That report, which I mentioned a few posts ago, from the University of the West of Scotland which claims to have found empirical, statistical evidence that the BBC is biased against Scottish independence is now available to read online, and is pleasingly compact.
Whatever your views on Scottish independence, the ensuing stooshie [noun (Scotland): the disruption caused by a disagreement or misunderstanding] has been interesting.
The BBC is not happy.
According to (pro-independence) former BBC Scotland host Derek Bateman, the BBC is doing what it always does when presented with empirical, statistical evidence of the kind of bias it doesn't want to be accused of: (a) trying to hide it from licence-fee payers by not reporting it, (b) contacting the university concerned to object, and copying in the university's principal ("a classic piece of low cunning to intimidate an academic by referring it to his boss"), (c) merely asserting their own doubts about the factual accuracy of the report and (d) playing the man rather than his argument:
There is little doubt that John Robertson’s illuminating report has found out the questionable management of news at Pacific Quay when [Ian] Small [BBC head of public policy there] says the report is “highly subjective and questionable analysis of our news output.” Those are, in my view, spiteful and insulting accusations against a Scottish academic for which Small has no evidence whatsoever. Are you getting the impression of an arrogant, out-of-touch, superior organization resentful of criticism and unable to defend itself without resorting to personal vilification?Sounds familiar.