Biased Broadcasting Corporation forced to apologise - yet again!

[threegee]

You'd have thought the Guardianistas at the Beeb would have learned something from being caught out propagating lies about Nigel Farage  over his de-banking, and then having to grovel again in March when describing Reform as "far-right".  But no, Geeta Guru-Murthy - older sister of Krishnan Guru-Murthy, the equally biased and foul-mouthed Channel 4 News presenter - simply couldn't resist adding a slur to the BBC's coverage of the Reform press conference in Dover.

A red-faced BBC had to speedily admit that the words they focused on were in fact the words of their own poster boy Donald Tusk (now the PM of Poland).  It seems that in the BBC's world view working British people must tolerate the illegal immigration levels that Poles, of all political persuasions, will no longer tolerate!

"... I used language to describe it which didn’t meet the BBC’s editorial standards on impartiality. I’d like to apologise to Mr Farage and viewers for this.”   Eternally curious that these frequent infractions of "the BBC’s editorial standards on impartiality" are all one way, and no sanctions are ever applied!  Maybe the BBC needs some REAL diversity and inclusion in its recruiting process?

[Vic Patterson]

Hmm! And I use BBC to view British news (but with great caution, and understanding of their obvious bias.) Any recommendations for an additional but genuine less biased news outlet. ?

 

[Canny lass]

19 hours ago, Vic Patterson said:

Any recommendations for an additional but genuine less biased news outlet. ?

Vic, you do right to administer great caution and to take into consideration any political bias when getting your daily dose of ’news’ (I use the last word loosely) but a non-biased news outlet is, I fear, also a non-existent news outlet. The reason for that is that the task of a reporter is not, as one might think, to report news it is to earn money for his/her employer. Ever since William Caxton introduced the printing press to the people of Britain printed news has been a part of the British way of life. In Caxton’s time, however, news reporting was sporadic. It coincided with events as they occurred, and which were deemed worthy of report and comment. The situation today is somewhat different with news being reported on a weekly, daily or even hourly basis, regardless of whether or not anything of importance has happened. The media, digital or otherwise, are committed to filling their columns and air-time with something or other and how that ’’something or other’ is presented is largely down to the intended readership. The BBC does not, of course, ’sell’ it’s news reports neither does it allow advertising – as do it’s many competitors – but it does have it’s viewing figures to think about.

Awareness of the social grade of the readership is crucial to the survival of news outlets. In the west they exist within a free market system and if they are not successful commercially they will fail and lose their profit. So, news outlets operating within a free market system are not necessarily going to give us a full account of the news of the day but rather ’selected’ information on recent events, and this information may well be presented with an ideological ‘spin’ which thankfully most of us can recognise.

News outlets fall with regard to readership into two main groups, the ‘quality’ press, and the ‘popular’ press, and that’s a division that’s been around since at least 1819 when they were referred to as the ”respectable -” as opposed to the ”pauper” press. Both share a need to condense information to fit the space/time available while, at the same time, retaining clarity and avoiding ambiguity. Both are concerned with presenting a certain number of facts in as interesting manner as possible BUT … to different readerships whose constitution they are very clear about, in particular their social and political standing. The latter fact accounts not only for the use of  political bias in news outlets but also for many stylistic and linguistic differences in the two and all are well documented by language researchers.

There is an abundance of research showing features of stylistic significance, in both the popular and the quality press, which reflect a certain social grade of readership. Thirty years ago the quality outlets used to give balanced news reports in a neutral language. However, recent research has shown that there are signs that some quality outlets are moving towards a more popular style. This is evident above all in their increased use of a more simple language, noticeably in their choice of words from the lower end the lexical register. - usually reserved for the popular press.

Believe me, the popular and the quality press choose their words carefully to create an impression which is attractive to certain types of reader from opposite poles of the social scale and they have at their disposal a whole battalion of linguistic - and even paralinguistic – tools which ensure that their text is tailor-made for just their reader so if anyone isn’t liking what they are reading then they are probably subscribing to the wrong news outlet.

Keep reading Vic and keep being aware of the bias in the text. It’s never going to disappear – from ANY news outlet - because this interest in profit is sufficient to ensure that the versatility of the English language will continue to be utilised to make newspapers more attractive to the different social classes for many generations to come.

[Vic Patterson]

Reuters, BBC, Associated Press were all reliable and trusted news sources, even Blyth News Ashington post was good (especially to use as a bleezer!) Daily Mirror was just for the crossword. The Newcastle Journal/Evening Chronicle on line was alright but I gave up fighting all of the advertising.  Can't beat Facebook for the real facts.....

[Canny lass]

20 hours ago, Vic Patterson said:

(especially to use as a bleezer!)

Bleezer, there's a lovely word from my past. The bleezer was the cause of at least half - and possibly all - chimney fires in Netherton colliery, when it caught fire and ignited the soot in the chimney. I can't remember there ever being a chimney sweep in the colliery and chimney fires were a monthly occurrence.

[Canny lass]

I remember there being an attempt a few years ago to publish a newspaper 'without bias'. The publication was simply called 'i' and was, I think, started by The Independent. I gave it a quick Google today and it's still going strong but it is now said to have a centre-left political flavour.

Edited May 30 by Canny lass

[threegee]

22 hours ago, Canny lass said:

the task of a reporter is not, as one might think, to report news it is to earn money for his/her employer

The BBC doesn't earn money, it has a route into everyone's pockets via the TV Tax!  It is in a privileged position as the state broadcaster and a royal charter which is supposed to guarantee complete political neutrality.  If it wants to go the commercial route, then that seems to be fine by most people.  But then it will have to stop threatening to imprison people who don't want to fund its leftist propaganda.

[threegee]

58 minutes ago, Canny lass said:

I remember there being an attempt a few years ago to publish a newspaper 'without bias'. The publication was simply called 'i' and was, I think, started by The Independent. I gave it a quick Google today and it's still going strong but it is now said to have a centre-left political flavour.

It's a failed leftist publication with strong links to the Kremlin and KGB!  It failed commercially and "went digital" in order to keep churning out its anti-British propaganda.  Like C4 it has taken significant funding from the EU which it prefers not to reveal.  Naturally, it was vehemently anti-Brexit and remains metropolitan centric.

[threegee]

On 28/05/2024 at 20:27, Vic Patterson said:

Hmm! And I use BBC to view British news (but with great caution, and understanding of their obvious bias.) Any recommendations for an additional but genuine less biased news outlet. ?

 

Despite being branded "extreme right" by the BBC, GB News does in fact broadcast a pretty broad spectrum of views.  One of its founders was Andrew Neil when he was pushed out of the BBC by the woke mob.  You can get GB News Radio anywhere in the world with several Android or iPhone radio apps.  If you have a Google smart speaker, simply say Hey Google, play GB News Radio, and I'm guessing Amazon and Apple devices will respond similarly.

This is novel: I'm providing a link to an old Guardian article (interpret with care)!

GB News launch gains more viewers than BBC or Sky news channels

Several ex-BBC and ITV people present regularly, and particularly notable is young Geordie lad Darren Grimes - who used to be a Lib Dem activist.

You can view part of the TV coverage on their YouTube channel.  They seem to have started a GB News America recently too.

If you have a Roku box or stick, there's a Roku app that will connect your TV to the full monty.  I see that there's an Android Play Store app too, but I've never needed it.  Almost definitely an Apple Store app too, and maybe other platforms.  Unlike other UK TV broadcasters, they don't block international streaming, so you can get their full 24/7 UK TV coverage wherever you are in the world.

[threegee]

Quote

Farage vows to reform ‘biased’ BBC and scrap licence fee

‘Wasteful’ broadcaster’s levy is ‘taxation without representation’, says Reform UK manifesto

 

Ticks a box for me in any election!   If it's really as good as the BBC wants us to believe, then loads of people will pay voluntarily - won't they?