailed examples.
Mr Aitken worked for the BBC for 25 years including Radio 4's Today programme during the Iraq war. He told The Daily Telegraph: "The scandal is that left wing voices are not balanced by right wing voices. If that is not reformed, then it's hard to justify allowing the BBC to hold on to its monopoly.
Mr Aitken says many BBC staffers are active members of the Labour Party and the Liberal Democrats. He adds: "In 25 years I met only a smattering of Tories in the organisation."
Mr Aitken, who describes himself as a "middle-of-the-road Conservative", explained how in his view BBC coverage had been biased during his time as a journalist there.
Yes, they had skewed broadcasting about the Iraq war, but it was against the government. In what other country would that happen?
Vienna
"I know that is how it is portrayed because I have done my bit to paint that picture..."
Who to, his kids?
Who to, his kids?
Well that doesn't really matter, unless you can find any evidence where he has actually tried to do this...?
And editorials are personal and impartial?
They are yes, and the fact that this is an editorial is hardly a secret. If this was a news article then it would be unacceptable, but i'm not about to start moaning about comments quite blatantly made in an editorial...
Ferrus
Yes, they had skewed broadcasting about the Iraq war, but it was against the government. In what other country would that happen?
Oh, forgive me, I thought we were discussing all forms of impartiality. Let me think, one where 121 Labour backbenchers and the Lib Dems opposed the war?
Beekeeper
Well that doesn't really matter
Eh? An admission of bias from the reporter himself doesnt count as evidence of bias from the reporter himself?
"I see nothing wrong with correspondents offering their opinions in editorials"
If it doesnt matter, why the distinction between editorials and news?
They are yes, and the fact that this is an editorial is hardly a secret. If this was a news article then it would be unacceptable, but i'm not about to start moaning about comments quite blatantly made in an editorial...
I think you're missing the point. The comments in the editorial reflect his actions as a BBC reporter.
I think the poll lends itself to two very different debates.
The reliabilty of the BBC tends to point to the direction of its news coverage, does the BBC cover a sufficiently wide array of news stories, and are the contents of the reports factually correct?
The thing about the BBC, is that its news coverage from TV channel to radio station is so diverse, its difficult to give an overall picture. For example, Radio 1's news coverage is almost certainly:
Top item: Murder/race hate attack in Britain
2nd item: (if you're lucky) dumbed-down politics, only if it is an issue directly relating to a large proportion of young people, i.e. the smoking vote etc. etc.
The rest: Entertainment news
(Ok, I do have a bit of a bee in my bonnet about Radio 1 news.)
However, Radio 4 will give you a wider look at the world. But that's just the way the stations are, they target different markets and can address the same stories from completely different approaches, and therefore I find it difficult to draw a conclusion on the reliability of the BBC as a whole.
In terms of the impartiality, I would say again that this is variable. I like reading editors' comments on the website, but am glad, that for broadcast news bulletins, there is more impartiaility than at other channels, in my opinion. It's impossible for an organisation run by human beings with opinions to be completely impartial, and living abroad has made me appreciate even more the BBC's broadcasting.
If I did have a major criticism, it would be that the news is very Britishcentric, and although I do think the BBC reports very well on internal affairs, the international reports often let it done, because they are not given enough importance.
The reliabilty of the BBC tends to point to the direction of its news coverage, does the BBC cover a sufficiently wide array of news stories, and are the contents of the reports factually correct?
The thing about the BBC, is that its news coverage from TV channel to radio station is so diverse, its difficult to give an overall picture. For example, Radio 1's news coverage is almost certainly:
Top item: Murder/race hate attack in Britain
2nd item: (if you're lucky) dumbed-down politics, only if it is an issue directly relating to a large proportion of young people, i.e. the smoking vote etc. etc.
The rest: Entertainment news
(Ok, I do have a bit of a bee in my bonnet about Radio 1 news.)
However, Radio 4 will give you a wider look at the world. But that's just the way the stations are, they target different markets and can address the same stories from completely different approaches, and therefore I find it difficult to draw a conclusion on the reliability of the BBC as a whole.
In terms of the impartiality, I would say again that this is variable. I like reading editors' comments on the website, but am glad, that for broadcast news bulletins, there is more impartiaility than at other channels, in my opinion. It's impossible for an organisation run by human beings with opinions to be completely impartial, and living abroad has made me appreciate even more the BBC's broadcasting.
If I did have a major criticism, it would be that the news is very Britishcentric, and although I do think the BBC reports very well on internal affairs, the international reports often let it done, because they are not given enough importance.
Vienna
I think you're missing the point. The comments in the editorial reflect his actions as a BBC reporter.
I think you're missing the point. The comments in the editorial reflect his actions as a BBC reporter.
I'm not missing the point at all, Vienna. These comments reflect his personal political beliefs, he is human and like most humans he has his own beliefs.
There is no evidence I have seen that he reports in a significantly bias way. There is a difference between 'reporting' and writing an 'editorial', a distinction which I think you need to understand.
If you click on a link which takes you to the "Personal reflections of BBC correspondents", then you shouldn't expect impartiality.
Quick Reply
Latest
Trending
Last reply 5 days ago
Why is the political left now censorious and authoritarian??Last reply 5 days ago
Is it true that British unis are prejudiced towards degrees from Scottish unis?Last reply 5 days ago
If the Russell Group was now a fair representation of what it still claims to beLast reply 2 weeks ago
TSR Goes Green: How important will the environment be in this year's election?Last reply 2 weeks ago
Research Rankings of universities if you add Research Quality & Intensity percentagesLast reply 1 month ago
Is University of Birmingham prestigious and respected well enough in UK ?Trending
Last reply 5 days ago
Why is the political left now censorious and authoritarian??Last reply 5 days ago
Is it true that British unis are prejudiced towards degrees from Scottish unis?Last reply 5 days ago
If the Russell Group was now a fair representation of what it still claims to beLast reply 2 weeks ago
TSR Goes Green: How important will the environment be in this year's election?Last reply 2 weeks ago
Research Rankings of universities if you add Research Quality & Intensity percentagesLast reply 1 month ago
Is University of Birmingham prestigious and respected well enough in UK ?
