Guest 745- Registered: 27 Mar 2012
- Posts: 3,370
36
Tom
The death penalty should be given on economic grounds
Why do the taxpayers need to pay to keep monsters ??
Guest 710- Registered: 28 Feb 2011
- Posts: 6,950
So Keith, monsters that pay for themselves are OK?
Ignorance is bliss, bliss is happiness, I am happy...to draw your attention to the possible connectivity in the foregoing.
Guest 698- Registered: 28 May 2010
- Posts: 8,664
It's a question of weighing the 'rights' of such 'monsters' against the 'rights' of the other members of the community. One person's right is another's obligation and moral absolutism is unhelpful in the capital punishment debate.
I'm an optimist. But I'm an optimist who takes my raincoat - Harold Wilson
Guest 655- Registered: 13 Mar 2008
- Posts: 10,247
Howard - you, among other I classed as left of centre, FaryC - come on, you are a bit more left than 'left of centre'....
As for Tom, what a ludicrous claim to excuse BBC bias. The British are certainly not 'left of centre' as a population and, indeed, many of the old traditional Labour vote are to the right on many individual issues such as hanging etc.
Also Howard - there is a world of difference between the Grauniad and Telegraph. The reason many Conservatives no longer like the Telegraph is because it take, quite rightly, a more robust right wing stance than Cameron.
Again many people are deliberately missing the point. The BBC has an obligation under its charter as a publicly funded organisation not to have a bias. I have no problem if it wants to pursue its left wing agenda as long as it's exclusive right the licence fee revenue ends.
I have said before - licence fee money should be targeted to public service television and to be used as a quality drama benchmark that can be open to bids from any tv production group.
Jan Higgins
- Location: Dover
- Registered: 5 Jul 2010
- Posts: 13,888
Barry, I think everyone on here is possibly left of your centre.
The BBC (and the media in general) question the policies of which ever party is in power therefore the followers of that party will always say the BBC is biased, this is why Labour called them biased prior to the last election.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
I try to be neutral and polite but it is hard and getting even more difficult at times.
-------------------------------------------------------------------
Guest 716- Registered: 9 Jun 2011
- Posts: 4,010
# 45.....spot on.....carry on BBC keep popping at every government we are unlucky to get............
Guest 710- Registered: 28 Feb 2011
- Posts: 6,950
The charter obligation can only be to strive for balance, not simply to give equal air time to opposing opinion.
The BBC, quite reasonably, goes about this by ensuring that its output is evidence based, hence the rap on the knuckles for John Humphrys recently.
However you slice and or dice the population, it is only a tiny minority that harps on about 'left-wing bias'. Which is just about how things stand on this Forum.
Ignorance is bliss, bliss is happiness, I am happy...to draw your attention to the possible connectivity in the foregoing.
howard mcsweeney1- Location: Dover
- Registered: 12 Mar 2008
- Posts: 62,352
got in before me jan on 45. i think the term is left of barry which covers 90% of the population.
Guest 671- Registered: 4 May 2008
- Posts: 2,095
Howard.
You are quite right, maths was my worse subject, in fact for the last year at school I took cooking in the girls school next door, instead of my maths lessons, what a punishment that was.
BarryW.
You can call me what you like, you often do.
"My New Year's Resolution, is to try and emulate Marek's level of chilled out, thoughtfulness and humour towards other forumites and not lose my decorum"
Guest 655- Registered: 13 Mar 2008
- Posts: 10,247
I do not dispute that I am to the right of most, though Howard exaggerates. Right of Centre Jan and my own positioning is not the issue here. It is about how the BBC is utterly failing in its obligations under the Charter as shown by new evidence. Nobody has found a way to disprove that evidence and just try to excuse it, for some it actually suits their political stance.
Guest 710- Registered: 28 Feb 2011
- Posts: 6,950
From the link in #1
"Responses to Common Critiques/Questions
General Questions
1. "So What?"
Firstly, I think that the results are interesting in their own right: they provide objective, quantitative evidence of slant in both the amount and tone of the BBC's coverage of think-tanks. Secondly, the results reinforce the existing anecdotal allegations of bias at the organization and so suggest that these views should be taken more seriously."
What possible justification can there be for any 'think-tank' to insist that it gets the coverage it desires?
2. "Isn't the CPS even more biased than the BBC? How can we trust you?"
It is inevitable that, if an organization like the CPS criticises the BBC, it will be accused of ulterior motives. That is why I tried to use methods with clear (and I hope) uncontroversial assumptions. By removing much of the subjective element from measuring slant, my hope is that people will read the report, assess the assumptions and then draw their own conclusions.
It seems that people have done just that.
Questions About the Comparison between the BBC and the Telegraph/Guardian
1. "The BBC's coverage should be more similar to the Guardian than the Telegraph, one is a reliable news source, the other is outrageously right-wing."
I think that my choice of reference newspapers is reasonable.
He may, others (me) are less certain.
2. "Maybe everyone treats right-of-centre sources in this way and so you're singling the BBC out unfairly? How do the newspapers treat the think-tanks in your sample?"
We took Demos and the CPS as representative left-of-centre and right-of-centre sources and did a quick check of the Guardian and Telegraph's use of health warnings. Demos received a health warning 4% of the time in the Guardian and 20% of the time in the Telegraph. In contrast, the CPS received a health warning 71% of the time in the Guardian and 22% of the time in the Telegraph. It would be foolish to take too much from this observation, but it is fair to say that...
Foolish it may be, but he is willing to do it as far as it suits him.
3. "The right-of-centre CSJ was referred to as "independent" more often than any other think-tank. Doesn't this suggest that the BBC is being fair?"
The CSJ was a tricky think-tank to deal with because the BBC nearly always referred to its foundation by Iain Duncan Smith, but then often combined this with another health warning like "right of centre", or a reference to its "independence". This led to introductions like "The CSJ, an independent think-tank founded by Iain Duncan Smith". The result was that it received both more "independents" and more health warnings than anyone else. References to its independence were probably undermined somewhat by the accompanying health warning, but it is impossible to know by how much.
So much is impossible to know, but throw in enough caveats and innuendos and chalk becomes oh-so cheesy.
Ignorance is bliss, bliss is happiness, I am happy...to draw your attention to the possible connectivity in the foregoing.
Guest 671- Registered: 4 May 2008
- Posts: 2,095
BarryW.
Martin was right in that if the BBC was bias to the right this thread would not have started.
In fact I will go further than that, if they were bias to the right you would have "found a way to disprove that evidence and just try to excuse it, for some it actually suits their political stance".
Your more slippery than eel.
"My New Year's Resolution, is to try and emulate Marek's level of chilled out, thoughtfulness and humour towards other forumites and not lose my decorum"
Brian Dixon
- Location: Dover
- Registered: 23 Sep 2008
- Posts: 23,940
garyc,no just a wind up merchant that's good at maths and double chat.
Guest 655- Registered: 13 Mar 2008
- Posts: 10,247
GaryC - I started this thread as a result of new quantitative research.
This research methodology has still not been really challenged, with only excuses and a 'fog' being provided to justify the BBC carrying on with its bias.
It is no good making 'what ifs' the facts of the research are the facts. The BBC is in breach of its charter and should not as a result benefit from public money.
Keith Sansum1
- Location: london
- Registered: 25 Aug 2010
- Posts: 23,942
ALL POSTS ARE MY OWN PERSONAL VIEWS
Guest 710- Registered: 28 Feb 2011
- Posts: 6,950
More people think BBC has bias to left than bias to right - poll
Not that that tells the whole story...
"Almost twice as many people think the BBC has a leftwing bias as believe it favours the right, according to a new Opinium/Observer poll.
Around 41% think the BBC displays some bias. Of these, 27% say it leans to the left and 14% say it favours the right. Overall, 37% of people polled think the corporation is neutral in its news reporting while 26% do not know.
The findings come after Tory claims that the BBC has a leftwing culture and fails to report issues such as welfare cuts fairly. The BBC has defended itself against all such charges.
Among Tory voters, 44% believe the corporation has a leftwing bias, against 32% who think it is neutral. Far fewer Labour voters (19%) think it has a rightwing bias, while more of its supporters (48%) think it is neutral..."
WARNING! Pie chart...
http://www.theguardian.com/media/2013/nov/03/bbc-left-right-poll Ignorance is bliss, bliss is happiness, I am happy...to draw your attention to the possible connectivity in the foregoing.
Guest 716- Registered: 9 Jun 2011
- Posts: 4,010
Carry on regardless BBC.......
howard mcsweeney1- Location: Dover
- Registered: 12 Mar 2008
- Posts: 62,352
if someone chooses to watch a news programme it suggests that they are intelligent enough to make their own minds up on an issue.
i don't find much difference between bbc, itv or sky.
Jan Higgins- Location: Dover
- Registered: 5 Jul 2010
- Posts: 13,888
Same here Howard, I find the only difference is the quality or is that bias of the interviewer on which ever channel I am watching.
The worst for me is Eamonn Holmes who has an awful tendency to shout over any reply that his political guest tries to give.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
I try to be neutral and polite but it is hard and getting even more difficult at times.
-------------------------------------------------------------------
howard mcsweeney1- Location: Dover
- Registered: 12 Mar 2008
- Posts: 62,352
never watch him, i have no idea how he got such a job - never been more than a magazine style presenter.
