Sunday 24 April 2005

And still they claim to be unbiased!

If anyone doubted the BBC's bias before they'll surely be having second thoughts today:
The BBC was last night plunged into a damaging general election row after it admitted equipping three hecklers with microphones and sending them into a campaign meeting addressed by Michael Howard, the Conservative leader.
I do think that the Conservative response is far too mild. If I were Michael Howard I'd announce that no Tory would appear on any BBC programme or answer questions from any BBC journalist until after the election. Would the BBC be legally allowed to cover other candidates in such circumstances?

1 comment:

David Farrer said...

Comments made on previous template:

Interesting. I guess it all depends on your point of view. I saw the episode as an attack on Blair and his attempts to manufacture a threat (WMD) in order to start a war. 
I'm not going to post a comment on B-BBC, I don't think my opinions would go down very well. I am interested in why people feel the BBC is so biased though, which was why I commented here originally (and I like to read other Scottish blogs, hi David). 
I sometimes mention Dasani when talking about the value of a public service broadcaster. Any opinions on this? (Or directions to suitable posts, I'm a relatively new blogger and I wasn't reading blogs when the story first broke).

26 April 2005, 00:31:56 GMT+01:00
– Like – Reply

Natalie Solent
I commented on it at Biased BBC.

25 April 2005, 22:47:58 GMT+01:00
– Like – Reply

Fair point. The BBC's defence is that the hecklers would have been there anyway and they just recorded the incident. I'm not saying it was a smart move on their part, clearly it wasn't. I'm still not convinced about BBC bias I'm afraid to say. 
Any comments on the Doctor Who story? It was very clearly an attack on Blair and the war in Iraq.

25 April 2005, 13:07:26 GMT+01:00
– Like – Reply

Undoubtedly shoddy behaviour from the BBC, but how many people actually watch BBC 3? 
I remember hearing heckling of Howard at one of their Press conferances on Sky News, I think it was in their headlines that day. If it was indeed the BBC-hecklers that did it then they did affect the news agenda negatively for Howard.

25 April 2005, 09:55:48 GMT+01:00
– Like – Reply

Some strange work by the BBC, I wonder how they will justify that

24 April 2005, 17:33:28 GMT+01:00
– Like – Reply

Undoubtedly shoddy behaviour from the BBC, but how many people actually watch BBC 3? 
Did you see last nights episode of Doctor Who? If not, you'd be forgiven for thinking I'm off topic but.. 
Saturday, 7pm, BBC 1: A mocking parody of the ridiculous 45 minute claim by Blair in the middle of an election campaign on primetime TV. The very issue New Labour are determined not to mention. 
It swings both ways, IMHO.

24 April 2005, 16:19:06 GMT+01:00
– Like – Reply

Neil Craig
I'm afraid that when its the only game in town it doesn't matter if it is fixed. It might be worth prefacing any statement by a Tory that they believe this proves the BBC biased - they would probably have to broadcast that. To be fair Labour have, on occasion, won elections when virtually all the press were against them. 
It is worth noting that the reasons western powers gave for the Ukraine election being fraudulent was electoral fraud & bias in the official media.

24 April 2005, 11:42:05 GMT+01:00