Does the BBC have a Pro-EU Bias?

[LeMaquis]

The BBC is massively biased in favour of the EU. When "technocratic" government was imposed on Italy and Greece, and democratic government removed, did the BBC explode with outrage? Did they hell.

 

Neither of those two governments were imposed. Politicians on all sides in both countries accepted the respective governments. Greece's technocratic government was composed of an appointed leader. All the other ministers were politicians.

 

Why would you expect the BBC to explode with outrage at such a thing?

[altus]

Why would you expect the BBC to explode with outrage at such a thing?

My guess is he's watched too much Fox News and thinks that's how things should be reported - rather than dispassionately reporting what has happened.

 

---------- Post added 03-03-2016 at 19:26 ----------

 

Lord Rose, who is leading the "In" campaign, has conceded that should we leave the EU, UK wages will rise.

 

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/newstopics/eureferendum/12181385/Wages-for-British-workers-will-rise-in-the-event-of-a-Brexit-head-of-in-campaign-says.html

 

I will bet my left nut and everyone else's that this will not be mentioned on the BBC's six o'clock news bulletin.

Perhaps because they reported it yesterday and it's not today's news.

 

It's still linked to from their website's front page though.

[Harrystottle]

I don't watch Fox news.

 

Well,we could look at the example of our own dear, dear Look North. The other night they reported on the restoration of a mill in Sheffield which they said with much emphasis "Would not have happened without EU money". They even repeated that, in case you missed it the first time.

 

And why not? It's true. What is also true though is that the UK has been a net contributor to the EU for every year of it's 40 odd year membership bar one.

 

That we paid in £12.9 billion last time, and got £6 million back. So this image that the Look North is deliberately trying to create, of the munificent EU grandly helping the poor old UK by selflessly giving us money, is cobblers.

 

Selective with their facts you see; because they are biased and bias tends to show.

[Magilla]

I don't watch Fox news.

 

Well,we could look at the example of our own dear, dear Look North. The other night they reported on the restoration of a mill in Sheffield which they said with much emphasis "Would not have happened without EU money". They even repeated that, in case you missed it the first time.

 

And why not? It's true. What is also true though is that the UK has been a net contributor to the EU for every year of it's 40 odd year membership bar one.

 

That we paid in £12.9 billion last time, and got £6 million back. So this image that the Look North is deliberately trying to create, of the munificent EU grandly helping the poor old UK by selflessly giving us money, is cobblers.

 

Selective with their facts you see; because they are biased and bias tends to show.

 

So to be "unbiased" they have to paint every EU storey (even if it's true) with some snide "qualifiers" at the same time.

 

You're grasping at straws. There is no bias other than that that is in your head.

 

http://www.theguardian.com/news/datablog/2012/nov/22/eu-budget-spending-contributions-european-union

 

"Germany, as the biggest economy, is also the biggest contributor, Poland is the biggest receiver. The UK contributes much more than it receives too, about €4.7bn more. Why the gap? The UK is a rich country and the EU points out that although it spends less in the UK than the national contribution, the British economy gains much more from access to European markets and contracts. UK exports to the EU were worth nearly €12bn in September alone."

 

So, what were you saying about that mill again?

Edited March 3, 2016 by Magilla

[ElasticMan]

I made my research measurement quite clear. I've got time to check the headlines twice a day, like most people have. That's why they're influential. I don't have time to do a complete analysis of all BBC output across multiple platforms. If you do, then I suggest you either do something productive with your life, or start your own thread detailing your own analysis.

 

So far, 10 days in, pro-EU headlines at peak times are out numbering the anti ones by a 3:2 ratio.

 

How do you know how regularly people check the headlines? or when peak times are?

You method is worthless.

[WiseOwl182]

Today's update:

 

 

Pro:

Monday 22/2/16 (lunchtime): "EU exit is a 'security risk'"

Monday 22/2/16 (evening): "EU exit is a 'leap in the dark'"

Tuesday 23/2/16 (lunchtime): "EU exit would 'risk jobs'"

Wednesday 24/2/16 (evening): Tusk: EU reforms cannot be reversed

Friday 26/2/16 (evening): David Cameron: No prospect of EU vote re-run

Saturday 27/2/16 (lunchtime): G20 warns Brexit would be global 'shock'

Saturday 27/2/16 (evening): G20 warns Brexit would be global 'shock'

Wednesday 2/3/16 (lunchtime): EU dossier to 'smoke out' exit campaign

Wednesday 2/3/16 (evening): EU dossier to 'smoke out' exit campaign

Thursday 3/3/16 (lunchtime): French minister sparks UK Calais row

Thursday 3/3/16 (evening): Hollande warns of UK exit 'consequences'

Total: 11

 

 

Anti:

Wednesday 24/2/16 (lunchtime): Gove says EU deal 'not legally binding'

Thursday 25/2/16 (lunchtime): EU in crisis talks over migrant limits

Sunday 28/2/16 (lunchtime): Leaving EU 'a stride into the light'

Sunday 28/2/16 (evening): Leaving EU 'a stride into the light'

Monday 29/2/16 (lunchtime): Migrants charge through Macedonia fence

Monday 29/2/16 (evening): Migrants break down Macedonia fence

Total: 6

 

 

Neutral:

Friday 26/2/16 (lunchtime): Osborne and Howard at odds over EU exit

Total: 1

 

---------- Post added 03-03-2016 at 19:46 ----------

 

How do you know how regularly people check the headlines? or when peak times are?

You method is worthless.

 

It's a valid measure. It might not be fully comprehensive but it gives a good indication of how the BBC are reporting on the EU over the course of the campaign.

 

So far it's almost 2 pro EU story headlines to 1 negative one. You can deny it as worthless or meaningless if you want. You can bury your head in the sand or stick your fingers in your ears crying "naaanaaanaaa" for all I care. I'm just putting it out there.

[ANGELFIRE1]

We pay 17 billion a year into the failing money pit they call the EU. We do get a rebate of 5 billion, so 17-5 = 12 billion which is the actual amount we pay to be a member of a failed institution.

 

Angel1.

[WiseOwl182]

So to be "unbiased" they have to paint every EU storey (even if it's true) with some snide "qualifiers" at the same time.

 

You're grasping at straws. There is no bias other than that that is in your head.

 

 

If I stole a tenner off you and gave you a fiver, which of the following is biased towards me:

 

- Generous man hands out fiver

 

- Thieving crook steals £10 and only returns a fiver

[chalga]

http://www.theguardian.com/media/2015/jun/20/bbc-europe-sceptics-anti-eu-referendum

 

 

 

 

 

Saturday 20 June 2015 10.00 BST

 

 

On Thursday, eurosceptic MPs tabled an amendment to the referendum bill designed to establish a regulator to ensure balance in the BBC’s coverage of the vote on UK membership of the EU.

 

Their implied attack on the BBC is not surprising as the corporation is one of the few mass media outlets with any hope of providing balance given the europhobic stance of many of the best-selling newspapers. But the proposal is bizarre in view of the BBC’s gentle handling of eurosceptics when they appear in broadcasts.

 

When eurosceptics feature on BBC programmes, they are rarely pressed on their assertions with the same vigour as other politicians. They are never asked how their wish to be part of the single market but outside the EU, like Norway or Switzerland, represents an improvement on the current situation.

 

Nor are they asked about how the UK would still have to abide by regulations over which it would all lose influence, how it would need to make a sizeable contribution the EU budget and how it would still need to accept EU immigrants (which are a larger share of the Swiss population than is the case for the UK).

 

And when eurosceptics stress the export opportunities available outside the EU, the BBC never asks why membership impedes our global exports, nor points out that an exit would exclude the UK from existing EU trade treaties and that negotiating new ones would take many years.

 

You could put the BBC’s shallowness on the EU down to cutbacks in its research base and the dismissal of knowledgeable staff. Some independent experts I speak to are appalled by the ignorance of BBC staff who approach them for comments.

 

Another reason could be fear of the eurosceptic influence on the negotiations over the BBC charter renewal set to take place later this year.

 

It could also be down to editorial policy and the stance of some presenters. Today programme presenter John Humphrys was quoted last year as saying the corporation had “bought into the European ideal” without evening out its coverage. Later that year, he asserted wholly incorrectly that the European Commission does not balance its books.

Advertisement

 

It’s not just Humphrys. On a 13 June broadcast of the Today programme, a eurosceptic MP wanted the government to not put civil servants in front of the media during the referendum purdah the eurosceptics are seeking, nobody asked whether they would be forbidden to answer factual questions. When a eurosceptic on the same programme two days later referred to the colossal costs of abiding by EU regulations, nobody pointed out that the basis of such spurious calculations is the assumption of no UK regulations at all as the alternative.

 

There’s evidence of this approach stretching back to 2011 and the notorious Newsnight episode when Jeremy Paxman allowed eurosceptic commentator Peter Oborne to abuse a European Commission official, calling him “the idiot from Brussels”. Paxman then joined in with “Mr Idiot in Brussels, would you like to respond?”

The stories you need to read, in one handy email

Read more

 

I am no starry-eyed europhile. As a former European Commission official, on my own initiative I did the work that established that the UK would be the largest net contributor to the budget which was the basis of Margaret Thatcher’s negotiation of the rebate. Later, I spent many years at Barclays and as an adviser to the City of London, fending off continental efforts to curtail the competitiveness of the City.

 

But at a time when Britain’s largest selling newspapers are predominantly eurosceptic, the BBC’s duty to inform has rarely been of greater importance and its frequent failure to live up to this duty on the EU debate saddens me. Eurosceptics want to cow one of the few mass media outlets that might take a balanced approach and so far seem to be succeeding.

 

The chairmanship and staffing of the BBC regulator the eurosceptics dream of would be hugely controversial, as would the implied breach of the BBC’s editorial independence.

 

But perhaps given the BBC’s repeated failure to challenge their viewpoints, an attempt to ensure its coverage of the EU is balanced is not such a bad idea.

Edited March 3, 2016 by chalga

[ANGELFIRE1]

Today's update:

 

 

Pro:

Monday 22/2/16 (lunchtime): "EU exit is a 'security risk'"

Monday 22/2/16 (evening): "EU exit is a 'leap in the dark'"

Tuesday 23/2/16 (lunchtime): "EU exit would 'risk jobs'"

Wednesday 24/2/16 (evening): Tusk: EU reforms cannot be reversed

Friday 26/2/16 (evening): David Cameron: No prospect of EU vote re-run

Saturday 27/2/16 (lunchtime): G20 warns Brexit would be global 'shock'

Saturday 27/2/16 (evening): G20 warns Brexit would be global 'shock'

Wednesday 2/3/16 (lunchtime): EU dossier to 'smoke out' exit campaign

Wednesday 2/3/16 (evening): EU dossier to 'smoke out' exit campaign

Thursday 3/3/16 (lunchtime): French minister sparks UK Calais row

Thursday 3/3/16 (evening): Hollande warns of UK exit 'consequences'

Total: 11

 

 

Anti:

Wednesday 24/2/16 (lunchtime): Gove says EU deal 'not legally binding'

Thursday 25/2/16 (lunchtime): EU in crisis talks over migrant limits

Sunday 28/2/16 (lunchtime): Leaving EU 'a stride into the light'

Sunday 28/2/16 (evening): Leaving EU 'a stride into the light'

Monday 29/2/16 (lunchtime): Migrants charge through Macedonia fence

Monday 29/2/16 (evening): Migrants break down Macedonia fence

Total: 6

 

 

Neutral:

Friday 26/2/16 (lunchtime): Osborne and Howard at odds over EU exit

Total: 1

 

---------- Post added 03-03-2016 at 19:46 ----------

 

 

It's a valid measure. It might not be fully comprehensive but it gives a good indication of how the BBC are reporting on the EU over the course of the campaign.

 

So far it's almost 2 pro EU story headlines to 1 negative one. You can deny it as worthless or meaningless if you want. You can bury your head in the sand or stick your fingers in your ears crying "naaanaaanaaa" for all I care. I'm just putting it out there.

 

 

Good post, exposing the real fact that the Bliar Broadcasting Corporation is undoubtedly pro EU.

 

Angel1.