That the BBC is biased and is not impartial as required by its Charter is self-evident and incontrovertible. This did not stop the renewal of its Royal Charter and Framework Agreement this year. It does not matter who is in charge be it Blair, Brown, Cameron and Clegg, or now May. They all complain about the BBC being unfair to them, but the reality is they all share the same liberal perspective of the BBC. This is the only logical reason for the Charter being renewed without reform. Added to which there is a regular interchange and job switching between their political parties and the higher echelons of the BBC. The Government tinkers about with the governance and management of the BBC but does nothing to enforce standards for fear of accusations of interfering with the independence of the BBC and the freedom of the Press. The BBC is quite adept at manipulating this predicament to achieve its own ends. In so far as the public are concerned they can complain as much as they like, it will get them nowhere. The BBC complaints procedure is not designed to acknowledge and resolve any complaint, only to manage it and suppress it before it goes any further. Very rarely is a complaint acknowledged and rectified with an apology and a correction. This is usually achieved by using external pressure and publicity. Last year the BBC wrongly accused the Catholic Church of silence about the Holocaust. Six months later their internal watchdog found the report to be unfair. Their sanction was to notify the news team responsible so that any future coverage might reflect historical understanding more closely. That is not even a slap on the hand. Although it took the involvement of Lord Alton to get that much. There was no apology or announcement of a correction, and no investigation as to why the news team made that erroneous assertion. It did reveal a strand of anti-Catholic sentiment within the BBC. Go to > http://www.catholicherald.co.uk/news/2016/12/09/bbc-admits-it-underestimated-the-churchs-opposition-to-hitler/
This is a matter of public concern as the BBC is a public corporation and in the privileged position of being able to levy its own tax by way of a licence fee. They also raise income from the sale of programmes to other broadcasters and from merchandising. Immune from financial pressures they can brush off the wider concerns of the public who are left frustrated. While other broadcasters and news media have the same general responsibility to be truthful it is recognised that there will be some bias as they are influenced by their proprietors to adopt political positions. The commercial broadcasters keep trying to chip away at the BBC’s revenue by demanding a share of the funding for the public news services that they provide. Without any regard to protect the BBC this is something that must be opposed. The BBC does not help itself with its anti-Christian attitude. Peter Hitchens has consistently taken the BBC to task on this issue. Go to his latest column ( it is a safe site ) > https://www.dailymail.co.uk/debate/article-4216036/PETER-HITCHENS-BBC-isn-t-trying-revive-Civilisation.html
This anti-Christian attitude is deeply ingrained and does not provoke any response never mind reprimand from BBC management. Examples are to be found at every level of programming from a Radio Lincoln presenter having a rant about a street preacher he encountered in the centre of Lincoln, to Stephen Fry losing it with an anti-God tirade as he presented QI – much to the amusement and approval of the panel.
Also check out Peter Hitches on YouTube with a very uncomfortable and wriggling David Jordan, Director of Editorial Policy and Standards, from the BBC > https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=q9y37GMLRC0
Peter refers to the BBC method of interviewing where the interviewer responds to an answer that he disagrees with by saying, “Are you seriously suggesting……?”, implying the interviewee must be mad. Along with this is their standard practice of trying to put words in to the mouth of the interviewee, “Are you saying that……..?”, with the question comprising a monologue of the interviewers own opinion. This was perfectly demonstrated on (17th February) Radio 4 Today programme, when Justin Webb interviewed Peter Oborne about Donald Trump. Peter Oborne, being a seasoned columnist and knowing what was happening just responded with “I didn’t say any of those things”. [http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/b08g97fm 2 hours 22 minutes – 2 hours 31 minutes]. The unsuspecting fall in to the trap if they in any way affirm the question, with the resulting headline (usually negative) that they have themselves stated an opinion. The questions can also be long-winded to the extent that the interviewer takes up most of the interview and then says, “Sorry we have run out of time”. Most irritating is asking the question and then interrupting the reply, and interrupting the reply, and so and so on. Or interrupting the reply with, “Answer the Question!”, when that is exactly what the interviewee is trying to do by dealing with a loaded question in a logical manner. I think you get the picture. I am no fan of the Jeremy Paxman, John Humphreys, Andrew Neill way of interviewing that is discourteous and bullying. It is more entertainment than serious journalism and fact finding. Unfortunately, young cub journalist think it is the way to achieving a successful career with the BBC.
The public frustration with the BBC goes further than its news and current affairs coverage. It has an agenda that permeates in to other areas such as drama and documentaries. At the present it is heavily promoting the LGBT lobby to make it normal (akin to brainwashing) and this is in every sphere from presenters and guests on everything, including Desert Island Discs, to light entertainment such as the Archers. Radio 4 is particularly infected and Woman’s Hour should be renamed Feminist Hour. The BBC is pro-abortion to the core. It really needs an infusion of New Wave Feminism, but this will not happen because of the employment and recruitment policies it has in place. No chance of getting a job as tea lady (sorry refreshment operative) if you admit to being uncomfortable with homosexuality, even though you might confirm this will not affect your ability to make a great cuppa and serve all and sundry. Admit to being a Christian and your job prospects are reduced. Claim to be any permutation of LGBT or minority race and nationality and your job prospects are enhanced. The BBC has a target to positively discriminate in favour of LGBT applicants to a percentage that is way over their proportion of the general population. No such target exists for Christians or heterosexual white men. Their journalistic guidelines are accordingly biased, to the extent that they comprise BBC Speak. Very Orwellian.
This is not to say that there is not any criticism of this state of affairs within the BBC. Go to > https://biasedbbc.org/quotes-of-shame/
Perhaps Theresa May became Prime Minister too late to affect the renewal of the BBC Charter and it is going to be a long time before there is another opportunity. From 1st January the new Royal Charter has an eleven year duration before it is up for renewal again. However, if the BBC continues to show that it is not impartial, there will be mounting public anger. Increasing numbers are showing their dissatisfaction by refusing to pay the licence fee. What do you do with a problem like the BBC? There are calls for it to be closed down or sold off to the private sector. Others want it to be broken up and reduced in scale. Part privatisation, with Channel 4 being amalgamated with Channel 5, is a favourite option.
The CDP position with regard to the news media, and the BBC in particular, is clear. Democracy requires that the people are informed and given the truth, if it is to function properly. Press barons and digital dictators must not be the masters and controllers of information, otherwise it becomes disinformation. An independent BBC – accountable to the public – is essential. The BBC must be fundamentally reformed. To achieve that objective it needs to go back to its roots and rediscover the real meaning of what ‘to educate, to inform, and to entertain’ means.