Conversation piece

Notwithstanding the hardcore Corbynista at the start here, this Twitter discussion yesterday struck me as being both civilised and interesting - and worth transcribing: 

Tom London: The BBC trashed its own reputation in this election. At the very least there should be an independent inquiry into the serious allegation of persistent pro-Tory bias.

Sam Bagnall: Meanwhile in other news Boris Johnson is to review the licence fee. Presumably for perceived anti-Tory bias. Sigh.

Douglas Carswell: It’s more than any partisan bias, Sam. The BBC’s problem, which affects much of what it commissions beyond news, is belief in a bogus empiricism, which is mere inductivism. From this flows many falsehoods that grate.

Sam Bagnall: Do you think all public service government regulated TV news should be abolished? Or just the BBC?

Douglas Carswell: No. I would a) make non payment of the fee a civil, not criminal matter and b) change broadcast rules to allow explicitly subjective shows to air. And that’s it. a) would mean a sub service. b) would mean intellectual competition in broadcasting.

Sam Bagnall: There's no rule outlawing reasonable polemics... Just the range of views needs to be reflected across the schedule. It's more a case of bravery of commissioners. Totally agree about the criminal thing. It's weird.

Douglas Carswell: Suspect you are right. Commissioners act like a cartel. Unless one shares the Groucho Club group think, you never get commissioned.

Sam Bagnall: More Soho House than Groucho these days!

Douglas Carswell: That said Sam, I’ve loved some recent programmes, especially “Reggie in China”!

Sam Bagnall: Thing is such a programme unlikely to be made by a commercial broadcaster with no public service remit and government regulation...

Douglas Carswell: Really? It felt to me almost like a Netflix production in that it wasn’t presented by a washed up celeb talking down to viewers, but a clearly knowledgeable chap telling me things I didn’t know. Very well made.