Crosswords3 mins ago
Is The Bbc Safe Under A Future Tory Government?
Never mind the NHS. Wading through the mainstream Tory press trying to find a balanced account of Labour's manifesto launch yesterday (and failing) it occurred to me that were it not for the BBC (and in fairness Sky too) we would be very much short changed for unbiased coverage of the election campaign.
And then what else do I find? George Osborne in a Radio Times interview apparently threatening the corporation by dredging up his touching concern for local newspapers by claiming that local democracy is under threat from the BBC's local websites.
And a nonsensical leader in the Times of all papers claiming that the BBC has "parked its tanks" on the front lawns of local newspapers.
Am I alone in finding this all rather sinister? Especially when he goes on to criticise The Radio 4 Today programme, effectively for being left wing.
And then what else do I find? George Osborne in a Radio Times interview apparently threatening the corporation by dredging up his touching concern for local newspapers by claiming that local democracy is under threat from the BBC's local websites.
And a nonsensical leader in the Times of all papers claiming that the BBC has "parked its tanks" on the front lawns of local newspapers.
Am I alone in finding this all rather sinister? Especially when he goes on to criticise The Radio 4 Today programme, effectively for being left wing.
Answers
Best Answer
No best answer has yet been selected by ichkeria. Once a best answer has been selected, it will be shown here.
For more on marking an answer as the "Best Answer", please visit our FAQ.
Mr Osborne obviously hasn't done his homework if he thinks the BBC local sites threaten local democracy. A quick Google search for local newspapers in 7 boroughs around here shows that, with the exception of one newspaper, all the local newspapers are owned by the same company.
So if (and I stress if) people are reading those newspapers to get information on local politics and if (again I stress the if) the proprietor has a political bias, those papers are themselves a potential threat to local democracy.
So if (and I stress if) people are reading those newspapers to get information on local politics and if (again I stress the if) the proprietor has a political bias, those papers are themselves a potential threat to local democracy.
Again, as a supporter of the BBC, you can still find it kills competition.
Try starting a local newspaper or a local website and competing with the BBC's coverage of your local area. It's no wonder they are often controlled by large interests.
Personally, I have run into similar issues with other areas of the BBC, e.g. its bitesize GCSE content which killed many educational publishers. Nothing worse than being crushed by competition that you are funding so that it can give away freely the kind of content that you have built a business on before the BBC started to give it away!
Even so, I love the BBC and am one of those who think that the license fee is worth it for Radio 4 alone. But it certainly does itself no favours in lots of different ways and, without criticism, it will continue to do so to its ultimate demise.
Try starting a local newspaper or a local website and competing with the BBC's coverage of your local area. It's no wonder they are often controlled by large interests.
Personally, I have run into similar issues with other areas of the BBC, e.g. its bitesize GCSE content which killed many educational publishers. Nothing worse than being crushed by competition that you are funding so that it can give away freely the kind of content that you have built a business on before the BBC started to give it away!
Even so, I love the BBC and am one of those who think that the license fee is worth it for Radio 4 alone. But it certainly does itself no favours in lots of different ways and, without criticism, it will continue to do so to its ultimate demise.
Ellipsis, it doesn't bother me in the slightest, having all those local papers owned by the same proprietor. Besides, the standard of reporting was so high that I quit buying one of them years ago and the free one usually went straight into the recycling bin.
The point I was trying to make was that if Mr Osborne was implying that bias in BBC local stations is having a deleterious effect on local democracy (and I have not read the piece in the RT), he has conveniently forgotten that there may also be a bias in the local newspapers which could have the same effect.
It seems to me that politicians of all stripes criticise the BBC, especially when they are in government. All governments would prefer the media in general to trumpet what the they say is good news and mute or bury the bad news. But as long as governments of all shades criticise the BBC in about equal measure, I'd say the BBC are doing a pretty good job of getting the balance about right.
The point I was trying to make was that if Mr Osborne was implying that bias in BBC local stations is having a deleterious effect on local democracy (and I have not read the piece in the RT), he has conveniently forgotten that there may also be a bias in the local newspapers which could have the same effect.
It seems to me that politicians of all stripes criticise the BBC, especially when they are in government. All governments would prefer the media in general to trumpet what the they say is good news and mute or bury the bad news. But as long as governments of all shades criticise the BBC in about equal measure, I'd say the BBC are doing a pretty good job of getting the balance about right.
Huderon, as I said earlier ...
The biggest problem, in fact, isn't that they're biased, it's that they claim to be unbiased when they're not. I have no problem with left wing (e.g. Daily Mirror) or right wing (e.g. Daily Telegraph) newspapers that are clearly biased and known for being so. But to claim no bias when a bias exists is insidious ...
...
Even so, I love the BBC and am one of those who think that the license fee is worth it for Radio 4 alone. But it certainly does itself no favours in lots of different ways and, without criticism, it will continue to do so to its ultimate demise.
The biggest problem, in fact, isn't that they're biased, it's that they claim to be unbiased when they're not. I have no problem with left wing (e.g. Daily Mirror) or right wing (e.g. Daily Telegraph) newspapers that are clearly biased and known for being so. But to claim no bias when a bias exists is insidious ...
...
Even so, I love the BBC and am one of those who think that the license fee is worth it for Radio 4 alone. But it certainly does itself no favours in lots of different ways and, without criticism, it will continue to do so to its ultimate demise.
// Especially when he goes on to criticise The Radio 4 Today programme, effectively for being left wing.//
this was levelled at the Beeb in the sixties - effectively the 1964 election ( about which you and I have posted before Ichkey ) that it was irretrievably left wing.
Fifty years later one of the hacks commented that everyone knew you couldnt get a job at the Beeb nless you had impeccable left wing credentials. Talk about Reds under the bed - about which they always did.
this was levelled at the Beeb in the sixties - effectively the 1964 election ( about which you and I have posted before Ichkey ) that it was irretrievably left wing.
Fifty years later one of the hacks commented that everyone knew you couldnt get a job at the Beeb nless you had impeccable left wing credentials. Talk about Reds under the bed - about which they always did.
I don't see the point of competition for competition's sake. If the BBC do it efficiiently and well, what is the problem?
As for local newspapers, I simply don't see that the BBC is to blame for their alleged demise. If I don't buy a local paper very often then it isn't because of the local BBC website. And there are things in local papers that the BBC simply can't - or don't - match. Papers are selling poorly full stop and local papers are no exception. If the local paper did a decent website then I would always go to it instead of the BBC, but it doesn't
As for local newspapers, I simply don't see that the BBC is to blame for their alleged demise. If I don't buy a local paper very often then it isn't because of the local BBC website. And there are things in local papers that the BBC simply can't - or don't - match. Papers are selling poorly full stop and local papers are no exception. If the local paper did a decent website then I would always go to it instead of the BBC, but it doesn't
Peter,
Mr Osborne may well be right about the Today programme. But match the (pre-charter renewal) rhetoric with the undoubted bias towards the Tories (and that means against all the other parties not just Labour) and one starts to wonder if that party is so used to having the media onside that the comparative balance of the broadcasters starts to look like insurgency
Mr Osborne may well be right about the Today programme. But match the (pre-charter renewal) rhetoric with the undoubted bias towards the Tories (and that means against all the other parties not just Labour) and one starts to wonder if that party is so used to having the media onside that the comparative balance of the broadcasters starts to look like insurgency
> I don't see the point of competition for competition's sake. If the BBC do it efficiently and well, what is the problem?
Ah, hardly a "market forces" perspective ...
In the specific example I was referring to, there were a bunch of relatively small businesses in the educational publishing market - revision guides for GCSEs, A Levels, things like that. The internet came along and they had to learn how to cope with that, which most did. Then the BBC decided to publish educational content on the internet for free, which of course those small publishers simply could not compete with. This meant that they had to close down and make people redundant. I would guess 99% of those redundant people paid BBC license fees so that the BBC could afford to put them out of business. And who benefited from this upheaval? Mainly, the kids of middle class parents who had computers and internet connections, who previously spent a few quid on revision books and now got it free from the BBC ...
That's a very specific example. I would guess there are many similar stories where small businesses find it very hard to compete against a massive, publicly funded behemoth, and you find that the only competitors that actually can compete are massive, privately owned behemoths like the Murdoch empire.
These reasons, as well as the BBC's claimed unbias but actual bias, are among the reasons why a future Tory government may have it in for the BBC. I think the BBC does need to change a little. It is brilliant, but not perfect and not above reproach.
Ah, hardly a "market forces" perspective ...
In the specific example I was referring to, there were a bunch of relatively small businesses in the educational publishing market - revision guides for GCSEs, A Levels, things like that. The internet came along and they had to learn how to cope with that, which most did. Then the BBC decided to publish educational content on the internet for free, which of course those small publishers simply could not compete with. This meant that they had to close down and make people redundant. I would guess 99% of those redundant people paid BBC license fees so that the BBC could afford to put them out of business. And who benefited from this upheaval? Mainly, the kids of middle class parents who had computers and internet connections, who previously spent a few quid on revision books and now got it free from the BBC ...
That's a very specific example. I would guess there are many similar stories where small businesses find it very hard to compete against a massive, publicly funded behemoth, and you find that the only competitors that actually can compete are massive, privately owned behemoths like the Murdoch empire.
These reasons, as well as the BBC's claimed unbias but actual bias, are among the reasons why a future Tory government may have it in for the BBC. I think the BBC does need to change a little. It is brilliant, but not perfect and not above reproach.
OK, that's your opinion - not one I agree with. And Nick Robinson's two blogs, that I posted earlier, covering the launch of the Labour and Conservative manifestos - are they genuinely unbiased?
http://
http://
http://
http://
The Tories and UKIP see the BBC as left-wing. This is entirely logical, if are very right-wing, as they are, then you see the centre as way to your left. The BBC is not safe under the current extreme brand of Conservative, they are extremists using "The Deficit" as an excuse to destroy every institution that doesn't directly benefit them.
Latest Posts
ChatterBank6 mins ago
ChatterBank7 mins ago
ChatterBank8 mins ago
Quizzes & Puzzles16 mins ago
News17 mins ago
Related Questions
Sorry, we can't find any related questions. Try using the search bar at the top of the page to search for some keywords, or choose a topic and submit your own question.