Both the BBC and CBC have a history of government influence in their reporting - this is not a civil society function I can trust to government.
Citation absolutely required. The BBC have always sought to be impartial - which brings its own, occasionally absurd, biases. Their charter has always required they separate from government and impartial.
They've managed to piss off almost every government, of every colour, in almost equal measure.
Do you have a link for this? The govt can’t tamper with the editorial output of the BBC, that’s not how it works.
First D notices apply to all media, second they are a voluntary "government request" to not publish. Various outlets, including the BBC, have plenty of history ignoring these. Some are actioned. Essentially the media body has to be convinced there is a national security case to follow the request. They're not mandatory and not following one results in no government or court action. Just words.
Cameron emptily threatened to bring in tougher measures to restrict all media, not just the BBC, during Snowden.
And private media, controlled by unaccountable billionaire capitalists and funded by corporate advertising, can be trusted?
With publicly funded media, there can be far more scrutiny, openness and criticism. I mean, look at the UK and compare the BBC, which has its flaws, to the absolutely repulsive, dishonest and dogmatically right-wing private press.