Where would we be without the BEEB?

[sandGroundZero]

In October 1922 the British Broadcasting Company was formed by a group of leading wireless manufacturers including Marconi.

By the curious mechanism of a Royal Charter in 1927 the British Broadcasting Corporation, i.e. the BBC came under the control of the government, albeit supposedly at arm's length. Read a summary history of the TV licence.

So, how does the BBC stand in the national consciousness, today? The BEEB's creative output is an impressive, if chequered legacy. The BBC World Service was formerly, at least, an instrument of the UK's Foreign and Commonwealth Office. BBC News and Current Affairs output is a topic of debate (see: Trump Acquittal Q Local Forum thread for examples.)

.

[sandGroundZero]

The BBC at war saw fundamental changes in programme making practice, live reporting from battle scenes, and was a fundamental source of propaganda news to the free world.
Post war a TV news service was launched, the first post-war Olympic Games was televised, and Children's Television began. BBC engineers invented the first means of recording live TV, and extended the corporations international presence.

A good deal of contemporary popular sentimentality was fashioned by world war II. In much the same way, the BBC often appears to be viewed as a projection of the UK's place in the world.

[susanb]

£154.50 per year better off.

I miss the Antiques Road Show on Sunday. The only thing on BBC I like to watch.

The World Service is very good, it has things on there that are not on the BBC news.

[sandGroundZero]

£154.50 per year better off.
I miss the Antiques Road Show on Sunday. The only thing on BBC I like to watch.
The World Service is very good, it has things on there that are not on the BBC news.

Anticipate knock-on effects, if the TV Licence is abolished. All but government-mandated content and unadulterated crap will be behind pay walls. If you like to view television, you'll probably continue to pay circa £154.50 (+ inflation adjustments), or more!

Advertising revenues are slipping away for the commercial broadcast that is, ad supported business model — except of course, we all continue to give away our personal data so that advertisers can target you precisely. If that happens, we'll probably see a sharp rise in household bankruptcies!

[duncet]

Throughout my lifetime I have grown up respecting the BBC for its reliability and professionalism with regard to its radio and television output. It has, for me, provided a backbone both as a informer of news and as a supplier of first rate entertainment.
Certainly, in recent years I have become more and more aware of its political agenda. Whereas at one time most people considered the BBC to be impartial, there can't be many "thinking people" today who are still of that opinion.
In its constant attacks on Donald Trump, its ongoing attempts to undermine Brexit (even though a majority of those who voted in the referendum voted for it) and its general political stance on most issues, it can no longer claim to be an impartial, politically neutral broadcaster. This might well suit those on one side of the political divide but it doesn't carry with it the honesty with which I had always based my admiration for the BBC. It is very dangerous when any broadcasting network - particularly one that has built up national trust - can be accused of brainwashing and it is a great shame that the BBC is moving, ever closer, in that direction.
Whatever your political views, I am sure most people would agree, this is happening.

[silver fox]

Throughout my lifetime I have grown up respecting the BBC for its reliability and professionalism with regard to its radio and television output. It has, for me, provided a backbone both as a informer of news and as a supplier of first rate entertainment.
Certainly, in recent years I have become more and more aware of its political agenda. Whereas at one time most people considered the BBC to be impartial, there can't be many "thinking people" today who are still of that opinion.
In its constant attacks on Donald Trump, its ongoing attempts to undermine Brexit (even though a majority of those who voted in the referendum voted for it) and its general political stance on most issues, it can no longer claim to be an impartial, politically neutral broadcaster. This might well suit those on one side of the political divide but it doesn't carry with it the honesty with which I had always based my admiration for the BBC. It is very dangerous when any broadcasting network - particularly one that has built up national trust - can be accused of brainwashing and it is a great shame that the BBC is moving, ever closer, in that direction.
Whatever your political views, I am sure most people would agree, this is happening.

Bias is very much in the eye of the beholder, just as many believe that the BBC supported and gave too much air time to Brexiteers, come on just how often did Farage turn up smirking on our screens? not even part of either campaign, although clearly a Brexit supporter, he certainly got a lot of free air time.

[said]

Throughout my lifetime I have grown up respecting the BBC for its reliability and professionalism with regard to its radio and television output. It has, for me, provided a backbone both as a informer of news and as a supplier of first rate entertainment.
Certainly, in recent years I have become more and more aware of its political agenda. Whereas at one time most people considered the BBC to be impartial, there can't be many "thinking people" today who are still of that opinion.
In its constant attacks on Donald Trump, its ongoing attempts to undermine Brexit (even though a majority of those who voted in the referendum voted for it) and its general political stance on most issues, it can no longer claim to be an impartial, politically neutral broadcaster. This might well suit those on one side of the political divide but it doesn't carry with it the honesty with which I had always based my admiration for the BBC. It is very dangerous when any broadcasting network - particularly one that has built up national trust - can be accused of brainwashing and it is a great shame that the BBC is moving, ever closer, in that direction.
Whatever your political views, I am sure most people would agree, this is happening.

I agree totally! But to me, the changes in BBC broadcasting output were very obvious a few decades back and the reason why I gave up watching television. From being regarded as a highly respected source of impartial news delivered by professional presenters it has become highly biased, very political and targets a habitual audience. At one time I would have allowed young children to watch the news and programmes knowing that they provided a good learning platform - today, I would have to clap my hands over their ears.

[sandGroundZero]

There is a lot of tosh spoken and written about the BBC; most notably about the BBC's lack of balance in matters of social or political controversy.

The problem with the BBC's news and current affairs output is NOT bias. The BBC and other cultural 'institutions' in the UK and elsewhere have not weathered the change in social attitudes at all well. Incidentally, the same applies to North America's broadcast media.

BBC television's golden age (as you might describe its early post war years) perhaps share some responsibility for what is widely viewed as the demise of social deference. When television broadcasting resumed after the war and presenters were selected for their 'posh' RP dialects, viewers generally still retained a degree of awe with respect of their better educated and more cultured fellow countrymen (they were men, then). In the intervening decades that deference declined. One consequence was that the BEEB was left foundering in cultural storm — it had lost the coherence of its former Reithian values.

Assertions that BBC news and current affairs has favoured one side over the other in assorted culture war controversies says much more about the accusers than it does about the accused. True the BEEB was and is managerially bloated. True too, it is without coherence. But also, the society it serves is far more factious than ever before in the BBC's short history.

[Toodles McGinty]

In its constant attacks on Donald Trump, its ongoing attempts to undermine Brexit (even though a majority of those who voted in the referendum voted for it) and its general political stance on most issues, it can no longer claim to be an impartial, politically neutral broadcaster. This might well suit those on one side of the political divide but it doesn't carry with it the honesty with which I had always based my admiration for the BBC. It is very dangerous when any broadcasting network - particularly one that has built up national trust - can be accused of brainwashing and it is a great shame that the BBC is moving, ever closer, in that direction.
Whatever your political views, I am sure most people would agree, this is happening.

Do you ever watch 'Question Time'? As SF stated, Nigel Farage has been on that show more than anyone this century. Kenneth Clarke next. And virtually every week there is some far right plant spewing some bogus vile nonsense. Last week a NF / Tommeh supporter. Front and centre. Paid for their time. Their chief political editor did more for the Tory election campaign than any party political broadcast. They allowed the Prime Minister to avoid any scrutiny during the election.The Labour party actually made an official complaint regarding BBC bias last December.

As for Trump, do you have any examples to back up that theory? Because as far as I can see, you really don't need any clever editing to make him look stupid. Just play the video. Or ask him to say 'origins'. Or look at the actual facts about him. There are many.

There are bizarre ideas about who runs the BBC. In the 80s there was 'communists and homosexuals'. More recently, it was apparently run by Jewish people. I actually heard the phrase 'one of the BBC Jews' recently. Although looking at a list of the Directors General, they all seem very straight, very white, very 'establishment' and very Gentile.

Apart from politics, I think the BBC output is second to none. Drama, documentaries, kids programming, sport, all worth the licence fee. The problem is, as has been discussed already, the compulsory nature of the fee. But without the fee, there wouldn't be the output. I know I grumble about it, but I'd really miss the BBC if it wasn't around.

[sandGroundZero]

…Certainly, in recent years I have become more and more aware of its [i.e. BBC's] political agenda. Whereas at one time most people considered the BBC to be impartial, there can't be many "thinking people" today who are still of that opinion.

• attacks on Donald Trump,
• attempts to undermine Brexit (even though a majority of those who voted in the referendum voted for it) and
• its general political stance on most issues,

it [i.e. BBC] can no longer claim to be an impartial, politically neutral broadcaster. …It is very dangerous when any broadcasting network - particularly one that has built up national trust - can be accused of brainwashing and it is a great shame that the BBC is moving, ever closer, in that direction.

There's danger — accusations of brainwashing on the strength of such feeble evidence!

The BEEB's guidelines on balance seem to be a bureaucratic own goal resulting in complaints from all sides (which incidentally, do not justify the often heard "…must be getting it about right" defence!)

Reckless claims of "brainwashing" are as stupid as they are outrageous! Trust is being eroded, sure enough; but not through BBC bias. More probably, it is the persistent, mindless or perhaps ideological attacks on institutions including the BBC.

Whatever your political views, I am sure most people would agree, this is happening.

Think again!

[said]

There is a lot of tosh spoken and written about the BBC; most notably about the BBC's lack of balance in matters of social or political controversy.

The problem with the BBC's news and current affairs output is NOT bias. The BBC and other cultural 'institutions' in the UK and elsewhere have not weathered the change in social attitudes at all well. Incidentally, the same applies to North America's broadcast media.

BBC television's golden age (as you might describe its early post war years) perhaps share some responsibility for what is widely viewed as the demise of social deference. When television broadcasting resumed after the war and presenters were selected for their 'posh' RP dialects, viewers generally still retained a degree of awe with respect of their better educated and more cultured fellow countrymen (they were men, then). In the intervening decades that deference declined. One consequence was that the BEEB was left foundering in cultural storm — it had lost the coherence of its former Reithian values.

Assertions that BBC news and current affairs has favoured one side over the other in assorted culture war controversies says much more about the accusers than it does about the accused. True the BEEB was and is managerially bloated. True too, it is without coherence. But also, the society it serves is far more factious than ever before in the BBC's short history.

You either have not paid much attention to the output or you are dwelling on outdated views. The BBC is most definitely biassed, probably the most biassed of all. Just look how that programme Question time is manipulated. Look at how presenters present popular politics without having a knowledge of the affairs just their own personal views, the heavily weighted Brexit debate simply because the BBC received funds from the EU. Perhaps most blatantly is how they ingore certain news topics completely for fear of giving rise to controversy. No - I do not have a television, but I am not ignorant as to the content of its broadcasts since certain topics arise on social media with the links provided and it is clearly evident. It is not just the news. Various reports and presentations have to include all societies whether they are relevant or not just to satisfy all the tick boxes. This creates a false impression of British life. The accusers are quite right to complain - in most part it is they who pay for the television licence and they have a right to demand neutral and factual output. A huge number of people have now chosen to pay for additional channels to suit their needs.
You mention American television. America has a high number of television channels for people to choose from. The American programmes that I have seen appear to relish personal attacks on other people or are fabricated events, even their sense of humour is dire. But the BBC World news does reach ex-pats abroad and in one topic alone, the ex pats were receiving very biased reports due to the lack of research given to the topic. Luckily I no longer have any problems with television broadcasts, thank heavens.

[said]

There's danger — accusations of brainwashing on the strength of such feeble evidence!

The BEEB's guidelines on balance seem to be a bureaucratic own goal resulting in complaints from all sides (which incidentally, do not justify the often heard "…must be getting it about right defence!)

Reckless claims of "brainwashing" are as stupid as they are outrageous! Trust is being eroded, sure enough; but not through BBC bias. More probably, it is the persistent, mindless or perhaps ideological attacks on institutions including the BBC.

Think again!

If you are subjected to continual brainwashing you become submerged in it and refuse to acknowledge that it is happening. That is brainwashing!

[sandGroundZero]

You either have not paid much attention to the output or you are dwelling on outdated views. The BBC is most definitely biassed, probably the most biassed of all. Just look how that programme Question time is manipulated. Look at how presenters present popular politics without having a knowledge of the affairs just their own personal views, the heavily weighted Brexit debate simply because the BBC received funds from the EU. Perhaps most blatantly is how they ingore certain news topics completely for fear of giving rise to controversy. No - I do not have a television, but I am not ignorant as to the content of its broadcasts since certain topics arise on social media with the links provided and it is clearly evident. It is not just the news. Various reports and presentations have to include all societies whether they are relevant or not just to satisfy all the tick boxes. This creates a false impression of British life. The accusers are quite right to complain - in most part it is they who pay for the television licence and they have a right to demand neutral and factual output. A huge number of people have now chosen to pay for additional channels to suit their needs.
You mention American television. America has a high number of television channels for people to choose from. The American programmes that I have seen appear to relish personal attacks on other people or are fabricated events, even their sense of humour is dire. But the BBC World news does reach ex-pats abroad and in one topic alone, the ex pats were receiving very biased reports due to the lack of research given to the topic. Luckily I no longer have any problems with television broadcasts, thank heavens.

For someone who claims not to watch television you have a lot to say on the matter!
Again …TOSH!

[sandGroundZero]

If you are subjected to continual brainwashing …That is brainwashing!

Just a minute! That is repetition!

.

[bensherman]

What has been upsetting people is that the BBC has been doing that truly insidious thing of reporting the news. And giving people of ALL opinions the chance to express themselves.

For example, Trump's bizarre behaviour, simply nasty actions and divisive policies are a matter of fact, not opinion. For example, it is a fact he walked out on the Kurds who had helped his forces for a decade.

Now if the BBC reports that, it is alleged to be biased. But if it DOESNT , it IS biased.

I have had two longish visits to the US in the last two years and I can tell you there are stories about him which the BBC has not repeated-presumably because they are unsure of their veracity.

Ditto with Brexit. We have had years of the truth becoming exposed. Should be BBC be cowed into not reporting that?

In the election, the BBC tried to step up to its democratic role of allowing voters to see politicians challenged. Corbyn, Swinson and the rest agreed. Did anyone see Corbyn interviewed? Not exactly given an easy time.The Tories would not do it( why do you think they did that?) to the extent that the potential PM did not. And the BBC got criticised for pointing that out!

Be very careful about joining in the rush to damage yet another pillar of our democracy.