A senior Conservative source has launched a blistering attack on the BBC, after they published an article reporting that nurses are “being forced to strike”. The piece published last night, entitled Chief nurse calls for strike resolution after day of action, informed the nation that:
“Staff have expressed anger and sadness at being forced to strike for more pay.”
Responding to the biased language, a Conservative source accused the BBC of “doing the unions’ bidding again”:
“As usual the BBC can’t hide their leftie sympathies, and forget the hardworking taxpayers who pay their bills and are disrupted. It’s about time they explained the economic facts, rather than showcasing union talking points.”
The blatant bias undermines Mick Lynch’s claim earlier in the week that the BBC is “parroting” hard right talking points lifted from the Daily Mail.
Guido notes the BBC quietly changed its wording, to “Staff expressed anger that they felt forced to strike for more pay.” Albeit not before Guido managed to save the article on Wayback machine…
An internal investigation by the BBC’s Executive Complaints Unit (ECU) has ruled that the channel broke impartiality rules over its negative coverage of Brexit on Scottish businesses last year. In a broadcast for BBC One’s Reporting Scotland on December 20, the Corporation aired the following uncontested claim:
“Brexit’s advocates say there will be long-term economic benefits, but it’s been a tough year for some of the Scottish businesses most affected.”
A viewer then complained, quite rightly, that the coverage was “unbalanced‘. The ECU happened to agree…
“The ECU noted the BBC’s Editorial Guidelines on impartiality say ‘We may produce content about any subject, at any point on the spectrum of debate, as long as there are good editorial reasons for doing so’, and considered it legitimate for the report to confine itself on this occasion to ‘the Scottish businesses most affected’ by Brexit.
“However, a programme adopting such an approach should maintain impartiality by exploring other aspects of the topic within a reasonable timeframe, which had not happened in the case of Reporting Scotland.”
How could this have happened again? Surely not the result of ideological bias… surely?
The BBC has been working hard to maintain its record of failing to meet transparency standards. On this morning’s Today programme, the BBC invited CEO Dale Vince to discuss the Autumn Statement, introducing him simply as “The founder of the green energy provider Ecotricity”. Dale criticised the government before advocating for “100% green energy”. Nothing to do with his career interest in the renewable sector…
Dale is not just an eco-exec. He’s also a devout Corbynite. Dale has been pictured with Jezza and has described him as “inspirational”, “genuine” and “so real”. He’s also had some choice words for Boris, saying “up yours” to the “dodgy guy”. Of course, he has a right to a platform on the BBC, but he needs to be introduced properly so people are aware of his prior commitments.
To be fair to Dale, he’s transparent about his own affiliations, freely admitting to being a Labour donor. Shame the BBC can’t match his openness…
The BBC has been quick to publish a favourable write-up of a recent think tank report from the Progressive Economy Forum. The report was presented as a neutral analysis, with the authors presented simply as a “group of economists”. A little digging shows they are not simply economists, they’re also ardent lefties…
Their observations, quoted by the BBC without challenge, include “a consensus among economists” that austerity is damaging, “as the experience of the last decade in Britain has shown” – and that government policy is based on “very shaky foundations”. It doesn’t take a genius to work out which side of the tax-spend debate they sit on…
The Progressive Economy Forum website shows their council members, including the likes of Faiza Shaheen, James Meadway and Danny Dorling, who wouldn’t be out of place at a Momentum rally. As for the authors quoted directly in the article, Rob Calvert Jump publicly endorsed Corbyn’s 2017 election manifesto, whilst Jo Churchill has a history of pro-Corbyn tweets.
As co-conspirators know, Guido welcomes the BBC providing a platform for all viewpoints. However, presenting activists as objective, impartial authorities is hardly in keeping with the BBC charter. The Corporation would never treat the IEA like that.
UPDATE: The BBC has updated the article to reflect the political persuasions of the report and has also included a right-of-centre perspective. The new version also has the welcome addition of the phrase “experts disputed the findings”. For posterity, co-conspirators can view the old version here. That wasn’t so hard, was it?
The BBC has been forced to pull a profile on Kemi Badenoch, which had been criticised as “disappointingly inaccurate” by a women’s rights group. The Mail initially reported on the corporation’s forced withdrawal, with a source quoted as calling the piece a “botched hit job”.
It’s since been re-uploaded to BBC Sounds with a disclaimer saying “This programme has been edited since broadcast.”
Despite the editing, the profile still reeks of W1A’s woke inclinations. It repeats debunked claims about Kemi removing gender-neutral toilets at her campaign launch, albeit with a caveat. Contributions from discredited journalist Ben Hunte are also retained. The BBC even allows him to make the unchallenged claim that Kemi doesn’t believe in “all forms of equality” within her portfolio. It’s almost like they have an agenda…
This morning, Mark Carney – the Steve Bray of central bankers – used the BBC as his megaphone to belabour listeners with his opinion that leaving the EU is responsible for rising interest rates and sinking the pound. All par for the course…
Speaking to the Today programme, the former governor of the Bank of England congratulated himself on his clairvoyance:
“If I can cast your mind back to two years ago, this is what we said was going to happen…”
Carney’s numbers to justify this were, as Julian Jessop points out, spurious:
Here's @MarkJCarney's data, which suggest German GDP has grown by 40.9% since 2016, and UK GDP by only 3.3%.
— Julian Jessop (@julianHjessop) November 4, 2022
This is obviously wrong, even allowing for the fall in the pound. I suspect he's compared real (inflation-adjusted) GDP in the UK with nominal GDP in Germany! (2/3) pic.twitter.com/zCtQTiNT2I
Lord Lilley has written to Today, complaining about the interview and pointing out that they frequently allow the likes of Carney to bang on about Brexit uninterrupted – without challenging the improbable and illogical elements of their argument.
Dear Mr Stone-Lee,
Once again you had the Canadian banker, Mark Carney, on to attack Brexit. Given that the UK and Canada now have similar relationships with their continental neighbours (a free trade agreement leaving Britain and Canada free to make their own laws), why do you never ask the obvious questions?
If a simple free trade relationship with its neighbour is so damaging for Britain is it not equally damaging for Canada?
If we British would be 30% better off within the EU, wouldn’t his fellow countrymen be 30% better off if Canada joined the USA?
If he wants the UK to accept EU laws, does he advocate Canada submitting to US laws? And if not, why not?
The bias on Today goes from bad to worse. The reason you don’t ask these questions is your Remoaner groupthink means that, although objectively obvious, they never enter your blinkered minds.
Best regards
Peter Lilley
The Rt Hon the Lord Lilley
If a simple free trade relationship with its neighbour is so damaging for Britain is it not equally damaging for Carney’s native Canada?
