Hacker News Reader

Comment by rvieira | Hacker News Reader

There are two BBCs. BBC News and BBC TV programmes.

BBC TV programmes (from fiction to documentaries) are among the best of in the world in terms of productions.

BBC News is incredibly biased pro-government. IMO, this all stems to the changes David Cameron did to its structure and funding, making it effectively averse to "upset" the government. They also have this view of "balance" that is best exemplified by inviting a flat-earther to a debate on Earth's geology to offer a alternate POV.

EDIT: Also, if anyone is not in the UK or following it, catch up on Nadine Dorries, the "culture" secretary of state. Her agenda is to discredit the BBC, bring "culture wars" to the public service debate (e.g. "Woke BBC") and threats of defunding.

View on HN

> BBC News is incredibly biased pro-government.

If anything it's pro status-quo or pro establishment it has a bias towards liberal democratic values and the norms. As politics swings about, the BBC has a dampening effect which is valuable.

So if you look at the extreme of Johnson's incompetance, you will see the BBC scrutinising it quite heavily - but similarly with Corbyn in the past.

The fact that government culture secretary Nadine Doris is attacking the BBC puts into context your assertion that it is 'incredibly pro government'.

The BBC News department recognised the problems with 'false balance' several years ago and I think that it's got a lot better on that front. https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2018/sep/07/bbc-we-g...

I gave my opinion on Dorries' approach further down on the thread.

Interestingly, the heavy scrutiny only came after the govt's threat of "defunding" the BBC in 2021. It was never there for the 2019 election, for instance or the Brexit referendum.

Also, the Tory party never accused the BBC of political bias, but rather "wokeness", so this is just an attempt to shift to the public debate to "culture wars", rather than other issues, in my view.

I mean - you're wrong

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-10373181/Tory-anger...

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/over-70-mps-w...

https://www.express.co.uk/news/uk/1559812/BBC-bias-Brexit-To...

https://www.express.co.uk/news/politics/1527642/bbc-bias-cha...

https://www.spectator.co.uk/article/watch-tory-mp-accuses-bb...

https://www.chroniclelive.co.uk/news/north-east-news/conserv...

https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/8133800/tory-ministers-bbc-bia...

https://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/entry/bbc-bias-open-letter-...

https://www.digitalspy.com/media/a339323/tory-mp-criticises-...

The incumbent government complains about "wokeness" and not political (party) bias.

Also, those are mostly examples of a hand-full of famously fringe hard-Brexit MPs, over almost 7 years now, that cry foul for anything. Even the 70 MPs open letter said:

"Some of the signatories of this letter shared many of the concerns about the economic impact of Brexit, but all are delighted to find forecasts of immediate economic harm were at best misplaced. So-called ‘despite Brexit’ reporting may be expected of a partisan press, but licence fee-payers have the right to expect better."

This is a vague as possible.

It’s really not “incredibly pro-government”. It’s anti-rapid change; pro-middle class; pro-a-comfortable-quality-of-life; anti “changing the system” whilst still “improving on the details”.

Some of its reporting feels pro-government because it’s telling the story of what the government is saying it’s doing. Watch any of the “just off the peak time” broadcasting and it’s very keen to hold politicians to account, to point out unfairness and hypocrisy, regardless of which party holds more power. It’s had gentle leans towards, and against various governments over the past 20 years, and not in sync with the party in power.

All of this is fairly centrist.

I agree the editorial line is not uniform. But realistically, how many people watch Politics live or Newsnight? Mostly politics buffs. The vast majority of the population watches peak time news (which is mostly repeating the governments line).

In addition to your points, the perspective is rather "metropolitan socially-liberal". I would disagree that they are anti rapid change on social issues.

> I would disagree that they are anti rapid change on social issues.

Eh, no. The BBC is institutionally anti LGBT, like much of the establishment in the UK.

As just one example, a few months ago they did a hit piece, to equate trans people with sexual offenders. Curiously, the loudest anti trans voice in the article was herself a sexual offender. However the BBC was okay with not disclosing that, and then platforming her.

Later, emboldened by the BBC piece, said anti trans activist wrote a manifesto—just like a neo Nazi or a school shooter does—calling for the elimination of trans people. No apology from the BBC, and they didn't even pull the piece.

It's so pro-government that the government feels the need to discredit it?

Interesting...

Yes, it's strange. Mind you that the several accusations of bias (e.g. https://www.theguardian.com/media/2017/jan/18/bbc-trust-says...) are political and Nadine Dorries' angle is "wokeness", not political party bias.

So I'm assuming it's a way to shift public debate to the "culture war" topic, where people are more emotional, less rational, than say the economy, etc.

This is not just a Dorries thing, she is merely working from the script. I believe that focusing on culture war issues as a front for Tory vote-winning was becoming a key focus under Munira Mirza, and I only expect it to intensify in spite of her departure.

Even within BBC News, there is notably different content between the World Service and home stations.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com