BBC News Admits - We Are Biased

www.stevequayle.com...

Well, there you have it. The BBC finally admits what we have known all along. They are socially liberally biased and lean to the left politically. Gee, what a surprise! NOT!!

So next time someone quotes the BBC as an authentic source of news they'll have to have some backup. Afterall, the BBC has admitted to being a biased left wing propaganda outlet instead of a news source. They admit to being anti-Christian and anti-American as well.

Hey .. at least they finally admit it. That's something ... I guess.

Click here for original - This is London Article



[edit on 10/24/2006 by FlyersFan]

Hold on just a minute here...

Let's consider a couple of pertinent facts shall we.

1. All news and current affairs broadcasters and newspapers are biased to some degree or another, it's a simple fact of human nature. I try to be as objective as I can when considering news stories but I cannot ever completely ignore the fact that I have certain deep seated beleifs and opinions which would inevitably slant my opinions on a number of subjects. If anyone is sitting out there believing that they are getting an opinion on world vents without any spin, slant or bias when they watch ITN, Sky News, CNN, Fox or the BBC then you are deluding yourselves. The only differences are the direction in which news sources lean and just how far they go.

2. On the subject of bias, that report is from the Evening Standard, a publication from the Associated Newspapers group. This media group is the parent of the Daily Mail, probably the most unashamedly biased mainstream daily newspaper in the UK. Rabidly anti Labour and anti BBC it is quite impossible to take seriously as a news outlet at all, more a kind of "Hello" magazine for middle class housewives.

It's all a matter of perspective and if you want a full and rounded picture you would always be wise to study more than one source on any issue which is important to you.

timeless test

The one very big difference in this though, is that you can choose to pay for any other news source. Daily mail, Guardian, Daily Sport (), whatever. Sky, ITN, CNN etc, all are paid for through ad revenue/subscription. The BBC? If you live in the UK, and own a TV, you HAVE to pay for it, or you get fined. So, I think its only fair that all sides of the political spectrum should get equal and balanced coverage. Which I think its fair to say, the BBC is defianately not doing

FlyersFan, the original article on which you based your post is rather obviously slanted. Reading between the lines, it is quite clear that the story refers to an internal BBC seminar or workshop in which different BBC staffers made various representing different points of view, some of which have been selectively quoted. These statements about the BBC being left-biased evidently came from BBC employees whose own viewpoint was different. Rather than proving that the BBC is biased, it actually proves that many different shades of opinion are represented within the organization.

Having said all of that, I'll agree that the BBC is clearly biased in favour of democracy, egalitarianism, multiculturalism and secularism. In this sense, it is part of another great British journalistic tradition, one that is just as well-established as the provocative, near-libellous strand of British journalism represented by the tabloid press (of which the Evening Standard is a relatively sophisticated representative.

Whatever its detractors may say (and a lot of it is true), the BBC remains the gold standard for factual reporting and coverage in depth.

[edit on 24-10-2006 by Astyanax]

does this mean that we can demand the license fee back for all the years they have been sucking it from us?

Would be nice.

News brodcasts are responsible for just that, giving us the news. Not giving us their opinion on it, they are responsible for reporting things as they are. Oh, we can dream can't we.

I watched a broadcast on this yesterday that the BBC has finally admitted to leaning to the left.

Where is their credibility if they have openly admitted their bias?

Originally posted by chissler
News brodcasts are responsible for just that, giving us the news. Not giving us their opinion on it, they are responsible for reporting things as they are. Oh, we can dream can't we.

I watched a broadcast on this yesterday that the BBC has finally admitted to leaning to the left.

Where is their credibility if they have openly admitted their bias?

Has anyone else noticed the new trend to put music under the news storys on certain news channels to make things more dramatic?

I think we have to face facts that news is now viewed as another "entertainment" channel, and they are all fighting for the ratings.

Originally posted by ewan
I think we have to face facts that news is now viewed as another "entertainment" channel, and they are all fighting for the ratings.

Too True. One second, *Deep Breath*, Tooo True! Had to be said twice.

News broadcasts today have turned into a political debate. The next sound bite is their main concern.

Originally posted by ewan

Has anyone else noticed the new trend to put music under the news storys on certain news channels to make things more dramatic?

I think we have to face facts that news is now viewed as another "entertainment" channel, and they are all fighting for the ratings.

I'm glad thats one thing the BBC doesn't do..

Not like Fox's "Battleground in the Holy Ground" (imagine it said with dramtic music and a movie voice over)garbage that portrayed the Israelis as heroes and all Lebanese as terrorists....

I can't say I am surprised at Flyersfans attempts here, but you cannot argue that the BBC is the most level and informative news channel there is. Every other channel emphasises one side of the story.

Whilst the BBC may lean ever so slightly to the left, they give everyone a fair hearing and do not make assumptions, misquote or downright lie.

I know Sky News does all of those things and the US channels are even worse, such as when interviewing someone they hjave 5 sec's of speech for the quote they want and cut it off in mid flow, taking the whole thing out of context. If your going to interview someone, do it properly, for crying out loud.

I have to agree with timeless test no matter what news source you read/watch they will always be bias to some degree thats just the way we are.

the BBC may be slightly biased but not as biased as most of the other news & media out there you only need to watch C4 news to know that.

Originally posted by stumason

I can't say I am surprised at Flyersfans attempts here, but you cannot argue that the BBC is the most level and informative news channel there is. Every other channel emphasises one side of the story.

Id argue the toss with that one, personally the only source i trust/like is Channel4 news in the Uk.

Sky and BBC tend just to play "follow my leader" these days.

Originally posted by ewan

Originally posted by stumason

I can't say I am surprised at Flyersfans attempts here, but you cannot argue that the BBC is the most level and informative news channel there is. Every other channel emphasises one side of the story.

Id argue the toss with that one, personally the only source i trust/like is Channel4 news in the Uk.

Sky and BBC tend just to play "follow my leader" these days.

Channel 4? Dear god, they're more left than the BBC. They do nice in depth coverage of certain things though, I must admit. I agree with you that they are a quality news source, just a bit selective about what they make an issue out of. I do watch them occasionally myself.

Originally posted by stumason
I can't say I am surprised at Flyersfans attempts here,

I'm not attempting anything. I am bringing you a news story. I am bringing you quotes directly from the BBC .. THEY are saying that they are biased. I don't have to 'attempt' anything. To their credit - They have admitted it themselves.

the BBC may lean ever so slightly to the left,

Um .. it's much more than 'slightly'.

Now .. here's MY OPINION ... I think it is almost impossible to find a 'news source' that is really a non-biased news reporting service. They all seem to bow to the propaganda gods and push someones agenda. CNN is the altar of the radical left. FOX is beloved by the right. BBC??? They are in the same boat as CNN ... WAAAAAAAAY left. There is no 'slight' about it.

I give the BBC credit for fess'ing up to their bias. Admitting that you have problems is the first step in recovery. They may actually be a 'news source' instead of a propaganda machine in a few years (if they clean up their bias). I would hope that other news outlets follow suit.

Bottom line ... never trust the news ... always triple check and consider the source of the 'news' and the possible propaganda push behind it.

edited for spelling

[edit on 10/24/2006 by FlyersFan]

Originally posted by FlyersFan
I'm not attempting anything. I am bringing you a news story. I am bringing you quotes directly from the BBC .. THEY are saying that they are biased.

Nope, actually you have fallen into the very trap that you are complaining about. You are not bringing us a news story, you have passed on a competing news organisations comments on an issue. The BBC, (a corporation), is NOT saying that they are biased, what has been reported are the leaked comments and opinions of certain individuals within the corporation. How confident are you that the leaked comments represent a fair spectrum of the opinions voiced at the meeting or do you think it's just possible that the published quotes are those that best suit the agenda of whoever leaked them?

the BBC has admitted to being a biased left wing propaganda outlet instead of a news source

Not exactly an impartial, or indeed honest representation of the situation is it?

DAVID ICKE: And The Truth Shall Set You Free...

At the national and international level, the number of journalists knowingly manipulating the human mind is far greater than the local and regional media, but it is still a relative few. The rest just conform to the traditional structure and approach and allow themselves to be manipulated to manipulate their audience. I worked in the BBC Television national newsroom for years and everyone around me appeared to be extremely genuine. Most of them were very nice people who loved their children and would not wish to leave them to face a centralised global dictatorship. But every day they turn out stories which feed their millions of viewers the line the Elite want them to see and hear.


The following is provable fact: NBC is a subsidiary of RCA, a media conglomerate which appears regularly on the career details of a number of people named throughout this book. Among the NBC directors named in the Mullins article were:

• John Brademas (CFR, TC, Bil), a director of the Rockefeller Foundation;
  
• Peter G. Peterson (CFR), former head of Kuhn, Loeb, and Co (Rothschild), and a former Secretary of Commerce;
  
• Robert Cizik, chairman of RCA and of First City Bancorp, which was identified in Congressional testimony as a Rothschild bank;
  
• Thomas O. Paine, president of Northrup Co (the big defence contractor) and director of the (Elite-controlled) Institute of Strategic Studies in London;
  
• Donald Smiley, a director of two Morgan Companies, Metropolitan Life and US Steel;
  
• Thornton Bradshaw, chairman of RCA, director of the Rockefeller Brothers Fund, Atlantic Richfield Oil, and the Aspen Institute of Humanistic Studies (both of the latter headed by 'environmentalist' and elite Bilderberger, Robert O. Anderson).

Clearly the NBC board has considerable Rockefeller-Rothschild-Morgan influence.

Just to show an Example who OWNZ the Mass Media.

Independanty Media today?

There is no such thing.

Every single one of the News Networks is connected and influenced by the Global Elite - BBC included.

Want to see the Big Plan?

In the article were the (barely) one-dimensional cliches about 'disciples' and other childish nonsense, but nowhere was there a mention of the Bilderberg Group and its RIIA, CFR, TC network which I had spent much of the evening talking about. But what is it the Illuminati Protocols say?

"All our newspapers will be of all possible complexions - aristocratic, republican, revolutionary, even anarchical - for so long, of course, as the constitution exists...Like the Indian idol, Vishnu, they will have a hundred hands, and every one of them will have a finger on any one of the public opinions required. When a pulse quickens these hands will lead opinion in the direction of our aims, for an excited patient loses all power of judgement and easily yields to suggestion. Those fools who will think they are repeating the opinion of a newspaper of their own camp will be repeating our opinion or any opinion that seems desirable for us. In the vain belief that they are following the organ of their party, they will in fact follow the flag which we hang out for them."

Protocol 12

Well the last paragraphy sure is intersting no?

Looks like THEIR newspapers, of all possible complexions, are controlled by the Global Elite, and every single thing they say and write is just spreading the opinion They want us to belive is true. And in the belif, that we are actually following the Truth, we are actually just falling th eflag which They hang out for us.

And Manipulated we are yet again...

Yes lets bring in David Icke material in an argument about the BBC being Left leaning, ANTI American, Anti Private Sector....Anti-War on terror.....anti neo-con

I'm sure its a valuabe asset to the Blood drinking Rothschilds.


[edit on 24-10-2006 by Peyres]

Originally posted by Peyres
Yes lets bring in David Icke material in an argument about the BBC being Left leaning, ANTI American, Anti Private Sector....Anti-War on terror.....anti neo-con

I guess you didn't get the point at all.

There is no LEFT or RIGHT - that is just a play designed to keep Sheeple divided.

Wake up and smell da coffee.

So freedom of thought and expression was miraculously identified as a way to controlling the world, hundreds of years ago, somewhere in Barvaria. And now its being executed perfectly to this day with 'agents' in high place who happen to descend from wealthy evil old people. And these agents happen to have to same twisted views on controlling the world as their ancestors... I get it now.

infact, freedom of thought and the political process is the biggest barrier to the Elite enslaving the world. Revolutions against monarchy.....

Marx, Lenin was in on the thing, Locke too, ooh and Burke and Churchill.

Can you not see the irony. So if the media was completley dominated by Neo-Con private financiers, it would be a big plot to enslave the world, and now that there are actual rival news agencies that have a mass audience and widely differing viewpoints, that is part of the big plan now to trick people.....

If its not one thing, it evolves on to something else...clutching at straws. Just like the whole 9/11 theories (note their are thosands, so obviously just one coherent theory doesn't have any sounds evidence) Bombs in the buildings, insurance scam, cia, bushco, holographic aeroplanes, the devil, the aliens, Remote control Israeli drones...

[edit on 24-10-2006 by Peyres]

Originally posted by Peyres
So freedom of thought and expression was miraculously identified as a way to controlling the world, hundreds of years ago, somewhere in Barvaria. And now its being executed perfectly to this day with 'agents' in high place who happen to descend from wealthy evil old people. And these agents happen to have to same twisted views on controlling the world as their ancestors... I get it now.

Well I am most Happy you Got it now!



If something is not clear, I suggest you pick up the Book I used for quotes and find out for yourself who is running the show for several hundreds of years.

Listen to yourself and decide how plausible any of Icke theories sounds, this is the same man those thinks the elite are all shape shifting reptillians. Pfft its hard enough for parents to stop their kids trying drugs and sex, but no these wealthy people have a duty and are obidient to their parents and grandfarthers? And they aren't swayed by freedom of thought and personal experiences as any other normal human being is.