"The BBC has squandered trust. But we will win it back"

"The BBC has squandered trust. But we will win it back" so says Mark Thompson in today's Guardian. You can read the whole article followed by, mostly, considered responses here. One of the responses is mine which I reproduce here, because I want to...


"The BBC's political bias has become the subject of much comment and is well documented by many blogs. I will not advertise any particular blogs here, but a Google search for "BBC +bias" brought up 1,900,000 links.

The BBC's bias is not always party political although it has been anti-Conservative for some years now; as Andrew Marr wrote in October last year "it is better expressed as a cultural liberal bias". Many of us can list the BBC's bias on most subjects as they are clear and obvious, often they are most obvious by looking at the stories that the BBC chooses not to cover as much as those that the BBC does choose to cover, the BBC is guilty of sins of omission as well as commission.

The BBC's coverage of John Redwood's report the other week was a classic of BBC bias. The BBC felt it had to cover John Redwood's report but that did at least give it an excuse to dust off the footage of John Redwood failing to sing along with Mae Hen Wlad Fy Nhadau. Yes it is a funny piece of video and it does the job of making John Redwood look a bit odd, which the BBC believe he must be as he is a Tory, but was it relevant? Yes the BBC have subsequently apologised but it was a very forced apology and the damage had already been done. Strange how the BBC have been much less keen to show the footage of Gordon Brown picking his nose and eating the results, footage that is just as watchable, more relevant and just as insulting. The difference is that the BBC don't want to pour ridicule on Gordon Brown whilst they do want to do so to all leading Conservatives. How many times has the John Redwood footage been shown on Have I Got News For You and Mock the Week? How many times has the Gordon Brown footage been shown?

The BBC's coverage of the 40 Labour MPs demanding a referendum on the EU Treaty is also interesting. I just went to the BBC news website so I could quote from the story but the story is not on the front page or the Politics page. How much coverage would the BBC have given a story about 40 or even 20 or even 5 Conservative MPS who were opposing David Cameron over Europe? Would the word "split" be used and used often? Would the story be a lead or at least third lead on the web and all news programmes? Why the difference in coverage?

How about Wikigate, the BBC story initially centred on edits made by the CIA and others whilst completely ignoring the edits made by BBC. Eventually the BBC published a rather weasely comment at the end of the article that "BBC News website users contacted the corporation to point out that the tool also revealed that people inside the BBC had made edits to Wikipedia pages." No examples were shown and no apology made there.

How about Jane Garvey's recounting of Election Night 1997 at Broadcasting House "I do remember I walked back in - we were broadcasting then from Broadcasting House in the centre of London, all very upmarket in those days - and the corridors of Broadcasting House were strewn with empty champagne bottles. [Hearty laugh from Peter Allen] I'll always remember that. Er... not that the BBC were celebrating in any way, shape or form...

Peter Allen: No not all...

Jane Garvey: ...and actually I think it's fair to say that in the intervening years... er... the BBC, if it ever was in love with Labour has probably fallen out of love with Labour, or learnt to fall back in, or basically just learnt to be in the middle somewhere which is how it should be. Um, but there was always the suggestion that the BBC was full of pinkos who couldn't wait for Labour to get back into power. That may have been the case - who knows -... Wish I hadn't started this now."

Jane Garvey started recounting a story that she felt was amusing about the joy at the BBC that great night when the hated Tories fell from power and nasty Portillo got shafted. Then she realised that it wasn't an intra BBC conversation but being broadcast and that so tried to row back "BBC was full of pinkos who couldn't wait for Labour to get back into power. That may have been the case - who knows" We know Jane, we know.

The other area where the BBC bias is so obvious relates to its coverage of the Middle East. The anti-Israel bile that flows from the BBC contrasts with the generally pro Palestinian, and recently incredible pro Hamas coverage. That along with the BBC's refusal to publish the Balen report leads many to assume that you are institutionally biased against Israel and maybe Jews as well. Face facts, if the Balen report had concluded that there was no bias the BBC wouldn't have fought so hard to stop its publication.

The BBC is biased in its coverage of politics, religion and much else and sees itself as the rightful promoter of the "correct" liberal mindset and as a bulwark against "conservativism". The BBC is institutionally biased and unless it faces up to that bias and starts recruiting staff from outside of the normal pool of "believers" then it will never change."