A Twitter chat yesterday:
Ross Hawkins: Interesting debate this morning, and over last few days. I covered election for BBC Radio 4 Today …Mark Mardell: There’s a concerted effort to lie about the way the Beeb covered the campaign in some newspapers.
It's not that difficult to recognise impartial broadcasting when you see it.
ReplyDeleteDespite being what Mardell would no doubt think of as "Anti-BBC Fanatics", "Fox Fans" and "Licence Fee Obsessives" (I'm doing his work for him there) I think most of us who post here were happy to say that the Nick Robinson debate with Corbyn and Johnson was conducted fairly and impartially (for whatever reason! - because on Today, Robinson can be as biased as the rest of them).
We've already pointed to the structural bias of touring Unis day by day on the Today programme. But add to that the way Boris Johnson was presented as having a "truth and trust" problem...whereas Corbyn's dodgy record and cover up re his involvement in Irish and Middle East terrorist politics, was never or harldy ever raised. If any minister came on the radio, the BBC journo would nearly always bring it round to truth and trust and Boris Johnson's record. Nothing about how Jo Swinson lied to the electorate about her previous support for an in-out Referendum (along with Nick Clegg), or her acceptance of the Referendum result or her acceptance of austerity policies.
For which #JohnSweeneyliked was created.
ReplyDeleteWhen the BBC is accused of bias, its supporters claim that it is a lie. It is so obvious to anyone that the BBC is biased against all Tories and Brexiteers (constant interruptions, sneering tone, irrelevant personal questions) compared to the tone of interviews with Labour and Remainers (fawning lack of interruptions and easy questions allowing them to make their case).
ReplyDeleteIf Mark Mardell cannot see this, he is not only deaf, but so wrapped inside his own BBC bubble that he cannot see the real world anymore.