Options

The BBC: Why Is It A Tory Supporter?.

2

Comments

  • Options
    AlbacomAlbacom Posts: 34,578
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    Aaron_2015 wrote: »
    Frankly this is first class bollocks.

    So many inaccuracies. The BBC is not biased. The Conservatives have not made cuts.

    Don't know why people are being leapt upon for being "right wing". There's not a thing wrong with that, especially when the Conservatives have been democratically elected to lead the country.

    Don't start saying things that make perfect sense on here! :)
  • Options
    runfor yourliferunfor yourlife Posts: 118
    Forum Member
    lundavra wrote: »
    I would think that the Olympics are very good value for money considering how many hours of TV they fill.

    When blaming the Conswrvatives, don't forget that it was Labour that hit the BBC hardest by making them pay for old people's TV Licences - I think I saw the figure of £750 million per year mentioned?

    Labour Payed the Money lost from the over 75's to the BBC through General Taxation . The Tory;s stopped Subsidising the money lost
  • Options
    TelevisionUserTelevisionUser Posts: 41,417
    Forum Member
    I am heartily sick and tired of all these bull plops threads that accuse any one of BBC News/Sky News/ITV News of political bias.

    Overall, all three do a pretty good job overall and if anyone wants to see what a really s****y biased, propaganda channel look no further than Russia Today or Press TV.

    The biases are invariably in the eyes of the partisan hard left or right beholders who whinge on this forum because they only want a 100% propaganda fix (go to your favourite party's website for that).
  • Options
    Ash_M1Ash_M1 Posts: 18,703
    Forum Member
    ✭✭
    wizzywick wrote: »
    Don't start saying things that make perfect sense on here! :)

    Right, I will bite. Freezes in funding = real term budget cuts. The Tories have waged war on our public services. They are in serious trouble across the board.

    Public services being starved of money coupled with the madness that is Brexit is a toxic mix. I fully expect trouble ahead when people feel they have nothing to lose.
  • Options
    A.D.PA.D.P Posts: 10,383
    Forum Member
    ✭✭
    I am heartily sick and tired of all these bull plops threads that accuse any one of BBC News/Sky News/ITV News of political bias.

    Overall, all three do a pretty good job overall and if anyone wants to see what a really s****y biased, propaganda channel look no further than Russia Today or Press TV.

    The biases are invariably in the eyes of the partisan hard left or right beholders who whinge on this forum because they only want a 100% propaganda fix (go to your favourite party's website for that).

    Well said.

    Left say it's right. Right say it's left. Must be doing it correctly then.
  • Options
    Aaron_2015Aaron_2015 Posts: 3,860
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    Ash_M1 wrote: »
    Right, I will bite. Freezes in funding = real term budget cuts. The Tories have waged war on our public services. They are in serious trouble across the board.

    Public services being starved of money coupled with the madness that is Brexit is a toxic mix. I fully expect trouble ahead when people feel they have nothing to lose.

    No, they are not cuts. Retaining something is not cutting. Where the hell do you expect the government to "find" more money? Take some off the tree in 11 Downing Street's back garden?

    Frankly, the retention is a good thing. The poorest in this country do not need even more financial pressure placed on them.
  • Options
    Aaron_2015Aaron_2015 Posts: 3,860
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    A.D.P wrote: »
    Well said.

    Left say it's right. Right say it's left. Must be doing it correctly then.

    Agreed.

    Seems like nobody can agree which way the BBC/ITV/Sky are supposedly bias, which probably means they aren't.
  • Options
    Ash_M1Ash_M1 Posts: 18,703
    Forum Member
    ✭✭
    I am heartily sick and tired of all these bull plops threads that accuse any one of BBC News/Sky News/ITV News of political bias.

    Overall, all three do a pretty good job overall and if anyone wants to see what a really s****y biased, propaganda channel look no further than Russia Today or Press TV.

    The biases are invariably in the eyes of the partisan hard left or right beholders who whinge on this forum because they only want a 100% propaganda fix (go to your favourite party's website for that).

    Well said TV. Me too. Heartily sick of it.
  • Options
    Ash_M1Ash_M1 Posts: 18,703
    Forum Member
    ✭✭
    Aaron_2015 wrote: »
    No, they are not cuts. Retaining something is not cutting. Where the hell do you expect the government to "find" more money? Take some off the tree in 11 Downing Street's back garden?

    Frankly, the retention is a good thing. The poorest in this country do not need even more financial pressure placed on them.

    If you have your budget frozen and everything around isn't frozen too, then you have to- all-intents-and-purposes, a cut. It's as simple as that. It's basic economics.
  • Options
    Aaron_2015Aaron_2015 Posts: 3,860
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    Ash_M1 wrote: »
    If you have your budget frozen and everything around isn't frozen too, then you have to- all-intents-and-purposes, a cut. It's as simple as that. It's basic economics.

    No, it's not. The amount of money being given to the BBC has not been reduced. Therefore it has not been cut.

    I see you've not addressed the other points I raised.
  • Options
    human naturehuman nature Posts: 13,352
    Forum Member
    ✭✭
    Aaron_2015 wrote: »
    No, it's not. The amount of money being given to the BBC has not been reduced. Therefore it has not been cut..
    If you haven't had a pay rise for ten years while inflation continues to go up year on year, you've effectively had a cut. The money you take home might be the same as it always was, but you'll find it's worth a lot less.
  • Options
    mikwmikw Posts: 48,715
    Forum Member
    Aaron_2015 wrote: »
    No, it's not. The amount of money being given to the BBC has not been reduced. Therefore it has not been cut.

    I see you've not addressed the other points I raised.

    Almost true. But having to pay the for the over 75's TV Licences is a massive loss of expected revenue.

    And to return to the original topic, some say it's left wing, some say it's a government mouthpiece.

    Also, "I Daniel Blake", which is not flattering in anyway to the Conservative government is a BBC film.
  • Options
    ianradioianianradioian Posts: 74,865
    Forum Member
    ✭✭
    AlanO wrote: »
    Paranoid nonsense.

    Perhaps you should try the Guardian website with posts like this.

    The BBC aren't subject to "Tory cuts" - the BBC's licence fee settlement is one they have to negotiate with the government of the day and over the years have done it with governments of all different complexions.

    On the sporting rights - the BBC should expect to compete commercially - it was happy enough to busily outbid a nascent ITV back in the 50s and 60s on a commercial basis - doesn't seem to be coping quite so well in this multi-channel digital age.

    Live overnight programmes on R2 are a waste of money in my opinion. The listening figures will be in the low 000s.

    The only change to local radio I'm aware of was the move to a single 'national' programme from 7-10, which given most of the locals were already part of a regional service at that time of day again wasn't a massive loss.

    Perhaps you should ask the BBC why it believes it should be funded using an outdated 'television tax' with non-payment being enforced through criminal prosecution. In this day and age it should be funded by some form of subscription.

    Live overnight presentation should stay in my opinion; many 100,000s of people work nights, or are up very early for work , and as its a National station I would have thought it an essential service.
    As for the bbc dropping the licence & going subscription - Im all for it!
    It wont happen though as 1/2 the households in Great Britain wouldnt bother, and the bbc would go kaput without its licence income covering all those meetings/staff/taxis/trainfares/lunches/buffets/etc
  • Options
    Ash_M1Ash_M1 Posts: 18,703
    Forum Member
    ✭✭
    Aaron_2015 wrote: »
    No, it's not. The amount of money being given to the BBC has not been reduced. Therefore it has not been cut.

    I see you've not addressed the other points I raised.

    Have all costs been frozen too Aaron?
  • Options
    ianradioianianradioian Posts: 74,865
    Forum Member
    ✭✭
    Aaron_2015 wrote: »
    No, they are not cuts. Retaining something is not cutting. Where the hell do you expect the government to "find" more money? Take some off the tree in 11 Downing Street's back garden?

    Frankly, the retention is a good thing. The poorest in this country do not need even more financial pressure placed on them.

    Agreed- and just to add to your post ; any money the government has isnt THEIR money ; its OUR money, collected through taxation, bonds etc - and money the Nation brings in.
  • Options
    Aaron_2015Aaron_2015 Posts: 3,860
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    Ash_M1 wrote: »
    Have all costs been frozen too Aaron?

    Costs have risen, but the government have not willingly "cut" anything.

    The rest of my post which I think you must have missed, twice:

    No, they are not cuts. Retaining something is not cutting. Where the hell do you expect the government to "find" more money? Take some off the tree in 11 Downing Street's back garden?

    Frankly, the retention is a good thing. The poorest in this country do not need even more financial pressure placed on them.
  • Options
    ianradioianianradioian Posts: 74,865
    Forum Member
    ✭✭
    Hamlet77 wrote: »
    Hang on. The BBC is recognised as the most left wing leaning institution in the country.

    Heck individuals have acknowledged they have steered a leftist policy at the BBC for years.

    There are people at the BBC who would be hugely insulted for even suggesting the BBC tolerates right wing policies.

    Keep taking the tablets........

    Yes; Id agree with this.
  • Options
    Ash_M1Ash_M1 Posts: 18,703
    Forum Member
    ✭✭
    Aaron_2015 wrote: »
    Costs have risen, but the government have not willingly "cut" anything.

    The rest of my post which I think you must have missed, twice:

    No, they are not cuts. Retaining something is not cutting. Where the hell do you expect the government to "find" more money? Take some off the tree in 11 Downing Street's back garden?

    Frankly, the retention is a good thing. The poorest in this country do not need even more financial pressure placed on them.

    Oh they have. The terrible Tories know exactly what they are doing!!
    If your budget doesn't keep up with inflation/costs then you effectively suffer a cut. The BBC (and other public services) has faced a real-terms cut since 2010, now in it's seventh year.
  • Options
    Aaron_2015Aaron_2015 Posts: 3,860
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    Ash_M1 wrote: »
    Oh they have. The terrible Tories know exactly what they are doing!!
    If your budget doesn't keep up with inflation/costs then you effectively suffer a cut. The BBC (and other public services) has faced a real-terms cut since 2010, now in it's seventh year.

    Let's just be glad we don't have loony Labour governing the country eh Ash?

    A point you've ignored three times:

    Where the hell do you expect the government to "find" more money? Take some off the tree in 11 Downing Street's back garden?

    Frankly, the retention is a good thing. The poorest in this country do not need even more financial pressure placed on them.

    Where would money come from to avoid cuts? You have no idea clearly.
  • Options
    Ash_M1Ash_M1 Posts: 18,703
    Forum Member
    ✭✭
    Aaron_2015 wrote: »
    Let's just be glad we don't have loony Labour governing the country eh Ash?

    A point you've ignored three times:

    Where the hell do you expect the government to "find" more money? Take some off the tree in 11 Downing Street's back garden?

    Frankly, the retention is a good thing. The poorest in this country do not need even more financial pressure placed on them.

    Where would money come from to avoid cuts? You have no idea clearly.


    Drawing your attention back to the substantive point Aaron, if your budget is frozen whilst everything else around you rises you suffer a real-terms cut. It's basic economics.
  • Options
    runfor yourliferunfor yourlife Posts: 118
    Forum Member
    Aaron_2015 wrote: »
    No, it's not. The amount of money being given to the BBC has not been reduced. Therefore it has not been cut.

    I see you've not addressed the other points I raised.

    It has in real-terms . The BBC is also having to now pay for the World Service ,SC4 and the Licence fee for the over 75's Previosly not paid out of the license fee
  • Options
    Night CrawlerNight Crawler Posts: 1,416
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    Ash_M1 wrote: »
    Drawing your attention back to the substantive point Aaron, if your budget is frozen whilst everything else around you rises you suffer a real-terms cut. It's basic economics.

    LF might have been frozen but the the income from it has risen year on year. In 2010 it brought in £3.45m, 2016 it brought in £3.74m.
  • Options
    Jules 1Jules 1 Posts: 2,543
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    Aaron_2015 wrote: »
    Let's just be glad we don't have loony Labour governing the country eh Ash?

    A point you've ignored three times:

    Where the hell do you expect the government to "find" more money? Take some off the tree in 11 Downing Street's back garden?

    Frankly, the retention is a good thing. The poorest in this country do not need even more financial pressure placed on them.

    Where would money come from to avoid cuts? You have no idea clearly.

    We already have a loony Tory government in place anyway!!!!!!!

    Due to austerity the poorest have suffered badly under the Tories.
  • Options
    carl.waringcarl.waring Posts: 35,705
    Forum Member
    Sluger wrote: »
    The usual suspects will be along shortly to tell you how wrong you are.
    Well, that would be factually accurate. The OP is wrong.
  • Options
    Baz_JamesBaz_James Posts: 4,561
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    LF might have been frozen but the the income from it has risen year on year. In 2010 it brought in £3.45m, 2016 it brought in £3.74m.

    Er ... 3.74 billion, surely?
Sign In or Register to comment.