|
Sep 2019
12:50pm, 20 Sep 2019
8,718 posts
|
larkim
I wonder about my own reaction to Swinson's as being a little informed by latent sexism on my part - do I find her aggressive *because* she's a woman, and I wouldn't give it a moment's thought if she was male? Or is she objectively less conciliatory than most previous LibDem leaders have been?
|
|
Sep 2019
12:50pm, 20 Sep 2019
15,234 posts
|
Chrisull
Actually I'm with fozzy on this, the BBC have been too uncritical for some time (compare and contrast with Channel 4 being critical enough to get excluded from some press conferences a la Donald Trump).
Laura K's "This him here" pointing out Omar Salem's Twitter profile, was disrespectful at the minimum and inviting a Twitter pile-on at the worst. They have failed to question what has been put to them from no 10, right down to the tone and the language.
|
|
Sep 2019
1:10pm, 20 Sep 2019
2,279 posts
|
J2R
As recently as a year or so back, I was defending the BBC from accusations of bias on here, but no longer. I would definitely say there is now a pro-Tory slant to their political output. Laura Kuenssberg simply seems to regurgitate the press releases from No 10 without questioning things, and seems far too chummy with Boris Johnson, maybe enjoying privileged access too much to raise awkward questions. And Radio 4's Today programme is appalling. Maybe to do with the role of right-winger Sarah Sands as editor? Pleased to see the back of John Humphrys, though, an appalling presenter and interviewer who has done a lot of harm to the conduct of political discussion in this country, and whose bias over Brexit has been far too obvious.
|
|
Sep 2019
1:10pm, 20 Sep 2019
8,720 posts
|
larkim
I just don't see that. I'm sure she's made some missed steps, and no doubt has her own views about things. But when the left complained bitterly about how she handled Corbyn, I just felt she'd given him a good old proper journalistic going over and he was just inadequate to deal with that.
Equally I've seen and heard her be equally robust with govt ministers, cabinet members, PMs etc.
But I may just be missing things!
On the Omar Salem's stuff, I don't think it is at all an issue to point out that what previously was being shown as a "man in the street with no political axe to grind has a go at PM over personal experience of NHS" was in fact someone who is engaged with this debate as an activist. It doesn't change the fact that his was a personal account, but it does go to why a) he mgith be articulate about it and b) why he might actually have pre-judged views which supplement how he feels about his personal experience.
And on the "bias" thing, if you are part of the Tory propaganda machine, you don't tweet "Another very, very awkward encounter for PM - taken to task by a parent on a children’s ward in London where he says repeatedly the ‘NHS has been destroyed’ - Johnson like rabbit in headlights" (If that had been Corbyn as the rabbit there, I can be certain my more active FB labour friends would have been up in arms about her constant bias, yadadada)
|
|
Sep 2019
1:20pm, 20 Sep 2019
2,632 posts
|
FenlandRunner
BBC is terrible. Horribly biased with respect to Politics and Football. The only thing they deliver well is the cricket.
|
|
Sep 2019
1:34pm, 20 Sep 2019
8,721 posts
|
larkim
I'm intrigued to know how an organisation can be biased with respect to football!!
|
|
Sep 2019
1:43pm, 20 Sep 2019
18,855 posts
|
DeeGee
You don't support a "less glamorous club" then, larks?
Gary Lineker has a lifelong hatred of the dearly departed Sir Graham Taylor and allows that to flavour his discussions about Watford Football Club every single week.
|
|
Sep 2019
1:55pm, 20 Sep 2019
8,722 posts
|
larkim
My club was just kicked out of the football league after 100+ years of service and still holding the record for goals scored in an FA cup final. I've no doubt got a tin ear for anti-Watford bias, but I'm impressed if Lineker's personal problems have cascaded throughout the BBC!!
|
|
Sep 2019
1:56pm, 20 Sep 2019
9,145 posts
|
rf_fozzy
Larks - Do I actually think that Laura K is a propagandist for No10. No I don't.
But she is *too* close to them (as are a number of other journalists) to be sufficiently critical.
The BBC have always been somewhat deferential to the governing party (they were the same with TB and GB's Lab govts) but there was always *some* analysis.
Too often the stuff that Laura K comes out with might as well have been a press release directly from the govt. Especially compared to *some* (not by all means all) of her coverage of opposition parties.
The doxxing of the guy who confronted Johnson was a good example. It was effectively spinning a v difficult story for Johnson who was lying on camera about there being cameras there into a story that was effectively 'oh, but this guy votes Labour, so it doesn't matter'
I do worry about the BBC and their "false balance" - it did huge damage to the Climate Change movement (opinion treated as fact) and provided UKIP the oxygen they needed (and didn't deserve at the time) to grow.
|
|
Sep 2019
2:09pm, 20 Sep 2019
32,434 posts
|
HappyG(rrr)
I just don't like Laura K. Like Robert Peston, she talks like she has some special insight but actually she just regurgitates the obvious and the headlines. Not much critical thinking, imho.
Whereas Katya Adler, Lyse Douet and back in the day Kate Adie etc. excellent correspondents.
|
Fantasy General Election
Jul 2024