Complaining to the BBC about the bias of the Andrew Marr Show

Here is the text of a complaint that I have just lodged at the BBC Trust's complaint's page re the bias shown by Andrew Marr in his interviews with the three main party leaders:

'... Andrew Marr's interview with Gordon Brown broke down between subjects thus:
Hung parliaments, campaign, the Queen - 12m 18s (48.5%)
Immigration - 5m 21s (21%)
Bankers - 3m 11s (12.5%)
Ash cloud - 2m 40s (10.5%)
Afghanistan - 1m 56s (7.5%)
Cuts, deficit - 0 m 0s (0%)

Andrew Marr's interview with Nick Clegg broke down between subjects thus:
Hung parliaments, Clegg personally - 11m 7s (49.7%)
Immigration - 7m 32s (33.7%)
Trident - 3m 42s (16.6%)
Cuts, deficit - 0m os (0%)

Andrew Marr's interview with David Cameron broke down between subjects thus:
Cuts, deficit - 15m 26s (67%)
Priorities - 3m 20s (14.5%)
Hung parliament, campaign - 3 m 0s (13%)
Living Wage - 1m 18s (5.5%)


So Andrew Marr spent 2/3 of the whole interview discussing with David Cameron a subject that he chose not to raise with Nick Clegg and Gordon Brown at all. If the subject of 'cuts' was so important as to warrant 2/3 of the interview with David Cameron, why was it not important enough to raise with Gordon Brown or Nick Clegg? Does Andrew Marr believe that only the Conservatives will make cuts or is that just the perception he would like to leave viewers with?


Andrew Marr's position as one of the BBC's lead interviewer is compromised by such blatant bias; what action will the BBC Trust take against him now that you have proof of his anti-Conservative bias?


The percentages are sourced from http://beebbiascraig.blogspot.com/2010/05/more-on-marr.html - If you disagree with the figures, do please correct them.'

Somehow I doubt that the BBC will address my substantive points but will instead point to a duty to be balanced across programmes.

I am not sure which is worse the BBC's bias or the Conservative party's unwillingness to tackle them on it.