Post by Teddy Bear on Mar 25, 2015 13:56:27 GMT
There are several factors to note in this story, besides the fact that the BBC is biased in its support of all EU matters. This is not new, and has even been acknowledged by them in the past, so why does it take so long for the government to actually criticise them for it? Judging by the government's inaction on all matters related to BBC abuse of its funds and charter, I doubt they'll actually do anything about it anyway. In all probability they are only making noises to make themselves appear tough.
Director General Tony Hall has apparently been summoned to appear before MPs several times to answer accusations, and each time he is accused of using his Lord title to shrug it off. I understand the MPs ultimately threatened to replace him as DG if he failed this last time to appear.
Then we get to the BBC get of out jail card:
So not only are the BBC impartial merely because they claim they are, not even the government can criticize them for any bias perceived as it is deemed to undermine their independence. We already know that criticism and complaints by the general public are simply cast aside by the BBC, so there is nobody according to them who can criticise them and bring them to account.
I blame the government now for this ridiculous situation.
Director General Tony Hall has apparently been summoned to appear before MPs several times to answer accusations, and each time he is accused of using his Lord title to shrug it off. I understand the MPs ultimately threatened to replace him as DG if he failed this last time to appear.
Then we get to the BBC get of out jail card:
A BBC spokesman said: ‘As Lord Hall told the committee, we are and will be impartial in all matters concerning our coverage.
‘The BBC provides extensive coverage of both European and parliamentary issues and while we respect the committee’s role, it would be a breach of our independence if a committee of MPs were to instruct us how to cover an individual issue or story.’
‘The BBC provides extensive coverage of both European and parliamentary issues and while we respect the committee’s role, it would be a breach of our independence if a committee of MPs were to instruct us how to cover an individual issue or story.’
I blame the government now for this ridiculous situation.
MPs attack BBC for its 'biased EU reporting': Corporation accused of 'falling down severely' in its obligation to provide impartial coverage
By Katherine Rushton, Media And Technology Editor For The Daily Mail
The BBC has a ‘deeply concerning’ pro-European bias and has ‘fallen down severely’ in its obligation to provide impartial coverage of the issue, MPs say today.
The European Scrutiny Committee says the corporation does not give enough airtime to those who believe Britain should leave the European Union or that there should be a referendum on membership.
The MPs also criticised the BBC’s director-general, Lord Hall, for failing in his role as the corporation’s editor-in-chief, after he turned down an invitation to give evidence to the committee in Parliament four times.
Lord Hall, who earns £450,000 a year of licence fee payers’ money, eventually relented after the committee told him to treat its invitation as a ‘formal summons’.
Sir Bill Cash, the Eurosceptic who chairs the committee, said: ‘The BBC has fallen down severely on its obligations to viewers and listeners to give them a proper and balanced assessment of both sides of the argument.
'This is an issue that affects everybody’s lives. Who can say that the European question is not important?’
The Conservative MP argued that many of the BBC’s flagship shows, including Radio’s 4’s Today programme, are stuffed with commentators who talk about the economic and political dangers of Britain leaving the EU.
But, he argued, they have far too few people on its shows to explain what the benefits might be.
Sir Bill said: ‘There is a [line] of questioning which is quite clearly geared to elicit the answers, “I don’t want a referendum”, or “I don’t want Britain to leave the European Union.”
'There are two sides of the argument. Why don’t they have more people on so they can represent them? That [bias] is carried through an enormous amount of the BBC’s flagship programmes.’
It is not the first time the committee has called on the BBC to give more airtime to Eurosceptics.
The cross-parliamentary group said in 2005 that the corporation should have to air a series of debates about Britain’s position in the EU, to help educate the public.
But in today’s report MPs say the BBC has done little to change things, and that they ‘remain deeply concerned about the manner’ in which the corporation tackles the subject of the EU. They were particularly angry with Lord Hall.
‘He is editor-in-chief,’ said Sir Bill. ‘He has responsibility for ensuring that the [BBC] Charter and Framework Agreement are complied with. The charter does not give them absolute editorial independence. They have to work within a framework.’
The committee had to write to the director-general five times over the course of a year before he agreed to appear before members.
Even then, he only did so after the committee told him it was a ‘formal summons’ and accused him of hiding behind historic rules which would let him off the hook because of his peerage.
Members of the Lords do have the right to decline invitations to appear before the Commons. Lord Hall has denied ever trying to take advantage of his peerage in this way.
A BBC spokesman said: ‘As Lord Hall told the committee, we are and will be impartial in all matters concerning our coverage.
‘The BBC provides extensive coverage of both European and parliamentary issues and while we respect the committee’s role, it would be a breach of our independence if a committee of MPs were to instruct us how to cover an individual issue or story.’
- BBC has 'concerning' pro-EU bias, the European Scrutiny Committee said
- Sir Bill Cash argued flagship shows don't give Eurosceptics enough airtime
- MPs also criticised Lord Hall for failing in his role as BBC's editor-in chief
By Katherine Rushton, Media And Technology Editor For The Daily Mail
The BBC has a ‘deeply concerning’ pro-European bias and has ‘fallen down severely’ in its obligation to provide impartial coverage of the issue, MPs say today.
The European Scrutiny Committee says the corporation does not give enough airtime to those who believe Britain should leave the European Union or that there should be a referendum on membership.
The MPs also criticised the BBC’s director-general, Lord Hall, for failing in his role as the corporation’s editor-in-chief, after he turned down an invitation to give evidence to the committee in Parliament four times.
Lord Hall, who earns £450,000 a year of licence fee payers’ money, eventually relented after the committee told him to treat its invitation as a ‘formal summons’.
Sir Bill Cash, the Eurosceptic who chairs the committee, said: ‘The BBC has fallen down severely on its obligations to viewers and listeners to give them a proper and balanced assessment of both sides of the argument.
'This is an issue that affects everybody’s lives. Who can say that the European question is not important?’
The Conservative MP argued that many of the BBC’s flagship shows, including Radio’s 4’s Today programme, are stuffed with commentators who talk about the economic and political dangers of Britain leaving the EU.
But, he argued, they have far too few people on its shows to explain what the benefits might be.
Sir Bill said: ‘There is a [line] of questioning which is quite clearly geared to elicit the answers, “I don’t want a referendum”, or “I don’t want Britain to leave the European Union.”
'There are two sides of the argument. Why don’t they have more people on so they can represent them? That [bias] is carried through an enormous amount of the BBC’s flagship programmes.’
It is not the first time the committee has called on the BBC to give more airtime to Eurosceptics.
The cross-parliamentary group said in 2005 that the corporation should have to air a series of debates about Britain’s position in the EU, to help educate the public.
But in today’s report MPs say the BBC has done little to change things, and that they ‘remain deeply concerned about the manner’ in which the corporation tackles the subject of the EU. They were particularly angry with Lord Hall.
‘He is editor-in-chief,’ said Sir Bill. ‘He has responsibility for ensuring that the [BBC] Charter and Framework Agreement are complied with. The charter does not give them absolute editorial independence. They have to work within a framework.’
The committee had to write to the director-general five times over the course of a year before he agreed to appear before members.
Even then, he only did so after the committee told him it was a ‘formal summons’ and accused him of hiding behind historic rules which would let him off the hook because of his peerage.
Members of the Lords do have the right to decline invitations to appear before the Commons. Lord Hall has denied ever trying to take advantage of his peerage in this way.
A BBC spokesman said: ‘As Lord Hall told the committee, we are and will be impartial in all matters concerning our coverage.
‘The BBC provides extensive coverage of both European and parliamentary issues and while we respect the committee’s role, it would be a breach of our independence if a committee of MPs were to instruct us how to cover an individual issue or story.’