• The site is still in the process of being updated today so a number of things may not work yet. We've opened the forum while this is taking place. Thanks for your patience.

BBC - Blatant Bullshine Company......?

#1
The acronym, BBC, has been around all my life and once upon a time it was deemed to be a fair and impartial broadcaster of news while its other departments provided us with sport, music and entertainment.

That was a long, long time ago. Nowadays, with its compulsory licence fee income, its primary role is in being the major propaganda organ for the Conservative party. Apart from that, the BBC coverage of sport has deteriorated and last evening provided yet another occurrence of their poor reporting and lack of support for home-grown talent.

At the Olympic Stadium in Stratford, an American girl shattered the Women's 100m Hurdles world record and a British girl, Laura Muir, broke Kelly Holmes' record in the Women's 1500m. What was the BBC headline?

'Usain Bolt powers to 200m win'

Now, Usain Bolt winning a sprint event isn't exactly unusual but when an American girl destroys a 28 years-old world record and won't even be in the American squad for the Rio Olympics, surely that merits some publicity? Equally, when a young Scots girl manages to break a 12 years-old record, previously held by a Dame, no less, I'm inclined to think that is more important to British people and British sport than the BBC headline........and we have to pay for this crap!

Tom
 

tillson

Pedelecer
May 29, 2008
5,044
138
113
#3
The acronym, BBC, has been around all my life and once upon a time it was deemed to be a fair and impartial broadcaster of news while its other departments provided us with sport, music and entertainment.

That was a long, long time ago. Nowadays, with its compulsory licence fee income, its primary role is in being the major propaganda organ for the Conservative party. Apart from that, the BBC coverage of sport has deteriorated and last evening provided yet another occurrence of their poor reporting and lack of support for home-grown talent.

At the Olympic Stadium in Stratford, an American girl shattered the Women's 100m Hurdles world record and a British girl, Laura Muir, broke Kelly Holmes' record in the Women's 1500m. What was the BBC headline?

'Usain Bolt powers to 200m win'

Now, Usain Bolt winning a sprint event isn't exactly unusual but when an American girl destroys a 28 years-old world record and won't even be in the American squad for the Rio Olympics, surely that merits some publicity? Equally, when a young Scots girl manages to break a 12 years-old record, previously held by a Dame, no less, I'm inclined to think that is more important to British people and British sport than the BBC headline........and we have to pay for this crap!

Tom
I agree with all that you have written...........apart from:

I don't see them as a propaganda organ for the Conservative Party. I think the BBC are politically biased, but my perception is that they are rather left leaning and anti Conservative. I think it's interesting how different people have such varying perceptions of the same organisation. I suppose it come down to where we stand politically and that making us sensitive to anything reported which does not fit our beliefs.

I always though that BBC stood for Biased Broadcasting Corporation.

Fully agree with the rest though.
 
Feb 17, 2011
2,487
109
113
#4
I find the Beeb stuffed full of left wing media luvvies.
Tom alleges exactly the opposite, but instead of giving examples of political bias, simply contents himself with the Beeb's peculiar view of sporting triumphs.
I guess that in reality, they are trying to please both sides.
I did hear an allegation that the sudden disappearance of the LibDems from our screens was down to the fact that the Beeb hate UKIP, but because they get as many votes as the LibDems and could demand equal coverage, the Beeb ignore both.
Again, this is possibly untrue and is down to our own political beliefs.
 
#5
not wanting to **** on anyone's rant, but I watched the BBC news this morning the they covered all 3 results from the games, and I think gave about equal time to each result, although granted they did only show the interview with Bolt. But he is the personality most people went to see I suspect.
 
Jun 20, 2016
314
20
43
18
York
#6
I watched the women's hurdles world record get broken (last one stood from 1988?), she destroyed the field and ironically hasn't been picked for the Olympic squad!.

Usain Bolt is a world phenomenon to be fair, I was nervous just watching that race. If they've got 1 slot he would have top priority (fair or not considering the wr).
 
Oct 25, 2006
40,227
186
113
#7
The acronym, BBC, has been around all my life and once upon a time it was deemed to be a fair and impartial broadcaster of news
Mistakenly so though. In 1953 they allowed themselves to be used by the CIA and the UK government of the day to overthrow Prime Minister, Mohammad Mossadeq's legal democratically elected government of Iran by knowingly publishing completely false information as news.

The utterly corrupt reason is that Iran had legally nationalised their oil industry, but we in the West wanted the despotic Shah of Iran back in power to get Anglo-Iranian Oil back in ownership of the oil. Anglo-Iranian later became BP. All the involved parties eventually admitted their guilt many years later.

Today's BBC is far more honest, transparent and balanced and could never hide being involved in such a corrupt scheme as was possible back then.
.
 
Feb 17, 2011
2,487
109
113
#8
In those days, National organisations such as the Police, the Government, Courts,BBC, Civil Service, Town Councils, Banks etc. were held to be beyond reproach and staffed by people of impeccable rectitude.
We now know better, and despite our illusions being shattered, I think that we are all better off to know that all organisations hold their own share of rogues.
 
Jan 26, 2015
6,932
114
113
The European Union
#9
When I arrived in London I met a couple of guys in the CID and I can confirm they weren't beyond reproach. Lets just say we had a gentlemans agreement...

The BBC looks very neutral from the outside because it is compared to Fox and CNN.
 

Blew it

Pedelecer
Jun 8, 2008
1,472
29
48
Swindon, Wiltshire
#10
........and we have to pay for this crap!

Tom
In just twenty months from now, I will have the greatest of pleasure in cancelling the direct debit to the State Television Company...aka the BBC.

My viewing of this channel is nowadays reduced to just two programs, Antiques Roadshow and Gardeners World, the latter often kicked into touch due to some other event of no interest to me.

I am tempted to cancel a month early, but do not fancy being thrown into jail for doing so.
 
May 26, 2008
818
43
43
#12
At one time if i wanted the news I watched the BBC now I find that to know what is happening in the world I have to follow France24, RT and Sky. They all have their own bias, especially RT, but together they give a world view.

Without wishing to sound like a right wing racist the BBC bias is never more evident than in recent reporting of post Brexit and terrorism with its refusal to mention ethnicity even when it is relevant.
 
Feb 12, 2015
536
35
43
51
Bristol, Uk
#13
If there is say a march against government austerity or any other governmental injustice then it's rarely covered well, if at all, by the BBC.

There is definite sense of them bowing to political pressure to adhere to party political requirements over unbiased reporting which I personally think is shocking from what you would hope would be the last standing example of a balanced and unbiased news organisation.
 
Oct 25, 2006
40,227
186
113
#14
At one time if i wanted the news I watched the BBC now I find that to know what is happening in the world I have to follow France24, RT and Sky. They all have their own bias, especially RT, but together they give a world view.

Without wishing to sound like a right wing racist the BBC bias is never more evident than in recent reporting of post Brexit and terrorism with its refusal to mention ethnicity even when it is relevant.
If there is say a march against government austerity or any other governmental injustice then it's rarely covered well, if at all, by the BBC.

There is definite sense of them bowing to political pressure to adhere to party political requirements over unbiased reporting which I personally think is shocking from what you would hope would be the last standing example of a balanced and unbiased news organisation.
I similarly use an even wider range of news sources, but never any newspapers.

To me the BBC bias is one of trying to not upset anyone, probably a foolish aim when reporting news. But I strongly disagree with any contention that they don't cover all aspects. On TV they all get some space, but for coverage in greater depth their radio services are far better, especially the programs on the larger background.
.
 
Feb 12, 2015
536
35
43
51
Bristol, Uk
#15
I similarly use an even wider range of news sources, but never any newspapers.

To me the BBC bias is one of trying to not upset anyone, probably a foolish aim when reporting news. But I strongly disagree with any contention that they don't cover all aspects. On TV they all get some space, but for coverage in greater depth their radio services are far better, especially the programs on the larger background.
.
I don't watch Tv, or very rarely. I have however noticed on a couple of specific occasions that anti governmental marches (for one) have been woefully poorly reported by the BBC. On the two occasional that I have noticed this since 2010, both my GF and I have written to the BBC asking why there was no relatively sized video report or at best a fair mention on their website of what most would consider a substantial democratic statement by the people.

I got one reply refuting my claim despite them admitting they didn't actually report much on the 150.000 British people marching on Downing Street in disgust at the cuts.

I met a news crew in Bristol some time ago and we got in a conversation about reporting on such marches and the chap mentioned that most news rooms would consider it a boring story. A belief that is too often evident on the BBC news website.
 
Jun 20, 2016
314
20
43
18
York
#16
Go on then KeithMac, enlighten me on my bad spelling.

I guess you haven't met soundwave yet :p
Is there a KeithMac on Points of View forum?, if so it's not me ;).

Agree with the Antiques Roadshow comment, it was that F1 and Top Gear that I watched normally on the Beeb. Sadly AR is the only one left (that's worth watching..).
 
#17
Sadly AR is the only one left (that's worth watching..).
I used to watch that but I have become more and more bored by it as the years have passed. The cynic in me began to imagine that the frequent answer to the question of how the visitor came to be in possession of the valuable artefact - "It was handed down from my great aunt!" is really a code for 'It's stolen - don't press me on it!'

Before I ever watched the AR, I had several aunts, a couple of whom were ok but I'd never have called them great. When I asked why so many people mentioned a great aunt on the show, it was explained to me. Following that enlightenment, it seemed that almost every programme produced one or two objet d'art handed down through generations of the family and received by the visitor from a great aunt.

'You're kidding me!......is it really worth a squillion quid? I'll never sell it, of course!

Oh yes you will!

Tom
 
Jun 20, 2016
314
20
43
18
York
#18
The best ones are those who've had it valued at a small fortune and it turns out to be fake, priceless!.
 
#19
The best ones are those who've had it valued at a small fortune and it turns out to be fake, priceless!.
Yes, love those.....there's a kind of Karma about it. Why do they bring the subject matter, be it a gigantic sideboard, a three-hundred year old long-case clock or some other oversized thing of beauty all the way to the roadshow venue, queue up for hours and if they are very lucky, be one of the chosen ones to appear on telly to have their prized object appraised by an expert?.....and then say they had it valued ten years ago before going on to say when they get the updated value, they will never sell it, even though it's now worth a fortune......'Really! You're kidding me'.....'I'd never have guessed'......'of course we'll never sell it!'

Tom
 
May 23, 2015
8,205
97
113
#20
why do you even watch it ? any off it ? think im paying for a licence they can jog on, watched the new star trek last night on kodi for free;)