Sue and I began this blog in a genuine spirit of open-mindedness towards the BBC. We wanted to start again, fresh, from scratch, and to try and be as fair as possible to the BBC. The BBC would be given the benefit of the doubt whenever there were doubts about bias. (You can read all our early posts if you don't believe us.)
And that spirit persisted for some time. (You can read all our slightly later posts if you still don't believe us.)
It also began to fray over time, and this year has frayed to the point of snapping (at least for me). Why? Because the BBC has regressed, and its regression has got much, much worse this year and is now, frankly, becoming insufferable.
Giving them the benefit of the doubt has started to seem naive. They aren't naive; and I should stop being so naive about them. (Sue has never been naive about them).
Giving them the benefit of the doubt has started to seem naive. They aren't naive; and I should stop being so naive about them. (Sue has never been naive about them).
When I posted recently about reports of parliamentarians speculating that "a group within BBC senior management have decided that they see their job as actively campaigning to thwart Brexit", I sounded a very tentative note, wedded as I've long been to the 'collective ethos/groupthink' view of BBC bias rather than the 'conspiratorial' take on BBC bias. I just couldn't quite believe it was possible.
Some of you, however, said you had no doubt that the BBC was carrying on the 'conspiratorial' way. And I've since been told from a source I trust that the 'speculation' about a group within BBC senior management deciding to actively campaign to scupper Brexit actually comes from impeccable sources (presumably within the BBC)....
Some of you, however, said you had no doubt that the BBC was carrying on the 'conspiratorial' way. And I've since been told from a source I trust that the 'speculation' about a group within BBC senior management deciding to actively campaign to scupper Brexit actually comes from impeccable sources (presumably within the BBC)....
....which is severely alarming - especially as it chimes so closely with what I'm hearing and seeing on the BBC (huge amounts of outrageous bias)....
....and if it can be proven that such a group exists it would sound the death knell for the BBC's claims of impartiality, once and for all. It would surely be the end for them.
....and if it can be proven that such a group exists it would sound the death knell for the BBC's claims of impartiality, once and for all. It would surely be the end for them.
If true - and I now think it is probably more probable than not that such a group exists - please, please let the hounds of hell descend on the BBC.
Meanwhile, I'm also starting to get to the stage where I'm even considering breaking a cardinal rule of mine for this blog - that nothing should be commented upon unless it's been heard - on the oft-mooted grounds that you sometimes don't even need to listen to something on the BBC to just know what it will be like. Among the items listed on the website for today's From Our Own Correspondent, for example, are:
- Justin Rowlatt, in the smog of Delhi, hears how Theresa May's hopes of brokering a free-trade deal with India could be much harder than the government would admit to.
- Gabriel Gatehouse is shown a decades old piece in St Petersburg as the authorities tell people to prepare for the worst.
- Alexander Beetham, on the US-Mexico border, comes face-to-face with some of those Donald Trump says he will keep out of the US.
I'm guessing the first won't be a happy listen for Brexit supporters, the second won't make pleasant hearing for Putin supporters and the latter will raise the blood pressure of Trump supporters.
Of course I could be wrong about those items! - he says, the old spirit still lingering on, weakly.
And, thus, just before posting this piece, I gave in and thought I'd better listen after all. It's my duty. But it was, of course, just as I knew it would be. No unexpected perspectives came. The biases were exactly as predicted. Will I ever learn?
Of course I could be wrong about those items! - he says, the old spirit still lingering on, weakly.
And, thus, just before posting this piece, I gave in and thought I'd better listen after all. It's my duty. But it was, of course, just as I knew it would be. No unexpected perspectives came. The biases were exactly as predicted. Will I ever learn?
