What is the law exactly on TV news and bias?
Moleskin
Posts: 3,098 Forum Member
✭✭✭
I always thought that broadcast news had to be unbiased in this country but Russia Today is clearly biased, the BBC is clearly biased, Al Jazeera is clearly biased, Channel 4 News is clearly biased.
What's going on?
Why are no sanctions applied if it's illegal?
What's going on?
Why are no sanctions applied if it's illegal?
0
Comments
Surely if it's a charter issue the poster should contact the BBC Trust rather than Ofcom...
Wasn't an Iranian station closed down in the UK so there must be a chance of the same happening to Russia Today.
They were given a large fine for airing an interview conducted under duress, which they failed to pay.
Although apparently the main reason it's licence was pulled is for failing to declare it was controlled by Tehran instead of the British company that held the licence. Apparently it was given the opportunity to amend it's licence and correct this, chose not to and then lost it's licence as a result...
If you want "the law exactly", the you should visit http://www.legislation.gov.uk/.
You will probably find that what you want to know is not governed by "the law exactly", but the law puts in place an entity that has the responsibility to put in place some rules regarding bias.
c.f The BBC Trust, or OFCOM.
Alternatively, certain issues are dealt with other laws which are not directly related to broadcasting but cover general concepts. For instance: if an item was considered to have a racial bias, it may be dealt with under the Race Relations Act 1976 and/or subsequent amendments.
In any case, most laws are subject to interpretation, normally by a judge, based on previous cases, experience, knowledge, etc.
So.... what is the law exactly?
Answer: Inexact.
What examples are there of bias in the above news output?
K
I must say, it's always vehemently pro-Independence supporters that accuse BBC News and BBC Scotland of bias, I've never seen it from a regular person or pro-Union supporter... (If I was being cynical, I'd suggest those in authority were saying that to create a scapegoat should Independence fail...)
It seems they aren't biased, until they don't take your side...
I'd happily have RT, A British Fox or MSNBC here in the UK so long as they are not state funded or funded like the BBC. I think even the BBC knows the licence fee is on the way out and if it does go the BBC can be as left wing as it likes.
Of which "Section Five: Due Impartiality and Due Accuracy and Undue Prominence of Views and Opinions "
http://stakeholders.ofcom.org.uk/broadcasting/broadcast-codes/broadcast-code/impartiality/
This has the Principles
To ensure that news, in whatever form, is reported with due accuracy and presented with due impartiality.
To ensure that the special impartiality requirements of the Act are complied with.
For the BBC the terms are in the agreement at section 44
http://downloads.bbc.co.uk/bbctrust/assets/files/pdf/about/how_we_govern/agreement.pdf
Accuracy and impartiality
(1) The BBC must do all it can to ensure that controversial subjects are treated with due accuracy and impartiality in all relevant output.
(2) In applying paragraph (1), a series of programmes may be considered as a whole.
(3) The UK Public Services must not contain any output which expresses the opinion of the BBC or of its Trust or Executive Board on current affairs or matters of public policy other than broadcasting or the provision of online services.
........( i t goes to sub point 8)
Note that all BBC programmes have to comply while ofcom only restricts news programmes .... But is very tight in policing it,,,
The primary legislation is in sections 319 to 328 of the communications act 2003
http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2003/21/section/319
It is long but sub point 2(c) is important
2(c)that news included in television and radio services is presented with due impartiality and that the impartiality requirements of section 320 are complied with;
Which is why pretending to be neutral is nonsense, newspapers are not neutral and I don't see why TV news should be, sometimes watching Fox or RT gives you a different perspective on the news, which is no bad thing even if you don't agree with it.
It is a bad thing when they are completely FACTUALLY wrong! Which Fox News often is! Thank GOD we are not like the USA.
“There is no Pravda in Izvestiya and there is no Izvestiya in Pravda”
K
for those too young to know what that means:
The BBC is sometimes factually wrong, Panorama has been done for telling porkies as has Newsnight. All TV news networks tell lies for various reasons.
You should take everything you are told with a degree of scepticism, be it Fox, RT, Sky or the BBC, to assume that our media don't lie is naive at best.
K
I am sure it is all part of the SNP's Project Fear to scare the media into giving more coverage to their point of view. I have been avoiding any programmes on the referendum but would have expected the local media to be in favour of separation because it is more jobs for them and promotions with more money for them.
You go to a number of different news sources and you use your best judgement about the differences between the way they report the stories.
I think anyone who relies largely on a single news source is never going to get the complete picture, however honest and diligent that source tries to be.
I'm not saying you shouldn't trust, but just because it appears in the Guardian or on the BBC does not make it true any more than on Sky or the Telegraph.
People should be open minded and have the sense to read up on a story or check out a journalist's credentials.
For example I never take anything said by Andrew Pierce or Kevin Maguire as fact as although both call themselves journalists both are really political commentators who write and say things with a clear political agenda, nothing wrong with that but you have to understand that if you read something they have written.
I agree, it's always a good idea to cross check stories, Governments lie and distort and so do the media, sometimes for valid reasons but sometimes not.
I really wouldn't want the unleashed bias that is allowed to be undertaken on FOX News, seeing many clips of coverage on YouTube and whilst the people I follow will be (rightly) critical of its coverage, fact check it and place it under scrutiny, there'll be many who'll take its views very seriously. I suspect if you abolish media plurality rules, the state of the newspapers and some of the more brazen bias you see within them, particularly the right wing populist newspapers, will be replicated on television and radio.
And here's me thinking Project Fear was Better Together's secret codename (as pro-Independence supports seemingly believe)...
I do remember a really cringeworthy interview or Q&A with Alistair Darling, where some woman was accusing him over it being called Project Fear, and it just got more and more awkward as she refused to believe him, that it was not called Project Fear and hadn't ever been called that. Almost made me feel sorry for him...
My particular favourite is the Fox Business News host convinced The Lego Movie is anti-big business (one of the bad guys is called President Business, as demonstrated by a very brief out of context clip from the film) it makes me crack up because he's being deadly serious and does not see the irony in his comments at all...
It's almost worth allowing biased news, just for clips like that...
Isn't RT just Putin's propaganda channel?