And Andrew Ian Dodge has said it.
I suppose someone really ought to say something about Mr Grade taking over.
Bookmark the permalink.
Search Biased BBC
Recent Comments
- Zephir April 26, 2024 at 10:38 pm on Midweek 24th April 2024Goodness sake SG I would rather call Lucy an optimist, and in the near future maybe a close rival to...
- StewGreen April 26, 2024 at 10:30 pm on Midweek 24th April 2024The Twitter thread shows Sadiq spun a tale to be able to claim Islamophobia but the tale was not based...
- Deborah April 26, 2024 at 10:23 pm on Weekend 27th April 2024I used to listen to Today when Monty Modlin did the humorous segments. It wasn’t easy to give up for...
- Eddy Booth April 26, 2024 at 10:22 pm on Weekend 27th April 2024Some JS Bach for the weekend - from the creative 1960s The Swingle Singers providing the vocals alongside Johann himself...
- tomo April 26, 2024 at 10:19 pm on Midweek 24th April 2024https://twitter.com/TomSyvret/status/1783919885493453047
- StewGreen April 26, 2024 at 10:13 pm on Midweek 24th April 2024Calvin did a sorry not sorry apology 30 mins after Lucy posted but Lucy was bad cos multiple replies to...
- Fedup2 April 26, 2024 at 10:07 pm on Weekend 27th April 2024From the DT - the BBC v GbNews STARTS watched the action unfurl, my heart in my mouth. Spooked by...
- Deborah April 26, 2024 at 9:58 pm on Weekend 27th April 2024First For the last forty years or more give or take I have been to ar least one prom concert...
- tomo April 26, 2024 at 9:58 pm on Midweek 24th April 2024I was going to stop posting .... but https://twitter.com/aDissentient/status/1783900765309772124
Categories
agw anti-American anti-conservative anti-Israel anti Israel. pro Palestinian Antisemitism BBC - sickeningly biased at all times. BBC agenda BBC bias bbc bias and balance. bbc bias by omission BBC censorship BBC Question Time BBC selectivity bias Biased BBC climate change dhimmis general thread immigration Islam israel Mark Mardell obama obama bias Obamalove open thread pro-labour pro-palestinian pro EU pro Hamas pro Islam pro Labour bias pro Obama PRO OBAMA AT ALL COSTS. pro Obama BBC agenda question time question time live Richard Black save gordon. USA politics US economy US News US politics US presidential elections
According to the Sunday Times, Grade wants Dyke back. So much for progress.
Is that the best you can do?
He canned a really bad out-of-date and old-fashioned science-fiction programme.
He canned it, because it was crap.
He introduced one of the most popular programmes on British television, you idiots.
Just because a bunch of anoraks like you Hogwarts lot wanted to see Sylvester McCoy hamming it up, doesn’t mean to say he’s going to be bad for the BBC.
In fact, quite the opposite – he’s bad news for all you Tory cynics that want rid of the BBC and the licence fee.
Get your chequebooks out – you’re going to be coughing up for a good while longer.
I hope he brings back Greg Dyke too – that’ll really shut you all up.
While controller of BBC1, Grade banned to use of snowmen at Christmas (the link sequences) on the grounds of ‘gender balance’.
Think I’m making this up? Nope, I heard him discussing this and it’s true.
I hope he does the same for the BBC as Dyke did.
Ah, the Insider – you old Troll – long time no hear.
BBC lefties obviously don’t do humour… mind you, anyone who saw ‘The Crouches’ would have to agree.
Andy,
Cyberwomen?
Dalekettes?
Nah, I just can’t see it.
I’m not quite sure why The Insider is arriving in his/her jeans over the entirely predictable government appointment of Grade. Did anyone seriously expect the new chairman to be hostile to the BBC? The Blair government is understandably infuriated by the anti-war Guardianistas infesting the newsrooms, but it is hardly about to cut off its nose to spite its face. Getting rid of the BBC and its socialist funding mechanism is simply not an option for the left. The corporation / licence fee ensure that leftist opinion enjoys far more exposure than a free ‘press’ in broadcasting would provide, thus making election of leftist governments more likely.
How long the British will tolerate this perversion of democracy is unclear, though the increasing disquiet over the Stalinesque licence regime leads to hope of an early resolution. I stopped paying some time ago. It’s easy to say no.
There are no Dalekettes? How do they reproduce? They must get pretty frustrated, no wonder they’re so angry all the time.
http://www.jpost.com/servlet/Satellite?pagename=JPost/JPArticle/Printer&cid=1080626721100&p=1008596975996
Sharansky slams BBC report on boy bomber
It must be galling for all you moaners that the beeb can cherry pick the best talent from their commercial competitors.
Due to the respect Grade commands in the broadcasting community it looks like one of the most sought after positions must be that of the DG.
It makes be proud to think with a new Director General, undoubtedly in the Dyke mould the BBC will go on to bigger and better things.
Long may it continue if only to keep me chuckling at your crackpot carping.
If I hear one more time on the BBC that support for muslim extremism is limited to a “tiny, tiny minority of British muslims” I am going to scream.
For goodness sake, the BBC’s own “flagship” Radio news programme, Today, commissioned a poll of British muslims which shows that support for muslim extremism is worryingly high (e.g. 15% thought the September 11th attacks were justified, 24% support muslims entering Afghanistan to attack coalition forces). Not once in all the phone-ins etc have these serious figures been cited by BBC journalists.
Yet, yet, the BBC tells us that Shia muslims in Iraq are rising up! All is going wrong! Later in the report we are told that this Shia faction represents “a few hundred supporters”. So hardly the overwhelming insurrection that Hawley, Plett and co are so anxious to pontificate about.
Interesting to compare the BBC’s treatment of the two, and their ability to spin.
Mr Tea, the notion that the BBC has broadcasting competitors, commercial or otherwise, is rather silly. The BBC is empowered, in the name of the licence, to extort over £2.5 billion a year from all TV viewers – whether or not those viewers actually watch the BBC. The BBC does not compete – it doesn’t have to. The BBC merely indulges itself in populism some of the time.
Conversely, ITV pays over £300million a year to the state for the ‘right’ to compete in the commercial broadcast sector. The network then has to attract viewers whilst hampered by ‘public service’ regulation, and having the whole market perverted by the presence of the state broadcasting leviathan.
That £2.5 billion a year extortion certainly does enable a great deal of cherry picking and other pie fingering. But don’t call it competing – it’s just another protection racket. Time’s running out though…
By the way, Mr Tea, Grade has been appointed to the position of Chairman of the Board of Governors, not that of Director General.
Appointed by the government, no less. Nice to see that BBC independence on display.
PJF I am aware that Grade is Chairman of the Board of Governors, I just reckon that with someone of his calibre on board, the BBC should be able to attract the cream of the crop as it where.
Mark Thompson from channel4 gets my vote and I reckon having Grade as a chairman will be a big incentive.
With these two creative heavy weights at the helm it’s bad news for the “scrap the licence fee” fringe on the far right, I’m sure you’ll agree.
According to an ICM poll done for the BBC last month (see ICM website), only 31% think the licence fee should be the main source of funding for the BBC – 67% think it should be advertising or a subscription paid by people who want it.
Unless ICM used the Oldham phone book, this means the “far right” fringe is much larger than anyone thought.
Of course it could just be that the BBC is far left of two thirds of the UK, but who would believe such small figure?
No Mr Tea, I wouldn’t agree. The weight of creativity enjoyed by those at the helm of the BBC is irrelevant to the continuation of the licence. Retaining the state broadcaster is a political decision based on other issues, mostly related to controlling public opinion.
Your “far right” comment was interesting, hinting as it does of desperation. Even the BBC’s own Panorama found that over two-thirds want the TV licence ended. This overwhelming proportion could only be described as a “fringe” by those with a level of enthusiasm that has crossed into delusion.
But hey, now that you’ve shared your opinion on the issue of the new chairman, perhaps you could address some of the posts relating to BBC bias. This site’s critics are strangely quiet when it comes to that…
PJF, I am a newcomer to the site and would welcome the chance to comment on any post relating to BBC media bias.
Though I am wary that on a site clearly populated with Neo Con fundamentalists that I may be subject to some censorship and control freakery, which I hear is the norm across the Atlantic.
I understand that ideas of patriotism and decency may not be fashionable in trendy conservative circles and traditional values may seem quaint, but I for one am proud to support a uniquely British Institution, staunchly independent and free from the bias created by market forces and advertisers.
Sadly PJF it seems that you and your like minded fellows would have Britain become some faceless federal state serving only shareholders, and run by shadowy business men.
I’m sure you would rather see the likes Disney’s Michael Eisner as head of state and on our postage stamps and currency the Queens noble countenance replaced by Mickey Mouse.
For Shame!
PFJ: “The BBC is empowered, in the name of the licence, to extort over £2.5 billion a year from all TV viewers”
Wrong! The license fee also funds services for radio listeners and internet users.
“The BBC does not compete”.
Wrong! It DOES. It is required, by the Royal Charter, to ensure that 25 percent of its income is spent on independent organisations. That’s £0.65 billion spent outwith the organisation – EVERY YEAR.
Also: ITV may well pay £300million for the ‘right’ to compete in the commercial broadcast sector, but that ‘right’ also lets them pollute the airwaves with cynical marketing campaigns for inspid big businesses like McDonalds and Intel – THAT’S protection racketing.
“Time’s running out” – yeah, on your chance to avoid a fine. I know who you are sir, and I’ve just reported to you TV Licencing. You’re breaking the law.
And don’t try to claim you don’t own a television – I know you do.
Wrong! The license fee also funds services for radio listeners and internet users.”
…with money that is extorted in the first place. Duh.
Oh sorry are you going to report me as well?
I might just report you ‘YOY’.
Wouldn’t you say ‘extorted’ is a little paraniod?
Are other compulsory taxes also ‘extorted’?
Like Road Tax?
You sock-sniffing bog-trotters probably agree – but owning a car is actually a luxury – like owning a telly or a computer – so why shouldn’t you be taxed on it?
What you idiots don’t realise, is that you pay for ITV too.
You pay with your brain cells when you expose yourself to third-rate programme-making and mind-numbing commercialism.
Given the choice between the BBC and greedy Rupert Murdoch’s Hellevision – I pick the BBC.
And here’s something even funnier: the random ad which appears at the bottom of this message box went to Walking with Prehistoric Beasts at Amazon when I clicked to leave my mark.
Now, that’s irony.
You dim-witted fools.
I’d just like to thank the authors of this site for providing a link to the frankly splendid “Changing Rooms: Complete Home Makeover” book on Amazon.
I have purchased the item and am glad that my cash will benefit the BBC, a truly great British company.
I realise that many of this sites regulars would prefer it if this great nation were merely a provincial office of the Microsoft Corporation and that the Union Jack was torn down and replaced by the Mr Gates’ windows logo.
Tut Tut.
Mr Tea, I hope you stick around and contribute your observations to the threads concerning bias (it should be fascinating). Being a mere commenter such as yourself, I’m not able to speak for those in charge of the blog functions. Nevertheless, I can safely say from experience that your comments will not be censored or controlled unless they are persistently rude or otherwise malicious. Freedom of speech is a general principle of this site. Furthermore, I’m not sure if this blog has a national base as such. Natalie Solent is a regular contributor and is UK based.
Despite the somewhat frivolous and impertinent approach to your responses here, I will indulge you.
(for Mr Tea)
Obviously we disagree on the merits of socialism vs capitalism in the media (and perhaps generally), and there probably isn’t much to be gained from exploring that difference. Simply stated, I seek a lack of state interference in the media because I support free speech via a free press. You seek the continuance of state-enforced payment by all consumers of one type of media in order to provide protection from what you see as undesirable influences in that, and wider, media.
I can’t see why the example of the printed press in the UK isn’t clear evidence that a free and diverse market can facilitate the expression and consumption of widely differing viewpoints. Commercial publishers cover all the mainstream political leanings to all the mainstream social groups. Private groups from the BNP to the Socialist Workers can publish their own material. It’s free and it works.
(more for Mr Tea)
Your comments on patriotism are bizarrely off target. The example of the USA shows clearly that the lack of a state broadcaster does not lead to a lack of patriotism. I would go further and say that the guilty-wet-liberal guardianistas infesting the BBC are responsible for a shameful decline in British patriotism. National self-revulsion; multi-culturalism and politically correct internationalism are the order of the day at the BBC.
Perhaps you regard US patriotism as mere ‘shallow flag waving’ of a type arbitrarily ascribed to the Reagan era by a BBC journo on behalf of Alistair Cooke. Such a regard could only come from ignorance and exposure to anti-American leftism such as that spouted by the BBC.
(more for Mr Tea)
Most peculiar is this notion of “independence”. The BBC is not independent. It is constitutionally part of the state. Its governing body is appointed by the state and it is funded by statute, with the annual level set by the government of the day. The organisation’s overall mission and editorial policy is defined by act of parliament. Even if you regard this state of affairs as desirable, you cannot claim it to be an example of independence.
Perhaps by independence you refer to the everyday editorial distance currently enjoyed by (but not guaranteed to) the incumbents, from the government of the day. Superficially this may seem desirable, but further thought and observation should surely lead you to conclude this is actually an example of isolated irresponsibility and unaccountability, leading to self sustaining, self-interested groupthink amongst the incumbents.
Hey, The Insider, thanks for your display. It is becoming increasingly difficult to avoid the conclusion that you are a parody.
TV licensing will already be aware of my online identity from my presence on the forum at http://www.tvlicensing.biz
– though whatever the actual legality of my TV viewing status, they are no more able to trace me than you are. Happy frothing.
Me, a parody?
What – you mean like this website with its paraniod rantings, comedy colours and adverts to BBC products at Amazon?
Answer the points, PFJ – and pay your licence fee like a good little boy, or you’ll be supping porridge and picking up the soap with your mate Jeffery Archer soon.
PJF, surely you will agree that the free press are either controlled by an owner or by a political organisation and therefore cannot be impartial. Although this in itself is no bad thing the dumbing down of the British press by the influx of self serving corporate crooks and interlopers, who are not versed in the grand British traditions of fairplay and decency has meant the decline of newspapers of all flavours.
I see the BBC as umpire at a great cricket match being zealously impartial and upholding the traditions that we as Britons can be proud of.
For PJF
It is with the regret that I note the decline in respect for dignity and honour in young conservatives, choosing to relegate the likes of Churchill to the rubbish heap while in favour of the leather jacketed cowboy boot wearing yanks. I can concur that, chocolate, nylons and rock and roll may be alluring to the misinformed but can we not learn from this vibrant culture and not copy this like demented parrots.
As for Ronald Reagan I consider his brand conservatism (playing fast and loose with the truth and cocaine) infinitely more palatable than the rehashed Trotskyite dogma and political fundamentalism, which is being touted by the current corporate cabal masquerading as the administration. Moreover, I fondly remember him as the hapless Drake McHugh in the classic “Kings Row”. His plaintive “Where’s the rest of me?” can still raise a tear.
for pjf
PJF, I hope my cry from Englands green and pleasant land will make all right thinking people look inwardly and question why you and friends are casting off tradition in favour of fashion.
I understand that many of the inhabitants of this site would like to see the writings of Piers Morgan replace Shakespeare in our houses of learning and the wonderful God Save the Queen replaced by the Coca Cola song.
Disgraceful!
“surely you will agree that the free press are either controlled by an owner or by a political organisation and therefore cannot be impartial.”
Yet, despite their claims, the BBC are no more impartial than anyone else. I’d prefer an honest free media that does not hide it’s political agenda and motives.
“I see the BBC as umpire at a great cricket match being zealously impartial and upholding the traditions that we as Britons can be proud of.”
I see the BBC as a great pile of steaming cr@p that is allied to the enemies of traditional British liberty. My opinion is just as valid as yours, yet I am forced to pay over £100 per year for this service I obviously don’t want, so much for the “grand British traditions of fairplay and decency” you care so much for.
“…choosing to relegate the likes of Churchill to the rubbish heap…”
I don’t think anyone here has done that, afterall Churchill was no fan of the BBCs approach to politics.
“I am forced to pay over £100 per year for this service”
No you’re not.
You can choose not to own a television – the choice is simple.
No “forcing” about it.
Maybe it’s the “being forced” element of it all that you Tory deviants like.
I was merely suggesting that the patrons of this site where more enamoured with our Americans cousins then they are with they’re own proud tradition.
The more I read the happier I feel that the proponents of this pseudo libertarian, social Darwinist crack pottery are hidden away in this dark corner of humanity. The rantings and ravings of this mob will be forever more filed under nutcases.
I imagine you and your friends would like to see the friendly British bobby replaced by a gun toting cowboy and Buckingham Palace turned into a Wal Mart.
Shame!
For Mr half-brew,
“I see the BBC as umpire at a great cricket match being zealously impartial and upholding the traditions that we as Britons can be proud of.”
Jolly good show. Roll on Pravda- the ultimate ‘umpire’. I say, is that a wench ready to serve me warm beer I see? Or a elderly spinster cycling to church on a Sunday? If they tell me so it is. Honestly, such half-baked John Majorism wins you no-one. The fetishist’s ‘love’ of Old England is not for me.
I’m British and I hate the BBC. I think they’re shallow, ideological, trivialising, sensationalistic for political purposes, mean-spirited, snobbish and unBritish. They take all the values I like about Britain- down-to-earthness, modesty, generosity, honesty- and instead of developing them turn them into a travesty.
I dislike Piers Morgan, but at least he’s consistently two-faced. The BBC pretend to be otherwise and hypocrisy reigns.
“shallow, ideological, trivialising, sensationalistic for political purposes, mean-spirited, snobbish and unBritish.”
That sounds like an advert for this website.
“down-to-earthness” – like Eastenders? Songs of Praise?
“modesty” – like David Attenborough?
“generosity” – like Children in Need?
“honesty” – like Crimewatch and Watchdog?
Do us all a favour Ed – stick to the crossword in The Sun – you clearly haven’t a clue what half of those words mean.
“No you’re not.
You can choose not to own a television – the choice is simple.
No “forcing” about it.”
True, and I am seriously thinking about scrapping my TV, even though I won’t be able to watch my DVDs any more. That pretty much reflects how pissed off I am.
“Maybe it’s the “being forced” element of it all that you Tory deviants like.”
No, you apparently don’t understand the concept; We’re complaining about being forced, strangely this means we don’t actually like it.
It’s you who seems to get a hard on from BBC bondage.
Ed
Obviously having a sense of humour in your New English Order would be a no no.
I imagine that in your United States of Britain that as well as a broadcaster Free from bias, Free speech. Free thoughts and Free people would also be in jeopardy.
Everything about this website is obsessively paraniod, and you muppets just can’t see it.
It’s the same phrases over and over again: a collection of non-existent and insane perceptions of unfounded bias.
I honestly wish you would get rid of your television Ed, but then you’d miss Stars In Their Eyes, wouldn’t you.
You bet I get a hard-on for the BBC. Who doesn’t? Heck – my mum gets a chubby at the Six O’Clock news, it’s so balanced and fair.
Yet we don’t have a broadcaster free from bias now! That’s the entire point!
But we do and it’s called the BBC and we all love her really, even your misanthropic gang must have liked the odd show?
Mr Tea,
It’s not my gang, and if their standards were low enough to accept me, I wouldn’t join!
As to myself, sure the BBC is capable of perfectly good non-political shows.
However it is their reporting on current affairs and recent history which is usually unacceptably biased.
This is not to say that they arn’t allowed to have their own opinions on these issues, in fact I encourage them to hold and broadcast their opinions. What I mind is having to subsidise their socialist propaganda.
Insider et teabag-
Eastenders- pie in the sky.
Songs of Praise- absolute bilge. Wouldn’t know one end of a church from another.
David Attenborough- can afford to be modest when so lavishly praised for talking so quietly and refusing to chair the BBC. Establishment pin-up boy surely millions of years old from before the dawn of modern man.
Children in Need- isolated occurrence; consequence of self-indulgent BBC’s guilt, particularly good as career enhancement for C-list celebs.
Crimewatch & Watchdog- pornography for Grandmas.
Honestly, none of the above would be so irritating if the BBC wouldn’t take such absurd pride in it- but then we might question their need to exist as billed. But, you know, if you want, you can console youself that we’re not anti-BBC campaigners, we’re just very naughty boys.
I think The Insider is a plant. His posts which contian NIL information are clearly intended to increase annoyance about the arrogance and bias of the BBC. The more he blusters, the more foolish the claims of BBC fairness and balance appear.
JohninLondon – another avoidser who employs diversionary nonsense.
I’m laughing my ass off at you idiots.
I just clicked on the comment link to leave this particular comment, and found an ad for Buongiorno Italia: A BBC Course for Beginners in Italian at Amazon.
Hilarious.
You idiots don’t even realise how derisory all of this is – so-called contextualised adverts leading to BBC products at Amazon on an anti-BBC site – which merely serves to illustrate the absurdity of your actions: you’re nothing more than a bunch of paraniod, bitter cranks.
I’m going to keep pointing these silly ads out until you do the decent thing and remove them.
Otherwise, you’ll continue to be servants for the “extorting” BBC money-grabbing machine, and I’ll continue to collect my big fat pay packet every month, at your expense.
The Insider and Mr Tea, thank you for helping fund this website by clicking through on the ads.
I’m off for my usual journey around the web now, but will probably look back here later for some more entertainment.
Herr Ed,
Initially I was a proponent “half-baked John Majorism” and now I’m lumped in with the insider.
Perhaps you find the idea intelligent impartial content hard to understand.
I’m sure Ed you dazzle your pals with Russ Limbaugh quotes but really when talking with adults you do need to try harder.
Stars ‘n’ Stripes
PJF, I’m more than happy to help fund this website.
Thatcher could never have been as successful without the loony left and the BBC will always prevail with the puritanical creepy bogeyman snapping at the heels of British broadcasting.
I thank you and your amigos for providing such a splendidly unsympathetic argument.
I imagine the insider will be happy with his continued cash flow, and I am merely content to be entertained.
Oh PFJ, make no mistake – I haven’t clicked on any of the ads – I’m not as stupid as you.
I’ll tell you something even funnier: on the bitter and disrespectful entry a few entries above this one about the late Alistair Cooke, the advert was a link to Alistair Cookes Letter from America (BBC Radio Collection).
When I clicked on this comment, there was the same ad.
You people are truly pathetic.
Click away at those ads, you nitwit – it’s me who’s profiting, not you.
I’ll be leaving a similar comment to this one on the Cooke entry.
Ho ho.
Off you toddle – around the net, spounting your Tory guff.
Mr Insider – what a clown !!! Not a spark of info, just stupid comments.
“what a clown !!!”
Man, that’s harsh. I’m so hurt.
Did you leave work early tonight to spend a few hours thinking that one up John?
Why don’t you try and answer some of the points?
Discuss the laughable BBC ads on this comedy anti-BBC website, perhaps?
Let me explain insider.
Click a bbc ad here == bbc helps finance this site.
A worthy cause no doubt.
It’s a bonus.