Quote:
Originally Posted by Ignitionnet
I know you're a Guardian reader I'm sure you've mentioned it before. I'm glad you agree that there is bias within the BBC's staff, and that this bias does find its way to news reports.
I don't remember mentioning that there was an institutional bias within the BBC, merely that it has a high proportion of Guardianistas, which you appear to have agreed upon, so it's all good.
Of course it's only bias if it's not what you think  |
I am pointing out that every organisation will have bias because reporters are human and when there is no editorial line for them to take then their own beliefs will sometimes come though. The difference between the BBC and other organisations is the BBC tries to eradicate it as best it can whereas News International deliberately seeks to push that a bias for it's owner's own political or financial (BSkyB) gain. The later is far more insidious which is why I fear their media dominance more than the BBC's.
I also find no real evidence that they intentionally seek to recruit left wing staff for their news output. I think that their recruitment in The Guardian is a result of The Guardian's position within the media industry as a good place to look and advertise for jobs.
I can understand bias when I see it. Even if it agrees with my own beliefs. I am aware of The Guardian's left wing bias and know when it's being pushed. I have to say that, like most broadsheets (i.e not The Independent), most of their bias is confined to their columnists, the editorial and the stories they choose to cover. I find most of their 'straight' reporting on matters is objective. I believe this is because that is what broadsheet readers want, they dislike facts being omitted. I do not see that bias in BBC reporting. Even the few opinion pieces on their site are mixed.
---------- Post added at 11:36 ---------- Previous post was at 11:30 ----------
That said I also read The Times online and on the iPad so I guess I am a big ol hypocrite there....