I used to be proud of the BBC

[Mecky]

I've already given one example, the "Power Day" on Five Live, propogating the green agenda.

 

There is also an endemic tendency/bias to present multiculturalism in an overly-positive light, with out any critical examination.

 

There is an organisation wide over-prepresentation of ethnic minorities and gays/lesbians.

 

There is very little balance in the programming, with more conservative traditional points of view being given little air time.

 

So what you're saying then is that the BBC should propagate your own views and nothing else

[frededwards]

No, what I'm say is that, as a publicly funded entity, it should show balance.

[dosxuk]

it should show balance.

 

Balance does not mean giving equal prominence to all viewpoints on a matter.

[frededwards]

You have obviously failed to understand the meaning of balance.

[spilldig]

The BBC is still the best broadcaster in the world and gives outstanding value for money.

 

It has not been value for money since the mid 80s and should be wound up and left to the independents.

[Xt500]

The BBC is still the best broadcaster in the world and gives outstanding value for money.

 

If you believe you should pay for lies and brainwashing very goverment biased views.

 

Its on a mission at the moment to convince the public that we should be going into syria altohugh it forgets to say there isnt actually any evidence but were going to attack anyway,its just a matter of when.

[Mister M]

There's some interesting empirical research from Cardiff University on the political bias at the BBC. Makes for interesting reading, as it wasn't what I was expecting:

 

http://theconversation.com/hard-evidence-how-biased-is-the-bbc-17028

[Car Boot]

Time to scrap the Licence Fee and encrypt all BBC television channels.

 

If the public want to pay for corruption and incompetence they should be able to do so voluntarily, not under threat of a large fine and home invasion.

[Ela James]

BBC Trust facing the axe .. Lord Patten and Mr Thompson are due to appear before the Commons Public Accounts Committee tomorrow for a showdown over who approved overpayments of £2.9m to BBC managers over six years.

 

“The Trust is there to represent the licence fee payer. Any shareholder in a public company would be furious if this had been happening.”

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/culture/tvandradio/bbc/10294123/BBC-Trust-facing-the-axe.html

[dosxuk]

it should show balance.

Balance does not mean giving equal prominence to all viewpoints on a matter.

You have obviously failed to understand the meaning of balance.

 

It's clear you are the one struggling with the concept.

 

Take human creation / evolution. It appears you are suggesting that not only should the BBC show equal prominence to the two popular views - that we evolved from the primordial gloop, or we were placed here by a sky pixie - but also the numerous crackpot theories with ideas like we're an alien experiment or that evolution doesn't exist and humans have always existed in their current form.

 

When it comes to things like homosexuality, there are significant numbers of people who still believe that being gay should be 'treated', or the 'sufferers' should be criminalised. Should these people, who are a tiny majority of the population, have their views given exactly the same amount of airtime as those who believe that being gay is acceptable.

 

If you look at politics, things get even more silly. By law all UK broadcasters have to demonstrate balance and impartiality. Under your idea, the BBC should be showing just as many party political broadcasts for the monster raving loony party as they do labour or the tories.

 

Balance is about providing access to the differing viewpoints - it's not about giving all the different views equal airtime. If you have views which the majority of people would disagree with, you are not going to get your views aired as much - not because of bias, but because of balance.