BBC Bias - Part 2

[Hillman avenger]

You have told us often enough about the "quotas" at the BBC.
So it won't be difficult for you to tell us what the quotas are will it?
I look forward to learning that.

Well on the evidence we have so far it's about 4x the national average for transgenders and god knows what for everything else that could be pigeon holed into other examples of box ticking. But I suspect they will ALL the much higher than the average if they fall into the category of box ticking.

More or less what I've just said.

So you don't know then

[m4rkb]

You have told us often enough about the "quotas" at the BBC.
So it won't be difficult for you to tell us what the quotas are will it?
I look forward to learning that.

Well on the evidence we have so far it's about 4x the national average for transgenders and god knows what for everything else that could be pigeon holed into other examples of box ticking. But I suspect they will ALL the much higher than the average if they fall into the category of box ticking.

More or less what I've just said.

So you don't know then

Their recruitment policy gives us a clue but we'll come back to this when the obvious truth comes out in the very near future as people will now be asking.

The trouble with you is you have absolutely no common sense and find it hard to see what is plainly visible before your very eye.

[m4rkb]

Here you go. Here's 53 pages of the BBC telling us how they are more diverse than anyone else, for anyone who can stomach reading it.
Page 1 alone tells us what we can expect from the rest.

I've read to about page 7 and cannot take any more mentioning of diversity.

https://www.google.co.uk/url?sa=t&rct=j ... uRN7S9zYXS

[Darkyboy]

I know that there were pages of appendices, but I'm not sure if they included political leanings of BBC staff. Given that one of the chapters is titled "Reflecting the UK: On and off air" that would have been very informative.

[Hillman avenger]

I know that there were pages of appendices, but I'm not sure if they included political leanings of BBC staff. Given that one of the chapters is titled "Reflecting the UK: On and off air" that would have been very informative.

1. I don't have a problem with them creating a diverse workforce. As long as they get the right people first. As a licence-payer I think they should do this.
2. Funnily enough I was with a group of people last night, complaining that the BBC was too right-wing. When they are upsetting both sides they've probably got it about right.
3. The idea of reporting on political preference is a big intrusion into privacy and would be primarily a dead-end anyway. Irrespective of their preference, it's what they communicate that counts. Later I will watch The Daily Politics. Although Neil is a devout right-winger, he does not ( and his editor does not let him) allow it to influence his presenting. And that's true elsewhere.

[Darkyboy]

I know that there were pages of appendices, but I'm not sure if they included political leanings of BBC staff. Given that one of the chapters is titled "Reflecting the UK: On and off air" that would have been very informative.

1. I don't have a problem with them creating a diverse workforce. As long as they get the right people first. As a licence-payer I think they should do this.
2. Funnily enough I was with a group of people last night, complaining that the BBC was too right-wing. When they are upsetting both sides they've probably got it about right.
3. The idea of reporting on political preference is a big intrusion into privacy and would be primarily a dead-end anyway. Irrespective of their preference, it's what they communicate that counts. Later I will watch The Daily Politics. Although Neil is a devout right-winger, he does not ( and his editor does not let him) allow it to influence his presenting. And that's true elsewhere.

1. Agreed. The right people should be the priority
2. If the people you were with were left-wing, they probably would think the BBC is right-wing. It would be interesting to see if they had any evidence, to balance that supplied by those convinced that the BBC is left-wing.
3. Asking political allegiance is no more intrusive that questioning sexuality or religion, which were included in the appendices. As for the political allegiance not affecting programming, it does, but not in a party political way as that would be too obvious. However, the content of programmes such as dramas, can be deliberately political; as can the guests on non-political programmes, who are then allowed to express political views that go unchallenged.

[Ralph]

I know that there were pages of appendices, but I'm not sure if they included political leanings of BBC staff. Given that one of the chapters is titled "Reflecting the UK: On and off air" that would have been very informative.

1. I don't have a problem with them creating a diverse workforce. As long as they get the right people first. As a licence-payer I think they should do this.
2. Funnily enough I was with a group of people last night, complaining that the BBC was too right-wing. When they are upsetting both sides they've probably got it about right.
3. The idea of reporting on political preference is a big intrusion into privacy and would be primarily a dead-end anyway. Irrespective of their preference, it's what they communicate that counts. Later I will watch The Daily Politics. Although Neil is a devout right-winger, he does not ( and his editor does not let him) allow it to influence his presenting. And that's true elsewhere.

Quite a lot of devout Tories presenting & editing BBC political programmes these days.

Will Andrew Neil ever get around to reporting the Brexit/Russia story? The fact it involves people he associates with & members of his exclusive dining club shouldn’t stop him.

[m4rkb]

I know that there were pages of appendices, but I'm not sure if they included political leanings of BBC staff. Given that one of the chapters is titled "Reflecting the UK: On and off air" that would have been very informative.

1. I don't have a problem with them creating a diverse workforce. As long as they get the right people first. As a licence-payer I think they should do this.
2. Funnily enough I was with a group of people last night, complaining that the BBC was too right-wing. When they are upsetting both sides they've probably got it about right.
3. The idea of reporting on political preference is a big intrusion into privacy and would be primarily a dead-end anyway. Irrespective of their preference, it's what they communicate that counts. Later I will watch The Daily Politics. Although Neil is a devout right-winger, he does not ( and his editor does not let him) allow it to influence his presenting. And that's true elsewhere.

1. Agreed. The right people should be the priority
2. If the people you were with were left-wing, they probably would think the BBC is right-wing. It would be interesting to see if they had any evidence, to balance that supplied by those convinced that the BBC is left-wing.
3. Asking political allegiance is no more intrusive that questioning sexuality or religion, which were included in the appendices. As for the political allegiance not affecting programming, it does, but not in a party political way as that would be too obvious. However, the content of programmes such as dramas, can be deliberately political; as can the guests on non-political programmes, who are then allowed to express political views that go unchallenged.

They'd all just describe themselves as centrists despite being well to the left thus , in their minds, defining the norm but also making anyone else even remotely to the right the far right.
Or have they already done that?

[m4rkb]

I know that there were pages of appendices, but I'm not sure if they included political leanings of BBC staff. Given that one of the chapters is titled "Reflecting the UK: On and off air" that would have been very informative.

1. I don't have a problem with them creating a diverse workforce. As long as they get the right people first. As a licence-payer I think they should do this.
2. Funnily enough I was with a group of people last night, complaining that the BBC was too right-wing. When they are upsetting both sides they've probably got it about right.
3. The idea of reporting on political preference is a big intrusion into privacy and would be primarily a dead-end anyway. Irrespective of their preference, it's what they communicate that counts. Later I will watch The Daily Politics. Although Neil is a devout right-winger, he does not ( and his editor does not let him) allow it to influence his presenting. And that's true elsewhere.

Actually many of the BEM presenters are quite good and I have no problem with them personally. It's not about them. It's about the forced BBC agenda of ramming diversity down our throats, as is apparent by reading almost any paragraph of their policy.

This 'integration' process , if you want to call it that, isn't natural, it's enforced as the levels we have to integrate are not natural either, and frankly their policy of recruitment is highly discriminatory as they have used the loophole in apprenticeship laws to more or less exclude white people from applying.

[Hillman avenger]

I know that there were pages of appendices, but I'm not sure if they included political leanings of BBC staff. Given that one of the chapters is titled "Reflecting the UK: On and off air" that would have been very informative.

1. I don't have a problem with them creating a diverse workforce. As long as they get the right people first. As a licence-payer I think they should do this.
2. Funnily enough I was with a group of people last night, complaining that the BBC was too right-wing. When they are upsetting both sides they've probably got it about right.
3. The idea of reporting on political preference is a big intrusion into privacy and would be primarily a dead-end anyway. Irrespective of their preference, it's what they communicate that counts. Later I will watch The Daily Politics. Although Neil is a devout right-winger, he does not ( and his editor does not let him) allow it to influence his presenting. And that's true elsewhere.

1. Agreed. The right people should be the priority
2. If the people you were with were left-wing, they probably would think the BBC is right-wing. It would be interesting to see if they had any evidence, to balance that supplied by those convinced that the BBC is left-wing.
Yes, they were. I am simply pointing out exactly that point- where you view the world influences how you see the BBC. As to examples, yes, they mentioned a few. Four of them had been on the referendum march last Saturday and reckoned the BBC ignored it, even though it started/finished outside.
3. Asking political allegiance is no more intrusive that questioning sexuality or religion, which were included in the appendices.
Don't agree.
As for the political allegiance not affecting programming, it does, but not in a party political way as that would be too obvious.
Not in the view of some others here. Can you give me an example of a drama chosen by the BBC because it supports a political standpoint? That wouldn't apply anyway if you accepted conversely that a playwright's political views should be a reason to prevent
broadcasting. Over the years , for example, the BBC has broadcast Willy Russell stuff- are you suggesting they do that because he's a socialist, or because he is a great writer?

However, the content of programmes such as dramas, can be deliberately political; as can the guests on non-political programmes, who are then allowed to express political views that go unchallenged.

[Darkyboy]

I know that there were pages of appendices, but I'm not sure if they included political leanings of BBC staff. Given that one of the chapters is titled "Reflecting the UK: On and off air" that would have been very informative.

1. I don't have a problem with them creating a diverse workforce. As long as they get the right people first. As a licence-payer I think they should do this.
2. Funnily enough I was with a group of people last night, complaining that the BBC was too right-wing. When they are upsetting both sides they've probably got it about right.
3. The idea of reporting on political preference is a big intrusion into privacy and would be primarily a dead-end anyway. Irrespective of their preference, it's what they communicate that counts. Later I will watch The Daily Politics. Although Neil is a devout right-winger, he does not ( and his editor does not let him) allow it to influence his presenting. And that's true elsewhere.

1. Agreed. The right people should be the priority
2. If the people you were with were left-wing, they probably would think the BBC is right-wing. It would be interesting to see if they had any evidence, to balance that supplied by those convinced that the BBC is left-wing.
Yes, they were. I am simply pointing out exactly that point- where you view the world influences how you see the BBC. As to examples, yes, they mentioned a few. Four of them had been on the referendum march last Saturday and reckoned the BBC ignored it, even though it started/finished outside.
3. Asking political allegiance is no more intrusive that questioning sexuality or religion, which were included in the appendices.
Don't agree.
As for the political allegiance not affecting programming, it does, but not in a party political way as that would be too obvious.
Not in the view of some others here. Can you give me an example of a drama chosen by the BBC because it supports a political standpoint? That wouldn't apply anyway if you accepted conversely that a playwright's political views should be a reason to prevent
broadcasting. Over the years , for example, the BBC has broadcast Willy Russell stuff- are you suggesting they do that because he's a socialist, or because he is a great writer?

However, the content of programmes such as dramas, can be deliberately political; as can the guests on non-political programmes, who are then allowed to express political views that go unchallenged.

You can assure your friends that the BBC covered the recent anti-Brexit march quite extensively:

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-44586638

If the BBC is not going to ask the political affiliation of employees, then how can they be diverse or inclusive? The answer is that they cannot. Employing people of different, races, sexes, religions etc if the majority are left or right wing is not diverse. It seems that the BBC is happy to promote the diversity that suits their agenda.

As for BBC dramas, you mention Willy Russell, but you could also mention Ken Loach, Alan Bleasdale, Jimmy McGovern etc. All of these have made overtly political dramas for the BBC. Not to mention guff like Doctors, which is relentless in highlighting "diversity" issues. Now, I understand that many dramatists are left-wing, but the BBC should be honest about their content. It's not enough to say that although they show the programmes, they do not reflect the overall view of the BBC. How about coming up with overtly right-wing dramas that are sympathetic to their protagonists?

[m4rkb]

^ Which is why I claim they would, if asked, all describe themselves as 'from the centre' after another left wing redefinition of the terms involved. The reason you won't see anything which you could claim is from the right or even centre right is that too has been redefined as a result. It's now the far right.

So what the BBC is actually doing is preventing far right material from being screened.

I'm convinced that's the way they see it. You only have to look on here to see what passes as the alt right. Waving England flags during the world cup isn't far off in their eyes.

[Hillman avenger]

I know that there were pages of appendices, but I'm not sure if they included political leanings of BBC staff. Given that one of the chapters is titled "Reflecting the UK: On and off air" that would have been very informative.

1. I don't have a problem with them creating a diverse workforce. As long as they get the right people first. As a licence-payer I think they should do this.
2. Funnily enough I was with a group of people last night, complaining that the BBC was too right-wing. When they are upsetting both sides they've probably got it about right.
3. The idea of reporting on political preference is a big intrusion into privacy and would be primarily a dead-end anyway. Irrespective of their preference, it's what they communicate that counts. Later I will watch The Daily Politics. Although Neil is a devout right-winger, he does not ( and his editor does not let him) allow it to influence his presenting. And that's true elsewhere.

1. Agreed. The right people should be the priority
2. If the people you were with were left-wing, they probably would think the BBC is right-wing. It would be interesting to see if they had any evidence, to balance that supplied by those convinced that the BBC is left-wing.
Yes, they were. I am simply pointing out exactly that point- where you view the world influences how you see the BBC. As to examples, yes, they mentioned a few. Four of them had been on the referendum march last Saturday and reckoned the BBC ignored it, even though it started/finished outside.
3. Asking political allegiance is no more intrusive that questioning sexuality or religion, which were included in the appendices.
Don't agree.
As for the political allegiance not affecting programming, it does, but not in a party political way as that would be too obvious.
Not in the view of some others here. Can you give me an example of a drama chosen by the BBC because it supports a political standpoint? That wouldn't apply anyway if you accepted conversely that a playwright's political views should be a reason to prevent
broadcasting. Over the years , for example, the BBC has broadcast Willy Russell stuff- are you suggesting they do that because he's a socialist, or because he is a great writer?

However, the content of programmes such as dramas, can be deliberately political; as can the guests on non-political programmes, who are then allowed to express political views that go unchallenged.

You can assure your friends that the BBC covered the recent anti-Brexit march quite extensively:

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-44586638

If the BBC is not going to ask the political affiliation of employees, then how can they be diverse or inclusive? The answer is that they cannot. Employing people of different, races, sexes, religions etc if the majority are left or right wing is not diverse. It seems that the BBC is happy to promote the diversity that suits their agenda.

As for BBC dramas, you mention Willy Russell, but you could also mention Ken Loach, Alan Bleasdale, Jimmy McGovern etc. All of these have made overtly political dramas for the BBC. Not to mention guff like Doctors, which is relentless in highlighting "diversity" issues. Now, I understand that many dramatists are left-wing, but the BBC should be honest about their content. It's not enough to say that although they show the programmes, they do not reflect the overall view of the BBC. How about coming up with overtly right-wing dramas that are sympathetic to their protagonists?

Or how about there being some decent writers who have a right-wing orientation?
It remains the case that for all the moaning, the BBC is the only channel which has shown a dramatisation of the Rochdale grooming, with all the implied or explicit criticism of muslims, social services and the police.

[Darkyboy]

Or how about there being some decent writers who have a right-wing orientation?
It remains the case that for all the moaning, the BBC is the only channel which has shown a dramatisation of the Rochdale grooming, with all the implied or explicit criticism of muslims, social services and the police.

Yes, they did show the Rochdale drama, but that was based on facts. As i understand it, there was no political bias, which is what is being talked about. The BBC constantly tells us that they champion diversity "BBC Films is committed to finding and developing new talent, collaborating with some of the foremost writers and directors in the industry." so how about some of them come at subjects from the right of the political spectrum?

[m4rkb]

We could have a drama about the trials and tribulations of jobless families in the north who have no work because it's all gone to foreign imported labour gangs - like a modern day Boys from the Blackstuff which depicted life under the evil Tories.