Post by ascendinglark on May 5, 2007 21:04:26 GMT
In a story like this it seems as irrelevant to mention "left wing" or "right wing" as it would to mention whether they were black or white. The word "opposition" would have done.
Of course, this is one of those examples in which the bias is subtle, almost not worth bothering with, I post this more out of amusement than anything else.
news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/europe/6628389.stm
Ha! I seriously doubt whether, had the roles been reversed, the BBC would have slapped the adjective "tenacious" in front of the phrase "right-wing councilor"
There just seems no reason to mention the fact that the whistle-blower was "left-wing" except to make the implicit suggestion that tenacity (or exposing corruption) is predominantly a "left-wing quality". And of course, in this context, the consequential suggestion is also that nepotism (and corruption in general) is predominantly a "right-wing quality".
OK so they're not emboldening any terrorists or enemies with this kind of crap - but I think little instances like this serve to illustrate, albeit on a trivial level, the subtle levels of bias in BBC journalism.
Of course, this is one of those examples in which the bias is subtle, almost not worth bothering with, I post this more out of amusement than anything else.
news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/europe/6628389.stm
But one tenacious left-wing councillor then started a probe that revealed nepotism on a grand scale.
Ha! I seriously doubt whether, had the roles been reversed, the BBC would have slapped the adjective "tenacious" in front of the phrase "right-wing councilor"
There just seems no reason to mention the fact that the whistle-blower was "left-wing" except to make the implicit suggestion that tenacity (or exposing corruption) is predominantly a "left-wing quality". And of course, in this context, the consequential suggestion is also that nepotism (and corruption in general) is predominantly a "right-wing quality".
OK so they're not emboldening any terrorists or enemies with this kind of crap - but I think little instances like this serve to illustrate, albeit on a trivial level, the subtle levels of bias in BBC journalism.
