"Radio 4 used to be the home of sober reporting..."

Here's an interesting comment from Red Handler on the unofficial army forum ARRSE:

I caught the end of The Media Show. It struck me that quite a few opinions were presented as fact. They talked about BAME representation in the media, but two of the four persons on the programme were BAME {judging by their names}: 50% representation is much more than the proportion of BAME by overall population size.  

Then I caught the BBC Radio 4 News at Six, which included a lot of opinion presented as fact and, overall, came over either as (a) a lot of effort being made to spin stories against HMG, or (b) reporters not realising that they are biased.  

Example (a reporter talking about HMG's new internal markets bill) - "...but the provocative move [i.e. HMG's bill] has increased tensions with the EU as the two sides attempt to hammer out a trade deal..."  

'Provocative' is defined as: 'causing anger or another strong reaction, especially deliberately' so the reporter appeared to me to be commenting about the assumed motivation behind the bill. The reporter's sentence could easily have been rendered as '...but the proposed bill has increased tensions...'. This especially after she began the item with:  

'When the Northern Ireland Secretary admitted last week that the government's plan would break international law in a specific and limited way, many MPs could hardly believe what they were hearing! His admission caused outrage; former Prime Ministers; lawyers, the opposition and many conservative MPs said the move threatened the UK's reputation for upholding treaties and international laws...'  

There was no representation of the government's reasons for bringing the bill forward. And I don't want hyped phrases such as '...many MPs could hardly believe what they were hearing! His admission caused outrage...': 

Radio 4 used to be the home of sober reporting...

Fair comment? 

Well, here's the offending report from Vicky Young: 

When the Northern Ireland Secretary admitted last week that the Government's plan would break international law in a specific and limited way, many MPs could hardly believe what they were hearing! 

His admission caused outrage; former Prime Ministers; lawyers, the opposition and many conservative MPs said the move threatened the UK's reputation for upholding treaties and international laws. 

The growing rebellion ahead of a vote next week has forced the Government to seek a compromise and the BBC understands that it will give Parliament an extra layer of oversight. 

But that has not been enough to assuage the concerns of the Advocate General for Scotland Lord Keen. He's resigned from the Government. Appearing in front of the Liaison Committee the Prime Minister insisted his duty was to protect the country from what he calls "an irrational interpretation of the Withdrawal Agreement". 

But the provocative move has increased tensions with the EU as the two sides attempt to hammer out a trade deal. Hilary Benn, the chairman of the Brexit Select Committee asked Mr. Johnson whether he believed the EU was negotiating in good faith. 

[Clip of Mr Johnson and Mr Benn.] 

Mr. Johnson's offer of compromise may persuade enough of his own MPs to fall into line over the Internal Market Bill in a vote next week, but many think Downing Street's approach has done serious damage to the UK's reputation.