Saturday, 15 July 2017

Wrong. Oh so wrong

A Lib Dem councillor, Matthew Hulbert, writes an article for the pro-EU weekly The New European headlined 'BBC and Channel 4’s obsession with so-called ‘impartiality’ is stifling true debate' and argues that the BBC should be more like MSNBC's Rachel Maddow and make a stand against people whose views "should be mocked, not respected" (i.e. Brexit supporters). 

The New European then sends out a tweet linking to this article, and the BBC's Nick Robinson responds to it:

It's the old 'Complaints from both sides' thing again. The BBC may be (and is) guilty of a pronounced and proven anti-Brexit bias but because some anti-Brexit zealots think that the BBC isn't as pronounced and proven in its anti-Brexit bias as they would like it to be - and they, as here, are fully open in wanting the BBC to abandon any pretence of impartiality and to take their side (the side of truth) instead whilst claiming that the BBC is guilty of "stifling true debate" (a sinister form of words if ever there was one) in allowing Brexiteers an equal say (sic) - then we're expected to believe that the BBC is getting it about right. It isn't, and The New European is 'coming it' massively.


  1. I agree with Nick. Of course, what he's not saying is that there are only certain views the BBC challenges. Also, Beeboids do plenty of mocking along the way.

  2. 52% or 17.4 million voters for Leave
    48% or 16.1 million voters for Remain

    This is the only stat that's provable. Any young old, educated uneducated stat is based on a sample or poll and we all know how accurate that's been recently.

    Apparently the BBC gives screen time to political parties based on election results, why doesn't this apply to the above? There's lot to criticise about the EU's negiotiating stance at the moment but they just take it as gospel.

  3. From Robbo to Simpson, the flounces at the merest suggestion their editorial integrity is anything less bent than a nine Euro note are a joy to behold.