The 2019 General Election - Campaign Debate and Discussion

Status
Not open for further replies.

Tetchytyke

Established Member
Joined
12 Sep 2013
Messages
10,749
Location
Isle of Man
I think you should go and check your facts before this sort of rant. The BBC Trust doesn't exist any more - it was abolished in 2017.
Pedantry doesn't make you look any cleverer. "Trustee/board member" better?

The last Chair of the Trustees- Rona Fairhead- was an actual Tory minister until this summer for crying out loud. Not to mention Chris Patten- Tory Chairman- and Roger Carr, the chairman of those cuddly socially responsible companies Centrica and BAe Systems. Or Michael Grade, another Tory peer.

Of course, some regulation was transferred to OFCOM. Their chair is Lord Burns, who is- you guessed it- a Tory peer.

I'm sure it's all coincidence :lol:

The BBC's charter and funding mechanism makes it as independent as it can be from government.
You mean the Royal Charter which they have to grovel for every few years? The one where they were forced to take responsibility for free TV licenses and S4C against their wishes, and forced to publish details of presenters' pay against their wishes?

You mean the Royal Charter which will be subject to a full Government review in 2022, and the next one for which negotiations will start during the lifetime of the next Parliament?

The BBC is entirely reliant on Government largesse. The "unique way it is funded" (pay them or go to prison) can be withdrawn at any time.

Come on. You are comparing a live 24 hour news operation with a once a day printed format.
And?

The BBC is not Fox News. The "unique way it is funded" (pay us or go to prison) means they don't have to hysterically chase viewers.

So other than to protect Laura's overinflated opinion of herself, why does the BBC need to be first, rather than right? "Do you have any evidence your aide was punched, Matt?" is hardly an unreasonable question to expect a senior journalist for a respected news organisation to ask.
 
Last edited:
Sponsor Post - registered members do not see these adverts; click here to register, or click here to log in
R

RailUK Forums

DarloRich

Veteran Member
Joined
12 Oct 2010
Messages
23,951
Location
Work - Fenny Stratford(MK) Home - Darlington
The BBC is not Fox News. The "unique way it is funded" (pay us or go to prison) means they don't have to hysterically chase viewers.

So other than to protect Laura's overinflated opinion of herself, why does the BBC need to be first, rather than right? "Do you have any evidence your aide was punched, Matt?" is hardly an unreasonable question to expect a senior journalist for a respected news organisation to ask.
I am not disagreeing with you simply offering an explanation as to why it happens. I still maintain a comparison with a printed newspaper and a 24 hour rolling news environment is not a fair one. The pressures and drivers and different.
 

DerekC

Member
Joined
26 Oct 2015
Messages
1,103
Location
Hampshire
Pedantry doesn't make you look any cleverer.
Call it pedantry if you like, but the fact is that you said something which is not true. The current BBC Board does not contain any Tory peers. It contains two crossbench peers.

The previous BBC Trust had the three Tory peers that you mention (Fairhead, Patten, Grade) out of 27 members who served at some point between 2006 and its abolition in 2017 (as well as one crossbench peer and one Labour politician not a peer) If you want to call that "a revolving door" I can't stop you, but others can draw their own conclusion.
 
Last edited:

Xenophon PCDGS

Veteran Member
Joined
17 Apr 2011
Messages
26,378
Location
A semi-rural part of north-west England
Looking at a similar high-profile female "name" to the one recently discussed on this thread, that has a well-known and respected sister in the national TV media but also one who actually showed an "alliance of thought" with a certain political party, I offer up Shami Chakrabati as an example of same.
 

edwin_m

Veteran Member
Joined
21 Apr 2013
Messages
18,160
Location
Nottingham
Looking at a similar high-profile female "name" to the one recently discussed on this thread, that has a well-known and respected sister in the national TV media but also one who actually showed an "alliance of thought" with a certain political party, I offer up Shami Chakrabati as an example of same.
As far as I'm aware Shami Chakrabarti has never been a TV reporter. According to Wikipedia she was a barrister and a director of the pressure group Liberty, in which capacity she was often on the media putting forward the viewpoint of that group. She later joined Labour and therefore appears from time to time promoting Labour policies. I don't believe she has never claimed to be an unbiased reporter.
 

Xenophon PCDGS

Veteran Member
Joined
17 Apr 2011
Messages
26,378
Location
A semi-rural part of north-west England
As far as I'm aware Shami Chakrabarti has never been a TV reporter. According to Wikipedia she was a barrister and a director of the pressure group Liberty, in which capacity she was often on the media putting forward the viewpoint of that group. She later joined Labour and therefore appears from time to time promoting Labour policies. I don't believe she has never claimed to be an unbiased reporter.
My posting clearly said that she had a well-respected sister in the news media, so I am at a loss to follow your reasons for misunderstanding what my posting actually said.
 

DaleCooper

Established Member
Joined
2 Mar 2015
Messages
3,403
Location
No.664 - Next door to the Beast
My posting clearly said that she had a well-respected sister in the news media, so I am at a loss to follow your reasons for misunderstanding what my posting actually said.
I found it difficult to follow, it was long-winded and could have been reduced to about six words with no loss of meaning but much greater clarity.

I don't think Shami Chakrabarti has a sister.
 
Last edited:

edwin_m

Veteran Member
Joined
21 Apr 2013
Messages
18,160
Location
Nottingham
My posting clearly said that she had a well-respected sister in the news media, so I am at a loss to follow your reasons for misunderstanding what my posting actually said.
I've read it again and I still don't understand whether you are accusing Shami Chakrabarti or the sister or both of political bias. Sisters don't necessarily agree with their siblings, see Rachel Johnson.
 

Tetchytyke

Established Member
Joined
12 Sep 2013
Messages
10,749
Location
Isle of Man
I offer up Shami Chakrabati as an example of same.
Are you accusing her newsreader sister, Reeta, of bias because of her sibling? That's...strange.

Kuenssberg's father was a Labour donor in Scotland, and got into a spot of bother for the money he gave to Wendy Alexander. Which just goes to show.
 
Last edited:

43066

Member
Joined
24 Nov 2019
Messages
790
Location
London
really? This is very close to tin foilery.

Were they biased when Labour was in power?
As someone of a centre right mindset I must say I consider the BBC to display a clear left wing bias, and have done so for years.

Since its “bias” is now being attacked by both left and right equally, perhaps it has pulled off the master stroke of being completely unbiased?!
 

Tetchytyke

Established Member
Joined
12 Sep 2013
Messages
10,749
Location
Isle of Man
The previous BBC Trust had the three Tory peers that you mention (Fairhead, Patten, Grade) out of 27 members
All three were the Chair, though, and two were appointed during Tory governments. Which is a rather salient point. Labour were in charge when Lyons was appointed, to be fair.

The Government meddling goes back to Thatcher's day, if not before. Under Thatcher we had Hussey and Bland, both influential Tories; under Blair we had Davies, a former adviser to Wilson and Callaghan, then Michael Lyons.

Since its “bias” is now being attacked by both left and right equally, perhaps it has pulled off the master stroke of being completely unbiased?!
My point is not "evil Tories nobble the BBC", my point is that the government control the purse strings and so, inevitably, the BBC will flash their knickers at whoever is in charge. It's partly why everyone opines that the BBC is biased; in bipartisan politics, at some point the BBC will have put out for either party.

Everyone thinks the BBC is biased because under Labour rule they keep Labour sweet and under the Tories they keep the Tories sweet. It's inevitable. You don't bite the hand that feeds you.
 

43066

Member
Joined
24 Nov 2019
Messages
790
Location
London
My point is not "evil Tories nobble the BBC", my point is that the government control the purse strings and so, inevitably, the BBC will flash their knickers at whoever is in charge. It's partly why everyone opines that the BBC is biased; in bipartisan politics, at some point the BBC will have put out for either party.
After a decade or so of Tory rule I can’t say I’ve detected much right wing bias! I’d say that Emily Maitlis’ marked difference in attitude towards brexiteers v remainers is a good, and recent, example of this.

On the assumption that you are right, I assume you would agree with me that the BBC should be privatised or, if it is to remain in public ownership, at least its funding should be completely divorced from political channels (a la Channel 4)?
 

Tetchytyke

Established Member
Joined
12 Sep 2013
Messages
10,749
Location
Isle of Man
I assume you would agree with me that the BBC should be privatised
Yes. I think the TV Licence is one of the grossest injustices in this country right now. The number of people I see having bailiffs coming to enforce criminal fines relating to the TV Licence, or having deductions of £100 a month out of their Universal Credit, is a national disgrace. And don't even get me started on the thugs employed by Capita to enforce the TV licence in the first place.

The BBC should be a subscription service.
 

43066

Member
Joined
24 Nov 2019
Messages
790
Location
London
Yes. I think the TV Licence is one of the grossest injustices in this country right now. The number of people I see having bailiffs coming to enforce criminal fines relating to the TV Licence, or having deductions of £100 a month out of their Universal Credit, is a national disgrace. And don't even get me started on the thugs employed by Capita to enforce the TV licence in the first place.

The BBC should be a subscription service.
Agreed. They seem to proceed on the basis of a presumption of guilt - if a property does not have a TV license, it will be sent threatening letters and occasional visits from rent-a-thugs.

The trick is not to admit guilt (or just don’t open the door)! I freely admit to not paying the TV license for over a decade - I think of myself as a “conscientious objector” ;).

The TV license made sense in the 1920s when, if you bought a “wireless”, you could only listen to one (BBC) channel. It makes no sense in an era where I pay Sky for the privilege of receiving a few BBC channels (that I never watch), amongst hundreds of others, and subscribe to Netflix etc.

Apologies this is off topic for the thread - but an interesting topic nonetheless.
 
Last edited:

deltic

Established Member
Joined
8 Feb 2010
Messages
2,111
I just cast my vote. I was literally the only person there apart from the staff. Then again I live in a quiet neighbourhood, it's usually empty at midday. It was during the last election.
Went to vote at 8ish this morning and the queue was massive, 50 minute waiting time apparently - I gave up and voted in the evening on the way home. London Evening Standard reporting long queues at a number of polling stations. Interesting article in the same paper as to how Party Leaders no longer engage with the media - the days when their battle buses were shared with journalists are long gone as are the daily media briefings all parties used to provide. Many big names have disappeared from view eg Jacob Rees Mogg & Kier Starmer during the election.

Its probably been one of the most policy free elections of all time.
 

DarloRich

Veteran Member
Joined
12 Oct 2010
Messages
23,951
Location
Work - Fenny Stratford(MK) Home - Darlington
Jacob Rees Mogg & Kier Starmer during the election.
Rees Mogg hasn't been allowed near a microphone because of some silly comments he made and Kier Starmer wont be allowed near a microphone because he isn't a paid up member of the Corbyn cult. Why would you need someone sensible like Starmer when you have the incredibly intelligent and massively talented Richard Burgon to use instead?

PS any sign of Diane Abbott? oh hang on................
 

jfollows

Member
Joined
26 Feb 2011
Messages
479
Location
Wilmslow
Yes. I think the TV Licence is one of the grossest injustices in this country right now. The number of people I see having bailiffs coming to enforce criminal fines relating to the TV Licence, or having deductions of £100 a month out of their Universal Credit, is a national disgrace. And don't even get me started on the thugs employed by Capita to enforce the TV licence in the first place.
I believe that the Conservatives are proposing to "decriminalise" or perhaps even abolish the Licence fee, it's not in their manifesto but although when it came out it appeared it might just be random thinking by Boris (to avoid having to say something concrete, presumably) it's actually a change which has been considered properly by a number of Cabinet members.
Probably to be forgotten as "too hard" in due course, but maybe not?
 

Carlisle

Established Member
Joined
26 Aug 2012
Messages
3,184
I think it still is the case that certain religious sects such as the Exclusive Bretheren forbid the use of televisions and computers in their homes. How does that situation have monitoring?
Perhaps it’s left well alone due to fear of a similar reaction to that encountered by U.S government enforcement officers when visiting the Mount Carmel Centre, Waco
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Top