Home » Posts tagged 'balance'
Tag Archives: balance
Out of the BBC or Daily Mail, please give me the Daily Mail any day!
Graphic from the Max Farquhar blog.
I’m surrounded by lefties – I’d say virtually all of my 3000 friends on Facebook are Labour voters, and possibly the vast majority of my nearly 6000 followers on Twitter are Labour voters too. Therefore, I am well aware how everyone has loved to mock the Daily Mail, as almost a ‘rite of passage’ for my party. However, I must say I really like the Daily Mail. I certainly feel that it now offers a more interesting and open discussion of policy matters than the BBC. There is no doubt that the BBC abuses its dominant position in subtle ways – it has a dominant presence on the internet, and in TV and radio; and it has such enormous reputation that it gets away with a lot. It gets away with rampant imbalance and bias against the Labour Party, and often makes basic accuracy mistakes.
The BBC has been implicit in furthering the lie that the Labour Party increased the deficit due to rampant recklessness. The fact is that a major cash injection had to be produced in 2009 to resuscitate a dying economy due to the global financial crash; without this injection virtually all senior economists concede that the UK economy would have entered a deep depression. As it was, the Conservatives, with the Liberal Democrats under Nick Clegg, withdrew investment and embarked on a policy of austerity, thus guaranteeing the slide into depression of the UK economy earlier this year. Sir Mervyn King does not like to emphasise this, which is odd given that he is supposed to be independent. Nick Clegg even this morning used his Andrew Marr to further the lie that Labour had ‘made a mistake’ akin to his fraudulent lie of making a pledge which the Liberal Democrats could not afford. Even Danny Alexander, according to James Forsyth’s article in the Spectator this morning, conceded that he warned against making this promise which the Liberal Democrats could not afford on The Sunday Politics show.
Apart from live interviews which the BBC uses to maintain balance, the reporting of the BBC of domestic news has been staggeringly misleading, either innocently, negligently or fraudulently. There has been no coverage of the welfare benefit reforms to the point that the public understands what is going on, the public have little comprehension that the NHS has been privatised and this had not been the policy prior to the 2010 general election, and the public do not know that many sectors have been taken out of scope in legal aid and that many law centres have shut down. This is in sharp contrast to the Daily Mail, curiously enough. For example, the Daily Mail “broke” the story last week that doctors are to be offered cash ‘bribes’ to slash the number of patients they send to hospital.
“GPs have been promised financial incentives of up to £26,000 for their surgery if they take certain measures to reduce referrals. Every time a doctor sends a patient to hospital for a scan, consultation or operation, the local NHS trust is charged for the cost of their treatment.”
The Daily Mail has also led through the journalism of Sonia Poulton on the trauma experienced by disabled citizens like me through this coalition government. Sonia recently reported on the Paralympics thus:
“This year, despite widespread revulsion and opposition, David Cameron’s Coalition has forced through some of the most punishing and harsh measures – via the Welfare Reform Bill – that disabled people have experienced in my lifetime. Financial life-lines have been severed and state-assistance stripped back, and in some cases completely withdrawn, as disabled people are forced into a system that will lessen personal independence and increase state dependence. This will almost certainly result in ‘disabled homes’ up and down the country.”
Sonia has even written to Ed Miliband about the disaster of the injustice of the work capability assessments, reproduced in this article:
“Dear Mr. Miliband,
I am prompted to write to you having just watched these two programmes on the subject of ‘fit to work’ testing for sick and disabled people: Channel 4?s Dispatches (‘Britain On The Sick’) and BBC2?s Panorama (‘Disabled or Faking it?’).
This year, as a writer, I have been made painfully aware of how distressing, unreliable and costly – both physically and emotionally – the Work Capability Assessment is for those undertaking it. The financial cost to the country is another concern altogether.”
It is worth looking at this quite carefully. Only this week, Michael Gove heaped praise on the Daily Mail in arguing the case for the E-Bacc in replacing the GCSE examination. The Conservatives are therefore very mindful of what the Daily Mail writes for its reasons, much more than it cares about the Labour Party Press Office says (stating the blindingly obvious). The BBC is playing an altogether deceitful game in furthering the political agenda of the Conservative Party, and knows that it has a massive outreach. However, it has a guaranteed source of income through the licence fee. Many people I know resent that the licence fee is being used to give such a distorted view of political thinking on BBC domestic news. However, the Daily Mail really does a golden market opportunity here. Whilst the death of newspapers has perhaps been somewhat exaggerated, the circulation of the Daily Mail remains good. It will benefit from a greater number of people who wish to read its papers, and it is very likely that the declining popularity of the Sun has been for a fundamental mistrust by the majority of reasonable voters in its output, accelerated by Kelvin Mackenzie and the propagation of smears over Hillsborough. The Daily Mail instead has a golden opportunity to make a lot of money, if many disenfranchised voters, who do not particularly like any of the political parties, wish to engage with resentment of the incompetence of ATOS in delivering assessments or the resentment of the privatisation of the NHS which they did not vote for.
I believe that Labour members, like me, should not underestimate the enormous value that the Daily Mail has been in recent times in discussing real issues involving domestic policies in a way that the BBC never would. This is an important thing for Labour to realise, and to get more people in the general public to engage with these important issues. I personally believe that, whilst much prominence has been given to the ‘it’s the economy stupid’ school of thinking, both main parties are in fact mistrusted on economic incompetence, and there is a new model army of armchair protestors against NHS privatisation and the way this government has treated disabled citizens.
Time for the BBC to give up on the pretence of responsible journalism
Today, I loved reading the Times on my iPad. Indeed, parts of the British media are world-class, and worthy of our reputation abroad. The Times and Financial Times are probably my most favourite media publications of all.
Unfortunately, in the run-up to the General Election, the BBC were without shadow of a doubt gunning for Gordon Brown – to lose. Many of my friends were appalled about the highly personal comments made towards him in both style and manner, and this includes so-called respectable people in respectable institutions (for example, Nick Clegg’s conduct in the Lower House in Prime Minister’s Questions). For the BBC and people like Adam Boulton, ‘Bigotgate’ was possibly a gift.
Some have said that senior presenters of the BBC, Laura Kuenssberg and Nick Robinson, put the most unbelievable gloss on the Tory Party, that a large number of my 2400 friends on Facebook were talking about not renewing their TV licence as class action protest. Maybe, taken as a whole, the BBC does not suffer from lack of impartiality, and indeed some of the output of the BBC is first-rate (for example, the Today programme). Some items on BBC online news would be more fitting for a tabloid on a bad day.
Right-wingers tend to claim the BBC has enormous left-wing bias, therefore providing evidence that it produces balanced coverage. My parents, who have lived in this country since 1961, used to have enormous respect for the BBC, and indeed the brand of the BBC used to be superb internationally, but now that they have zero respect for it. Whilst there used to be goodwill for ‘Beeb’, the illusion has nearly become shattered to an irreparable state. Now that its standards have declined so much, it is vital that an external entity should look at the functioning of the BBC as a professional media operation. The BBC investigates complaints internally mainly, leaving little recourse for complaints, because OFCOM’s terms-of-reference are so narrow.
The journalists are supposed to obey the Editorial guidelines of the BBC which are widely publicized, but within a single day it is ‘dead easy’ to find examples of problems in accuracy, balance and impartiality. However, one has to wonder whether journalists should declare a ‘conflict of interest’ in the same way that directors of companies in England have to declare a financial interest under the Companies Act (2006)? Does it matter that a highly influential person within the BBC News machine, Nick Robinson, was a prominent Tory at University? His argument will be that his professional manner can be divorced from his political views, in that a doctor with severe depression can be a psychiatrist, but might it be worth the while of the BBC to publish once-and-for-all some statistics on the volume of complaints for a definable and measurable period, such as the 2010 General Election? Throughout the election campaign, the coverage towards David Cameron and Nick Clegg was much more lenient than towards Gordon Brown.
The BBC has for some time been producing inaccurate coverage of news stories, some of which are clearly not in the overall public interest but constitute a ‘witch-hunt’ at best. The BBC regularly contravenes rules of responsible journalism as explained in Reynolds v Times Newspaper case from the House of Lords. The recent debacle has been that Question Time has been accused of demonstrating left-wing bias, when David Dimbleby was virtually shouting down answers given by Hillary Benn. Even when it comes to defamation, it is not a problem as they have a well-funded legal team, paid for by millions of tax-payers. Protecting the identity of ‘Stig’ in the public interest did not come particularly cheap, ‘reliable sources claim’.
Apparently, a Conservative source said:
Now, more than ever, is the time for the BBC to be careful and frame the debate responsibly so that the facts are properly heard. The spending review is a serious topic for all of us, it needs to be treated as such.’
Surely 150 days is a bit early for right-wing political paranoia to start setting in?
Today, we have a main news item concerning Wikileaks suggesting that all we see in the media may not be what is happening in real life.
How transparent is the BBC machinery? Sure, they can publish the salaries of Directors who are earning £500,000 a year, or more, but is this what is really ‘getting the goat’ of ordinary licence payers? Was it correct that the BBC refused to play the DEC humanitarian appeal? The Glasgow Media Group repeatedly has shown the BBC is more right wing in coverage; a genuine public interest point is that, with the BBC attacking pensions of BBC workers and now to make 16% cuts, we can expect even more right wing bias.
Take specifically what happened last Wednesday. An individual has written to me the following:
“My part of my union (Revenue & Customs, PCS) had a small demonstration outside our HQ @ 100 Parliament Street (opposite the HOP). I was offered a spot on the Radio 5 Question Time being held on the Green after the cuts were made. There was some confusion and I was advised that the BBC didn’t want any trade union representatives on air!!! However, a few of us hung around whilst the political heavyweights were being interviewed. No one from any UK news outlet paid us (or any other protesters) any notice at all.
However, my colleague was filmed by Al Jazeera – who seemed more interested in what the protesters were saying than the politicians. She also did a longish interview for a Danish TV station and an interview for the Portuguese press. I was intervied by Helsinki Sanomat in some depth. The European press were interested in the lack of action by the TUC. I was asked if I would rather be French. The day before we were followed by Japanese TV for a documentary there and today we were interviewed in London by the French TV.”
On the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, it is mooted that BBC still broadcasts much more pro-war views, even when 76% think troops should be returned. The most sinister development in their editorial policy is that they appear parrot ‘we have got to cut the deficit’ views without even providing the evidence from the Nobel Laureate, Paul Krugman, and David Blanchflower CBE, that the cuts will be a disaster. The BBC then creates editorial imbalance by not presenting half of the argument, thus making the entire argument grossly inaccurate. It is then easy for the BBC’s Director General Mark Thompson to satisfy the Conservative PR machine to present the coalition’s cuts in a favourable light, and for George Osborne to claim that Labour has no alternative.
The spin that has been propagated on this is truly mortifying. No mention is made by the BBC that the Conservatives supported the Labour borrowing plan between 2001-2007, the UK had the lowest debt of G20 countries on entering the recession, the recession was truly worldwide (as they might be forced to admit when we go into a double-dip), and that the reason Labour does not wish to specific which would it cut first is (a) because Labour with the Fawcett Society think the budget contravenes the Equality Act (b) Labour does not agree with the macroeconomic policy in the first place. Labour has made it perfectly clear in the public record for a long time that it does not support the rate or depth of cuts. It is especially nauseating that the Coalition does not command any authority on narrowing the ‘tax gap’.
The BBC could do a lot for public confidence in its reputation by reporting on tax avoidance by millionaires, or reporting on the alternative funding of the public sector services, rather than what it seems to spend most of its time in: gutter, trashy witch-hunts to grab headlines, so-called “breaking news”.
The real reason that people appear to hate the cuts is actually – shock horror – because real people (not millionaires) hate the cuts. The Coalition will be hard pushed to find a city sympathetic to their cause – maybe Middlesborough was a bad choice, but I look forward to Question Time from the BBC, in my home city of Glasgow next Thursday.
It’s all getting a bit serious isn’t it?
Here’s a video of Adam Boulton ‘losing it’ with Alastair Campbell
and Nick Robinson potentially contravening the Criminal Damage Act (1971)
Your journalism is safe in their hands? I’m saying nothing..
Dr Shibley Rahman is a research physician and research lawyer by training.
Queen’s Scholar, BA (1st.), MA, MB, BChir, PhD, MRCP(UK), LLB(Hons.), FRSA
Director of Law and Medicine Limited
Member of the Fabian Society and Associate of the Institute of Directors
I am not going to tolerate this long smear tactic by the BBC : no conflict of interest?
I find it incredible personally that the Chairman of the General Standards Board at the BBC Trust, Chita Bharucha, feels that there is no conflict of interest in her adjudicating on a BBC news story when she is also on the General Medical Council.
I am waiting to see what her judgment is. I am hoping that the decision by her won’t show the same degree of lack of accuracy, impartiality and balance as the original article, or further actions against sickening journalism will have to be taken by me. I am not going to tolerate smear tactics from the BBC.
