Originally Posted by Stuart

The problem with NI is not so much that they control so much of the media, but that they have proved that they are willing to use that control to further the political beliefs of one man. One man who has been known to change his allegiance seemingly on a whim. Also, like most newspapers, the bias in his publications is overt (yes, I do count the Guardian in that list).

You argue that print is dead, and it may be, but 3 to 4 million people still read the Times and The Sun everyday, and if they are basing their beliefs on what they read (and there is some evidence they do), that can mean the difference between one party winning an election and another.

That, IMO, is too much power for one man to have over our electoral system.

The BBC, while it has it's own political bias (slightly left, I'd say) also has strict rules governing political bias in it's output. Not just self enforced rules, but laws. It's political stance is also not set by one person.

It's also worth remembering that the two primary sources I've seen for complaints about BBC bias (The Mail and News International) have their own agendas that have little to do with BBC bias, and it's entirely possible that they are using the bias claim as a weapon to attack the BBC.