DS Forums

 
 

So the BBC is impartial is it?


Closed Thread
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old 02-01-2017, 01:09
Alrightmate
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Posts: 65,741
So? I have never seen the BBC state it has to be neutral and impartial concerning the EU and Brexit. They are entitled to be partisan on the issue and have been.
In which case there is a conflict of interests.
If I pay my license fee expecting a certain standard of neutrality then if I believe that the BBC are being partisan I should feel I have a right to retract my funding to them if I don't agree with it.
I think the time is to decide whether it receives its funding from the public or it also allows funding from other sources like other channels.

To take both seems to be unethical. Put it on a level playing field with other channels who don't have the luxury of receiving what is effectively a tax on the public if they buy a television (even though they'll tell you that it isn't a tax).

The TV license was brought in at a time when the BBC was television. In 2017 why is the BBC the recipient of the TV license when all the other channels have to find their own funding?
If their only income was the TV license then fair enough. But if they're taking what are effectively donations from a political body then why should I have to pay them too?
Take their money and be a political mouthpiece all they want, but don't force me to give them money as well.

In terms of the article though I don't think this is news. I was aware that they were receiving EU funding some time last year. I think it was linked to back then. Although I can't remember which thread or where it linked to.
Alrightmate is offline  
Please sign in or register to remove this advertisement.
Old 02-01-2017, 01:21
Alrightmate
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Posts: 65,741
So the BBC is impartial is it?

Overall, both BBC News and Sky News do a very good job and the bias is invariably in the eye of the partisan beholder. If you want a really rubbish channel then look no further than the propaganda outlet that is Russia Today.

Memo to all anti Sky News and BBC News whingers - stop whining and get a life.
This perceived bias is in the eyes of the partisan beholder is it?
The BBC and Sky do a splendid job and Russia Today is a propaganda outlet.

Okay.

So you have arrived at the objective conclusion that you don't see the world through partisan eyes have you?
Alrightmate is offline  
Old 02-01-2017, 01:24
Alrightmate
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Posts: 65,741
Yes, the infamous pro Tory BBC
Well that's not what everyone says who is critical of the BBC for being partisan. Many suggest that it is pro-establishment, or pro-whatever political mindset the BBC itself holds, not necessarily pro Tory or Pro Labour.
It may seem that way depending on who's currently in power at any given time.
Alrightmate is offline  
Old 02-01-2017, 01:29
Alrightmate
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Posts: 65,741
The Express? Lol
And an OP questioning impartiality using the Express as a source? Even funnier.
You can choose to buy The Daily Express. You have to pay for the BBC.
Alrightmate is offline  
Old 02-01-2017, 01:35
Alrightmate
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Posts: 65,741
There is nothing to disprove. It is no secret that the research and development department of the BBC recives EU funding.

Do you belive that a drop in the ocean amount over a few years to the BBC R&D department buys editorial control of a national broadcaster's entire news and political output?
It demonstrates financial ties which may further require agreements within a contract.
If the funding is significant it stands to reason that the BBC may be reluctant to report negatively on an organisation they share a business alliance with. Because naturally it may pose a threat to future funding.

It may not be a secret, but that's not really the point. The point is how freely you are prepared to overlook it and give them a pass.

How thorough do you believe any investigative journalism of a subject is going to be if it involves a business partner?
Alrightmate is offline  
Old 02-01-2017, 01:37
Alrightmate
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Posts: 65,741
But surely the Express is totally impartial and in no way is it a rival news organisation.
And its a base lie to say that it is a financial backer of UKIP. Some wicked people might even call it UKIPs mouthpiece.
Well said. So naturally you also agree with the premise when applied to the ethics of the BBC don't you?
Of course you do. Otherwise you wouldn't have said what you said in this post.
Alrightmate is offline  
Old 02-01-2017, 01:40
Alrightmate
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Posts: 65,741
Is this the new year comedy forum?

Brexiter links the Daily Brexit in a "how dare the EU fund UK projects" rant.
Would you find it to be a comedy post if you were told that you had to pay ITV a license fee even though they receive funding from external sources?
Alrightmate is offline  
Old 02-01-2017, 01:41
Alrightmate
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Posts: 65,741
I'm sure the BBC is more impartial than the rag you've linked to.
Why would it be?
Alrightmate is offline  
Old 02-01-2017, 02:27
vauxhall1964
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 5,800
next time try linking to a credible newspaper rather than the joke of a one that the Daily Express has become.
vauxhall1964 is offline  
Old 02-01-2017, 04:19
Eurostar
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Dublin
Posts: 51,599
The broadcast media would be expected to be much more impartial than the press in the UK, especially the one funded by the licence fee.
Eurostar is offline  
Old 02-01-2017, 04:51
d'@ve
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: Darn Sarf
Posts: 28,728
Would you find it to be a comedy post if you were told that you had to pay ITV a license fee even though they receive funding from external sources?
It's grants for research projects in areas the BBC has expertise. Good business for its R&D department which helps keep their essential R&D going and reduces the need for licence fee support in that department.

Stupid and pointless Express article, R&D has nothing to do with editorial policy. What next from the Express? We are going to have 100 days of snow and arctic freezes? Oh wait... they do that every year, twice a year.
d'@ve is offline  
Old 02-01-2017, 04:57
spiney2
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Posts: 24,092
So the bbc isn't biased after all ? Not even an elderly male Trotskyist, close to retirement age, spending all day im the gents' loo ?
spiney2 is offline  
Old 02-01-2017, 07:18
Alrightmate
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Posts: 65,741
The broadcast media would be expected to be much more impartial than the press in the UK, especially the one funded by the licence fee.
Well we might hope it would be.
Alrightmate is offline  
Old 02-01-2017, 07:37
Andrew1954
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2013
Posts: 3,992
Well we might hope it would be.
The broadcast media are required by law to be impartial. That's not to say they are of course. I have doubts impartiality is possible even in principle.
Andrew1954 is offline  
Old 02-01-2017, 07:56
jjwales
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Posts: 25,436
Yes, the BBC is as impartial as could be reasonably expected. A tiny amount of EU money for a specific purpose is hardly going to change that. And of course this is not news - it's been public knowledge for ages.
jjwales is offline  
Old 02-01-2017, 08:28
bluewomble88
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Posts: 1,112
next time try linking to a credible newspaper rather than the joke of a one that the Daily Express has become.
Like The Guardian? Oh wait...
bluewomble88 is offline  
Old 02-01-2017, 08:33
njp
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Posts: 21,645
The broadcast media are required by law to be impartial. That's not to say they are of course. I have doubts impartiality is possible even in principle.
Imagine the outrage if terrorist attacks were treated "impartially".

But the whole premise of the OP (channelling a tabloid whose own relationship with the truth is, shall we say, "problematic") is simply absurd, as even a cursory examination of the facts surrounding the EU grant reveals.
njp is offline  
Old 02-01-2017, 08:47
jjwales
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Posts: 25,436
Like The Guardian? Oh wait...
Why not the Guardian? It's certainly an improvement on some of our "newspapers"...
jjwales is offline  
Old 02-01-2017, 08:48
mossy2103
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Posts: 68,698
You are aware that many companies recive EU grants and in this case it is for research and development. Nothing whatsoever to do with editorial or actual programme making.
Indeed:

Through R&D partnerships we aim to:

Extend BBC R&D’s, and the wider BBC’s sphere of influence with academia, industry, and with funding and standards bodies by identifying and addressing the relevant challenges of tomorrow;
Amplify the BBC’s investment in R&D by creating and delivering greater value for our audiences, the wider industry and all our partners by building durable relationships and
Develop talented and skilled individuals, training and equipping them to address the future challenges, that will deliver innovative, engaging and accessible content and services.

We do this through:

Collaborative research projects

Across the UK and Europe, a number of major funding programmes exist which encourage and support organisations to collaborate actively on R&D projects. These include the research programmes developed and funded by major funding bodies such as the European Commission, the UK Technology Strategy Board (TSB) and the UK Research Councils amongst others.

We have a rich and successful history of actively contributing to national and international projects run within these research programmes, which have benefited the BBC, the wider broadcast industry and ultimately audiences and consumers, and which are key to some of our longer term strategic research.

<snipped>

Academic partnerships

We collaborate closely with universities through a variety of schemes ranging from short-term knowledge exchange activities, and student internships and staff secondments through to ambitious longer-term Multi-University Research Partnerships, where a critical mass of experts is pulled together to address complex problems over a period of 4 or 5 years. Through these partnerships we seek to work with leading academics who are ‘best-of-breed’ in their respective fields and relevant to our R&D work plan, and the challenges we are addressing.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/rd/about/partnerships
mossy2103 is offline  
Old 02-01-2017, 09:04
JELLIES0
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Posts: 6,361
The story in the OP is just the standard anti-BBC muck raking over nothing that we get from certain tabloids.

The BBC certainly is biased though, demonstrably so through academic research. Its clearly very pro the current Tory administration and very anti labour/corybn.
Anyone who thinks the BBC is impartial should compare their coverage of the death of Baroness Thatcher to their coverage of Fidel Castro's demise. They had not one good word to say about Margaret Thatcher.

For them to deny that Corbyn has done great damage to the Labour Party's future prospects would be stretching credibilty just a little too far.

The BBC is a bunch of metropolitan upper class socialists.
JELLIES0 is offline  
Old 02-01-2017, 09:08
CAMERA OBSCURA
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Posts: 6,692
It demonstrates financial ties which may further require agreements within a contract.
If the funding is significant it stands to reason that the BBC may be reluctant to report negatively on an organisation they share a business alliance with. Because naturally it may pose a threat to future funding.

It may not be a secret, but that's not really the point. The point is how freely you are prepared to overlook it and give them a pass.

How thorough do you believe any investigative journalism of a subject is going to be if it involves a business partner?


I wonder how much control the R&D department has over editorial influence of BBC news and political programming? Could you tell me?

How does it work then, this turning a blind eye to EU reporting? Does it come from the top or the R&D department itself? Who is making this call where journalists, editors and producers happily do what they are told because of a few million over a few years to the BBC R&D department.

I'm sure there are plenty of people/organisations that can easily stump up way more than the amount the R&D department gets for certain editorial favours. It seems strange that the BBC would happily break the law, break the broadcasting partiality rules for the sake of a drop in the ocean grant to it's R&D department. A department that is completely separate from programme making and any and all editorial influences.

Then there is the fact that the article linked is a lazy piece of journalism designed more for the headline than any actual journalistic merit.
CAMERA OBSCURA is offline  
Old 02-01-2017, 09:10
Sport1
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Posts: 3,057
The Express are so confident of reeling in the gullible that they basically just re-print the same story. In the OP's link it says 'after it emerged' when the Express themselves reported it in 2015. And it was no more of a story then.

http://www.express.co.uk/news/uk/628...-to-referendum
Sport1 is offline  
Old 02-01-2017, 09:14
CAMERA OBSCURA
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Posts: 6,692
Anyone who thinks the BBC is impartial should compare their coverage of the death of Baroness Thatcher to their coverage of Fidel Castro's demise. They had not one good word to say about Margaret Thatcher.
Not one good word eh?

A nice internet fantasy reimagining of events there.
CAMERA OBSCURA is offline  
Old 02-01-2017, 09:15
NilSatisOptimum
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Posts: 577
Jeepers the Express, wonder what the agenda is.
NilSatisOptimum is offline  
Old 02-01-2017, 09:31
davidmcn
Forum Member
 
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Edinburgh
Posts: 9,454
It demonstrates financial ties which may further require agreements within a contract.
If the funding is significant it stands to reason that the BBC may be reluctant to report negatively on an organisation they share a business alliance with.

How thorough do you believe any investigative journalism of a subject is going to be if it involves a business partner?
What proportion of the BBC's turnover would you consider "significant"?

Any big broadcaster is going to have contracts with thousands of other entities. Nothing really notable about that.
davidmcn is offline  
 
Closed Thread



Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

 
Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 20:07.