Although we are fully aware of the Radio 4 and wider BBC bias to remain in the EU, it is nevertheless astonishing to hear this morning’s blatant misrepresentation of the government’s position on the exit of the UK from the EU on the Today programme. Consistently throughout this morning the headlines have been quoting Theresa May’s position as being to cut all economic ties with the EU. This is utter rubbish, as the BBC editors will know, she has said we want to negotiate free access to the Single Market and the best possible trading relationship with the EU. Both the Conservative and Labour party had, during the election campaign, committed to leaving the Single Market and Customs Union, although the Labour Party changes its position depending who it is talking to. The BBC is misleading their audience on government policy and, as a publicly funded broadcaster, they need to reassess their position of trust. Many people I know do not trust the BBC and avoid listening to its coverage of the UK’s departure from the EU for that reason.
Subject: Still peddling EU propaganda: UK payment & receipts from the EIB The UK pays into the European Investment Bank, a portion of the funds the UK provides are then returned to the UK, with conditions attached, via the EU’s convoluted bureaucracy in which funding conditions are set by unaccountable bureaucrats unconnnected with the UK’s economy. Khamil Ahmed and the rest of the BBC’s Europhile establishment continue to attempt to mislead those who don’t follow the labyriithyne EU processes into believing that the EU is some kind of beneficient entity that the UK is dependent on for its continued survival. We object very strongly to this peddling of propaganda by a publicly-funded broadcaster.
It was last week’s Emma Barnett interview with Nick Clegg, who is not an MP anymore. Nick Clegg was not questioned at all about his Remoaning, and mistaken, destructive, undemocratic, untrue beliefs. All votes are equal, and us brexiteers got much more votes; just the same as when we were dragged in to the EU in the 1970s! Now, the same we are being thank god dragged out of it, to freedom for the UK; for all of us. We do not want what the EU forced on Ireland, a second Referendum! That was not right. Also we do not want dope legalized, it causes brain damage etc. So please do not keep imposing on us Nick Clegg. This is why he lost his seat, his unpatriotic, Loony, beliefs are not popular. Emma Barnett must be Lib dem, or some kind of Loony Left, as she gave only Nick Clegg a completely easy ride, this is not fair. Nick Clegg is not a MP anymore, or in the EU unfortunately anymore. So, why do we have to keep having him in the newspapers, and on the radio. Because it is part of your Loony Left agenda. Like the Climate change, and constant, tiresome, Trump bashing! Donald Trump has every right of a State visit, with the Queen to. I am very grateful for what Donald Trump has done to help the unborn child, and our religious freedom.
Historically, I have loved BBCs comedies and documentaries, but even I am now feeling reluctant to continue to pay for the license fee given the level of sneering and bias towards Brexit and Brexiteers. The BBC journalists, panellists and programme commissioners are all revealing that they are totally out of touch with the country to whom they broadcast too. The examples this week alone of negativity are legion, but what pushed me over the edge was the obvious bias on the News Quiz where the panellists revealed fully the height of their ivory towers and remoteness from the population at large. Please can the BBC at least balance if not reflect the actual level of coverage towards Brexit. Yours in despair!
Again airing the viewpoint of a remain politician, this time the failed US presidential contender, Hilary Clinton, to espouse her opinion that no deal Brexit would be bad for the UK as we wouldn’t get a deal with the US. Why do they always have to show negative slants on Brexit, typical slimy story manipulation!
Complete news coverage biased against Philip Hammond and our ability as a country. Same angle on EU negotiations which are impossible if the EU’s Mr Barnier is only able to negotiate within specific controlled boundaries which were set for him earlier this year Let’s have some proper grown up reporting please.
This show and the BBC continue to invite a failed deputy priminister and failed MP on every show it can to talk about re running the referendum because they lost . it is disgraceful the man is a failure what does he know? The BBC should have all funding withdrawn immediately.
BBC interviewed Nick Clegg seeking his opinion about the proposed speech by Theresa May to be given later today before it had been given. Why as he is no longer an MP or a member of the Lords ask him anything about Brexit when he is just a man in the street the same as anyone else? Obviously he is opposed to Brexit and that is why he was asked. He has no standing at all so it must be bias isn’t it?
Victoria Derbyshire interview with European correspondent Kevin Connelly following Junker/May joint statement saying they want to accelerate the Brexit negotiations. Connelly said there were 2 interpretations one could make of the agreed statement, and then went on to choose the most pessimistic one as being the more likely. He criticised Theresa May for wanting to limit the amount the U.K. has to pay, but also seemed to be saying that she was only wanting to limit the amount to appease Tory backbenchers rather than to benefit the U.K. as a whole. He moaned about the cost of exiting the EU, saying “no-one can now remember, during the brexit referendum, anybody talking about the idea that it would cost a fortune to get out of the European Union, just as it would cost a lot of money to remain in”. He failed to mention that the amount of money to be paid to exit the EU will be a one off amount (although probably not paid off in one lump sum) as opposed to large and ever increasing contributions going forward if we had chosen to remain.
BBC news channel. Yet more unwarranted attacks on Mrs May, her leadership and Brexit. Isn’t it time that ALL reporters, are legally bound to report only the facts of the news, not speculation, not ‘story telling’ as the BBC Head of News called it. The media have far too much influence over a lot of the population who believe that what they hear is the truth, rather than that particular reporter’s opinions. News reporting should not be allowed to be hyped up, with reporters becoming actors to try to force their opinions, or those of whoever they are working for, on the population.
They had an ex MP Nick Clegg giving his reasons we should have another vote. He was allowed to promote his new book. He was not challenged on his extreme views. The BBC should be punished and the Director//producer sacked.
The today programme was very biased in a pro-brexit direction. It didn’t challenge Bernard Jenkin who made many dodgy statements, and gave him a higher impact time, and a much easier ride than Nick Clegg, who was actaullt making sense. Why has the BBC suddenly stopped being interested in facts or sensible arguments when Brexit is stating to crystalise into something concrete.
When I heard Nish Kumar and James Acaster accuse over half of British voters of being racist for opting to leave the EU I had to re-wind just to confirm that I had understood correctly the gist of their comments! I was astounded. We’ve long had to endure the supercilious quips of Hugh Dennis and other panel members who regularly insinuate that anyone who didn’t vote to remain in the EU is a racist, bigoted, half wit but to make this accusation quite so bluntly was remarkable not only for the incredible ignorance, bitterness and vitriol of the comments but also because these two clowns clearly felt that a BBC programme was a safe platform from which to make these remarks. James Acaster even remarked ‘that won’t make it in’ – indicating his recognition that he had crossed a red line and that the comments would be edited out before being broadcast but clearly this didn’t happen. Comedy is a powerful tool and we should not be naïve enough to think that this is all just a bit of fun. The panel guests are clearly smart and funny people otherwise they wouldn’t be on the TV. They know full well that they have a great deal of influence and that they reach an audience of millions. I appreciate that they feel injured at having lost the political argument but they must not be allowed to abuse their influence by serving up slander thinly disguised as comedy.
There was no coverage of the Stop Brexit march in Manchester, which I attended, except on local BBC North West news. Both ITV and Channel 4 covered it. This follows similar non-coverage of anti-Brexit events elsewhere and the pro-Brexit bias of BBC1’s Question Time on Thursdays. This programme has now become populism’s shouting shop and I just switch off. Giving equal weight to the truth and a lie is not balance but undermines any value in reporting. Failing to question an assertion that has no basis or at least to challenge a minister to produce some evidence of what they are saying is an abdication of responsibility by the national news service for which we all pay. I used to value the BBC but now I really resent paying the licence fee, BBC management needs to stop bowing to pressure from right-wing groups and do their job, “to educate, entertain and inform. ” Bias against Brexit? You must be joking.
The BBC only told us (with glee and a tone that depicts mockery of British Citizens) how many Brits are applying for Spanish, French, German and Irish Passports. BBC never balanced the report with those EU Citizens who applies for British Citizenship. One would have thought the BBC would easily obtain the UK figures from the Home Office. At the end of the programme, it was disclosed they could actually not obtain official figures from the countries listed. So, ALL has been the BBC making guesses ir cooking up alarming stories. Where is the balance reporting?
BBC once again portrays a doom and gloom story on the main news web page. This is regarding the cost of holidays going up due to the poor pound – “Thomas Cook predicts Spanish holiday prices to rise”. This is contrary to recent surge in the pound which should be celebrated, yet the BBC want to slowly but surely change the publics view on the how Brexit is having negative impact. I believe this is story not worthy of being on the front page or in fact anywhere on the news as it not certain and is somewhat fake news. This is because we don’t know how the pound will end up for next years holiday season and if we did then we should give up our jobs and become a forex investor. I believe the reporting to be a pessimistic view instead of celebrating all the good that has come about and that can come out of Brexit. This is a dumb it down story for the normal Joe public who goes on holiday ,rather than giving them all the facts about the pound rallying . The BBC should be helping promote Britain as after all its the BBC after all, not the EUCC. A 34 yr old engineer from N Ireland.
Whilst driving to work this morning two key points of bias reporting by BBC Radio 4 morning programme came out of the radio at me and I am sure millions of others. At around 06:15 we heard from Paul Johnson of the Instuite of Fiscal Studies tell us why Brexit is going to be bad for business and that he couldn’t see us replacing lost trade with the EU as we step outside the single market and that this would have a natural impact on jobs. Next up we had Sadiq Khan London Mayor at around 07:50 tell us why he wanted something different for London as London voted to stay part of the EU and that people didn’t vote to make themselves poor along with a number of other negative comments and we had no counter to this from the leave side of the discussion what so ever, BBC (Bias Brooadcasting Corporation) an absolute disgracefull reporting and an all to commond outcome from the BBC reporting bias across its whole structure. The Government need to understand that the Country is in massive debit and we need to trade our way out of this which we will not be able to do whilst remaining part of the European Super State that my parents didn’t vote to join back in 1975 or I voted for since being old enough to vote at the 1983 general election onwards.
I was a big fan of BBC 2 but am sick and fed up with Jeremy Vine and his biased views regarding Brexit and the need to remain. We have voted and whatever side you are on we should accept the outcome. We do not need Mr Vine and the BBC constantly bringing this subject up in a negative way. Seriously, fed up.
Laura Kuenssberg coverage of Mrs May’s speech in Florence was aggressive, critical and blatently bias in favour of the EU and against Brexit. Her questioning of the PM Immediately following the speech was viscious and her manner was both cynical and offensive.
Yet again the BBC cannot report on Brexit without being impartial. Every time I see Laura Kuenssberg on the news, she is always reporting on Brexit negatively. Tonight she asked a politician questions pressing on the negative aspects of Brexit, many points not proven.
Presenter stated that there would be food riots after brexit.. Couldnt believe it. I work in a port and they were saying that inspections would stop all food. Total rubish . We eat food from everywhere every day. So angry
As usual the panel is loaded up with remain voters with just 1 leave voter. soon as the brexit question arose it was the usual claptrap and negative attitudes that made me turn the program off. I stopped watching question time months ago but thought I would give it a try. no change from previous panels. total bbc bias. will not watch again. dump it and rename it bbc anti brexit show.
Today’s BBC News Online headline is: “Brexit: Boris Johnson repeats Leave’s £350m for NHS figure” This contains two straightforward lies: there never was a promise, or even a suggestion, that £350m would go to the NHS – and Boris hasn’t ‘repeated’ it.
Once again, as in every single panel since the referendum, the BBC has put a panel on the show that is made up of 80% remain campaigners. Its disgusting how the BBC is abusing its trust to further their own political agenda.
don’t know what time it was shown. saw it on catch up. Will Shakespeare is talking about the time of Henry the eighth. About 10:11 into the programme, the narrative is something like this: the union between england and wales made sound economic sense. but the one thing we know about the british, is that when it comes to a choice to follow sound economic sense and bloody minded petty nationalism, the world can get stuffed because we want our countries back no matter how small, cold, wet or utterly impoverished they may be.
Every day I have to listen to the BBC bias on leaving the EU, the air time given to the remainers is disgraceful. We voted to leave pack trying to brainwash the British who pay for the license fee it will not wash, we are not stupid. More people voted to leave so the Brexitee’s should get the majority share on tv & radio.Why is this not so ? Why are the governing bodies that are supposed to make the BBC impartial not doing anything about it, It’s a disgrace that they get away with it.
I find it as astounding that the Andrew Marr programme today gave the prime slot to Tony Blair, ahead of a Minister of State, Michael Fallon. Yet another example of left-wing bias of the BBC and an opportunity for the unprincipled Blair to announce his astounding volte face regarding immigration.
Having Blair on the show for an enormous amount of time without a clear counter voice eg. From UKIP is entirely unreasonable. The % air time to remain was utterly disproportionate. Fallon was not given anywhere near as much time to talk positively againt remain
Andrew Marr now fails to challenge or provide intelligent response to guests on the show. The Mr Tony Blair remainder showcase this morning is the latest point in question. Mr Blair was allowed to pontificate without any challenge to the obvious half truths and weaknesses in his remainer speech. Mr Marr seemed only able to nod his head as if he was sitting on the right hand of some sort of god figure. Mr Marr’s questions appeared to assist Mr Blair make his very weak points, giving them a phoney gravitas they Would not have had if correctly challenged.
Total bias on the 6pm news regarding the government leaked document regarding immigration. Total bias on everybody interviewed stating they believed that immigration was a good thing. The country that’s the majority voted to leave the EU and the reduction of immigration was the key point. Not a senior person was interviewed supporting controls on immigration. I know it’s a waste of time complaining to the BBC as it’s always right and that’s how they always answer any complaint regarding this matter
I tuned in for news of the strongest hurricane to hit the Caribbean for years and what did I get?! More bias from the BBC regarding Brexit ( the proposed Immigration Bill. )We have Laura Kuenssberg back with us plus the Mayor on London et al giving the country negative indoctrination again regarding Brexit! I turn the sound off now and wait for the real news.
Total of five ‘Anti-Brexit’ news items and ZERO Pro-Brexit. This is a record for the BBC as there are only ten news items in total, and thus ‘Ant-Brexit’ was 50% of the items displayed.
A typically negative BBC news story about Brexit which appeared on the BBC News website today, the article was an interview given by Simon Fraser who was employed by the foreign office until 2015. He made claims that the Brexit negations hadn’t started particularly well. First point is the BBC doesn’t disclose that Mr Fraser campaigned for the remain campaign, also since leaving his post in 2015 Mr Fraser has been working as a consultant advising business on Brexit. It does make me wonder whether this a personal opinion as I can’t see very many of his ex-colleagues wanting to brief him on the current state of negations Especially when you have articles like this which suggests more progress is being made than what’s being reported by media outlets such as the BBC: https://capx.co/dont-believe-the-bad-news-about-brexit/
Dateline All guests we anti Brexit so only their views were put across …. another example of BBC’s bias against Brexit.
4 guests entirely anti Brexit. Jane Hill reminded them 52% voters , voted to Leave but the only message from the discussion was that Brexit will be a disaster, people didn’t know what they were voting for and the comparison between Britain’s withdrawal from India being equated to Brexit was total nonsense. For heavens sake get a balanced panel (pro and anti Brexit opinions) on this programme or admit the BBC is biased and anti-Brexit.
The Brexit debates on ‘What the Papers Say’ and ‘Dateline London’ were not balanced. All the guests clearly held the view of remaining in the EU. Such continued bias has changed my viewing habits and Sky News is now my preferred news programme.
Statements that the Japanese government is ‘deeply concerned’ and do not want Britain to have a ‘hard Brexit’ as this will endanger Japanese jobs and make trade talks with UK difficult. Quote from Rupert Wingfield-Hayes; ‘If Britain is heading for a hard Brexit, the UK -Japanese ties are going to be put under severe strain’. Is this really the view of the Japanese government or is it the opinion of the BBC?
Firstly yet another appearance by Nick Clegg attacking brexit and claiming no progress has been made in negotiations… despite a list of achievements being presented over the weekend. Second…. within half hour a completely unopposed opinion piece by writer Daisy Goodwin telling us how queen Victoria would have been “absolutely horrified by brexit” and would have been a firm supporter of the eu. Thank you. There is so much every day as I listen to radio 4 which is blatantly biased propagabda Now I have found this complaint facility I shall be more proactive in trying to do something about it.
Light entertainment show interview with Alex Salmond who was asked his view on Brexit and was given an unchallenged platform to be completely negative about Brexit. No challenge and no balance so even on non news programms anti brexit views now have an unchallenged platform
Terrible interview with Polly Toynbee and another person. “Debate” on the effects of Brexit re farming and food production. There was no debate, the interviewees were purely ruminating on the possible effects of Brexit on food production and farming subsidy. There were no facts, statistics etc just highly pessimistic speculation. Neither clearly knew anything about it, the gentleman simply agreed with Ms Toynbee. Phrases such as “people did not realise this when they voted for Brexit” were clearly heard, along with terrible cheap American food flooding into the UK.
MP Grant Chaps appears to talk about Broadband delivery, Naga Munchetty launches into him about Brexit matters,whole item slot is painfully extended while interviewer batters away and Grant Chaps presents a sound reply,I was interested about Broadband not Brexit, BBC stands for Brexit Bashing Company I suppose?
Kirsty Wark had a studio guest who opposed the democratic choice to leave the EU and a Conservative MP on to link up. The discussion was about air travel after the uk leaves the EU. The presenter chose to ignore the MP on the tv and the production staff turned the sound down so we were unable to hear her response.You could see the invited guest on the screen answering the question but not aware they chose to censor her response. Absolutely shocking.
Kirsty Wark seemed way out of her depth & getting confused with her subject matter, following Newsnight’s Business Editor Helen Thomas’s piece on aviation post-Brexit, including Open Sky agreements, which finished with the suggestion that “we may be in for a very bumpy ride”. Kirsty interviewed a seemingly staunch pro-Remain studio guest, aviation economist Peter Morris of Flight Global, then when her other guest Jacqueline Foster MEP, a Transport spokesman specialising in this area in Brussels, (this reference conspicuously omitted from KW’s introduction) spoke via video link & corrected some misleading statements & those from the studio guest, she was cut off by Kirsty Wark who continued instead putting questions to Peter Morris. When she did eventually get to speak, and asked KW to allow her to finish, Jacqueline Foster referred to KW’s studio guest being extremely negative. When she said “I have to take on board & challenge some of the points your studio guest is raising”, Kirsty Wark cut her off again, saying “very briefly back to my guest here in the studio”, allowing Peter Morris the final say before bringing the interview to a close, with Jacqueline Foster seen -& ignored by Kirsty Wark- on screen in the background continuing to speak ,but her comments unheard by the viewers. This was very rude and yet again an example of how the BBC continues to misrepresent and mis-report anything Brexit, on this occasion by stifling argument to their preferred position. Last night’s imbalanced interviews were quite disgraceful and left me shaking with anger; it was so predictably one-sided. God knows how Jacqueline Foster must’ve felt at the way she was treated, constantly interrupted by the interviewer. She said during the interview that she was at a distinct disadvantage by not being in the studio where she would’ve been better situated to properly take issue with some of the negative & misleading comments coming from Kirsty Wark’s studio guest Peter Morris. There was some irony too in the previous night’s Newsnight programme with Kirsty Wark discussing with 2 studio guests the topic of the use of that word “elite”. But there were no references (surprise, surprise) to mounting accusations directed at the BBC for their contribution within the mainstream media of “liberal elite ” negative criticism of anything Brexit.
Totally false information in item on Open Skies agreement and other aviation agreements. MEP who specialised in this was trying to give the correct situation when she her microphone was blatantly switched off!
Kirsty Warks interview about the aviation situation in Europe was so rude and biased towards her videoed guest who had a wonderful optimism and simplistic transition solution especially being involved as an MEP. Kirsry clearly opted for the pessimistic and scaremongering view of her studio guest, shame on you
My complaint is about the bias of the News at Ten on the item on Food Hygiene and particularly the care of chickens. It was a scare-mongering one-sided story that has not even about to happen. It is not only the EU that can legislate on food hygiene, Britain did it for years before the EU was started and it had much higher standards than the European countries before the EU. It is ludicrous to suggest that we be accepting lower standards from either the USA or the EU. Ww certainly will not, the public will not allow it. Have you investigated the pork husbandry of the Dutch? The BBC constantly neglects to mention the enormous possible benefits to Britain of leaving the colossally expensive Common Agricultural Policy. We need more optimistic views from those who are looking forward to Brexit and less views from your reporters. You regularly sink to the lowest professional standards with the use of VOX POPs which are meaningless as they depend entirely on the editorial involvement. You seem to regard your audience with contempt. You use disagreement and disharmony to cause fear and bias. We are all going to live with the outcome of Brexit. The BBC News has a responsibility to help us understand the truthful situation and hear from those who really know their subjects from both sides at the same time. You have forgotten you are a public broadcasting organisation representing the people not your own prejudices.
News item ,farm animal show new forest area,cut to cow and reporter, then anti Brexit diatribe on animal welfare standards, cut to canned pictures of American chicken production stating, birds washed in chlorine etc So? no explanation as to health implications, just Brexit and you will get lousy chemical covered food. Great impartial reporting!
Yet again BBC news is interviewing people , in this case farmers, about what MIGHT!! happen after Brexit. Time and time again the BBC are biased against Brexit. For goodness sake stick to reporting the News. In case you are having trouble understanding the concept of news; it’s things that are happening now and things that have happened. Not bias speculation on what might happen!! Deeply annoyed with and mistrustful of the BBC
Just after 8:11 a.m. on Thursday 20 July, Radio 4’s Today programme played a clip where a female presenter (either Sarah Montague or Mishal Husain) had earlier interviewed the MP Liam Fox about his WTO negotiations. This Today presenter then asserted to Liam Fox, and to the millions of Today programme listeners: “Our prosperity depends on the EU”. This is anti-Brexit propaganda: some 56 % of Britains’ trade is with countries outside the EU with whom we have a balance of payments surplus, whilst we have a massive trade deficit with the EU. The BBC is supposed to be following Lord Reith’s policy of inform, educate and entertain, not attack Brexit!
Totally unbalanced quartet including Polly Toynbee ranting about Brexit seems typical of the BBC coverage shown overseas. It is such a shame that this once great broadcast institution has become such a shamelessly biased instrument. Surely it is not difficult to understand that once impartiality has gone, then the BBC credibility slips to garbage status like Chinese CCTV or any other propaganda channel. What a pity such a world famous brand is being let down so badly by its current personnel.
Another opportunity for the Brit Bashing Corp. to interview an ex-politician (Tony Blair) who has lost all credibility. The excuse this time, “Europe may compromise on free movement” !!! What planet is he living on? and why oh why does the BBC continue its outrageously biased reporting? Yesterday it was ex-SNP loosers Ahmed Sheik & Alex Salmond. Every politician east of Calais has said the four European freedoms are sacred. Every European politician has said we can’t choose which bits we want. It’s the EU who are forcing the hard Brexit theme. But Blair, Farron, Sturgeon et al are hell bent on forcing the Single market and customs union issues as if WE are choosing this path. All we want is OUT & if possible, a free trade deal. Everything else is up for discussion.
Sneering anti Brexit reports on “No plan for Brexit”. Even splicing g together sound bites to ridicule David Davies and Boris Johnson. I never hear balancing articles promoting the possible benefits and opportunities nor the negatives of staying in an unreformed EU. The presenter betrays a biased attitude.
Australian PM Malcolm Turnbull and Theresa May yesterday held a press conference at No.10 Downing Street. Mr Turnbull was very positive about a free trade deal with the UK and said he wanted to see one in place as soon as possible after Brexit. The tone of his speech was extremely positive. On the other hand, Laura Kuenssberg (yet again) decided to ignore that positivity and ask negative questions about unrelated subjects in an attempt to make Theresa May foolish. BBC News at 10am covered the news conference, yet strangely they cut the footage of Malcolm Turnbull being positive about our post-Brexit future, and instead changed the entire story to meet Laura Kuenssbergs own self-serving agenda of trying to make the PM look foolish. Even the BBC News site barely covered the positive aspect of the news conference, with the only footage being hidden away as a small story on the Politics sub-pages. It seems increasingly apparent that the BBC will do it’s utmost to put a negative spin on any Brexit story and make it headline news. Where it is unable to do so, it simply buries the story.
Justin Webb interviewed Guy Verhofstadt, the EU parliament’s representative to the Brexit negotiations. My complaint is that Mr Webb failed to adequately challenge Verhofstadt on the EU parliament’s opposition to the UK Government’s plans for securing EU citizen’s rights after Brexit. The EU wants EU citizens post-brexit to have exactly the same rights as they enjoy now which from a EU perspective is not controversial but needs to be challenged if the requests are unreasonable. The only challenge was when Mr Webb stated (accurately) that this would create a new class of citizenship guaranteed in perpetuity which is of course different from UK citizens whose rights and obligations can be changed with successive parliaments. When Mr Verhofstadt replied that this was not the case (and it most definitely is) Mr Webb simply dropped the point. The obvious point that Mr Webb could have made is that EU citizens currently enjoy some rights that even British citizens do not enjoy such as bringing in spouses from outside the EU without restriction. Why should this continue post-brexit? The other point which Mr Webb alluded to but did not expand on is that it is a fundamental part of our constitution that one parliament cannot bind another. Could he not have put to Verhofstadt that it is a bit much to ask the UK to change its constitution in order to safeguard EU citizens’ rights when the UK would never ask France, Belgium, Germany etc to do the same. Next he asked whether the EU would expect these rights to be overseen by the CJEU (the European Court of Justice) to which the reply was yes. Again there was no challenge to this. The obvious point is that post-brexit the CJEU will effectively be a foreign court to which the UK is not a signatory. The UK does not allow the US supreme court to govern the rights of US citizens in the UK or the Indian Supreme court to govern the rights of Indian nationals in the UK? To allow the CJEU to have this jurisdictional oversight would be unprecedented and not something that any sovereign nation could agree to. There is also no precedent (to my knowledge) of any other bi-lateral treaty with the EU coming under the jurisdiction of the CJEU for the simple reason that no other country would accept it (example: the latest EU trade deal with Canada.) The third reason is the patent unfairness of having the EU choose its own court to be the arbiter of EU and UK citizens’ rights post-brexit. None of this was put to Mr Verhofstadt. Let me be clear, these are NOT pro-brexit points – simply points relating to the legal and constitutional status of the UK vis a vis the EU post-brexit. The interview ended with an incredibly bland and non-substantive point from Mr Webb that the EU parliament would not have much power as this would be decided by the nation states – a point easily rebutted by Verhofstadt as he is the lead negotiator for the EU parliament and rightly stated that the parliament has a veto on the withdrawal treaty. If you listen to the interview again, it is clear that Mr Verhofstadt’s views are not challenged adequately and his most outrageous points (from a UK perspective, although perfectly understandable from a EU perspective) are treated with undue reverence (compare with Evan Davies asking David Jones “what planet are you living on” on Newsnight 28th June 2017.) One might reasonably ask what planet Mr Verhofstadt is living on if he thinks post-brexit that EU citizens should have … Read More
This is a continued and long standing complaint. The BBC will not mention that we have a constitution and in fact Nick Robinson on the Today programme repeated the Government lie that we do not have a written constitution. We do and it goes back to Magna Carta and developed over time. It was considered by the Americans so good that they virtually copied it when they wrote their own constitution. WHAT HAS THAT GOT TO DO WITH BREXIT? you may ask. Our constitution states that my and your sovereignty cannot be given away to another country unless we have been defeated in a war. This makes all our treaties with the EU unlawful. This was confirmed by Lord KIlmuir’s letter to Edward Heath. Lord Kilmuir was the top law officer in the land. This letter was hidden for thirty years and because the media are controlled will never be mentioned or discussed. Make no mistake dear reader we are not leaving the EU. Negotiating using the Lisbon treaty is a diversion to ensure we stay in. We should just walk away. The BBC is your enemy and controlled by the globalist forces who created the EU.
It’s hard to pin down bias specifics in comedy but it’s all pervasive in the direct and indirect comments made by the panel whenever reference is made to Brexit. One particular example was a comment made on 7:00 minutes when one of the panellists compares leaving the EU to a divorce when the leaving party does not retain or gain anything but is only the loser in the situation. This kind of comment is held in high regard and plays along with the narrative of, “we’re all in this together laughing at how foolish the Brexit vote is”. It’s so condescending! Have they forgotten that millions voted for Brexit? They’re not all fools!
The hourly news from 7 am through until 12 noon did not mention that the EU Parliament vote for Northern Ireland to be given special status was rejected. Yet at 12 noon BBC reported Michael Barnier’s comments that frictionless trade between Europe and the UK would be impossible after Brexit After that I got tired listening.
Katya Adler and Kamal Ahmed attempted a re-run of the Remain campaign and brexit polemic. No upside potential was suggested for leaving the EU, such as new world trade opportunities and making our own UK laws, which was certainly nothing like the impassioned pitch made by the programme, EU and UK extreme remain commentators. The rhetoric that was so squarely on the side of remaining in the EU missed an opportunity for a balanced view of both sides of the argument. There was an air of scaremongering and stark warnings of no “cake” on UK plates when we leave the EU, but plenty of “salt and vinegar”. However, in the UK only a fortunate few ever had cake and the majority only ever had salt and vinegar, the majority of which stand to lose little or nothing. Therefore, why was 17.4 million leave voters and potential TV license fee payers suffering this tendentious nonsense barely considered in this programme?
Evan Davis declared to David Jones MP, ‘Theresa May’s plan for Brexit’ was one ‘which clearly didn’t grab the population in the election’. “I don’t think it was that,” Jones politely responded, “I think frankly the big issues were other non-Brexit-related issues, most particularly the issue of social care but also one or two other issues too. But I think so far as Brexit is concerned, we are now in the position where 80 per cent of the electorate of this country voted for parties who want to take Britain out of the EU.” The arrogant, EU biased response: “Sorry, what planet are you on? Davis, obviously cannot retain a professional attitude when interviewing anyone who diasagrees with his Remainer motivation. Witness the rudery he utilised against Nigel Farage in his series of interviews during the 2015 election campaign, which was stunning in its unequivocal presentation of complete contempt.
The BBC reported on an audience Q/A with Janet Yellen , Head of the Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve in the USA. They headlined their interview as ‘Federal Reserve chair Janet Yellen urges soft Brexit’. However, Janet Yellen made no reference to soft or hard Brexit, no reference the single market, customs union or immigration. She simply referred to the deep ties between the UK and the EU and the transitional uncertainties which will casue some difficult decisions to be taken. The BBC wholly misappropriated Janet Yellens comments to attach some international credibility to the idea of soft Brexit. I emailed Janet Yellen who was kind enough to reply as follows: ” I answered a question from the audience following a conversationwith Lord Stern at the British academy. There is a video on BBC that you can watch to see exactly what I said. The headline was written by them, not me, and I never used the term “soft brexit”. Hope this helps.
Evan Davis agressively insisted in an interview with a Conservative that the popular Labour vote in the election was a vote against the Tory hard Brexit in favour of something ‘softer’ which voters anticipated under Labour. This, despite the two parties’ Brexit objectives being virtually the same. Evan referred to polling data to support this – well we all know about the polls. The Conservative interviewee contested this view, claimig that the Labour vote was becase of domestic issues, e.g. relating to social care. In fact the polls did show a marked shift in Labour’s favour following release of the Tory manifesto. Worst of all Evan lost his cool and told the interviewee ‘What planet are you living on?’ This was a wholly unbiased suggestion, revealing his disdain not only for Brexit but for Conservative Brexit plans.
Evan Davis interview with conservative MP David Jones, including which he exclaimed to th MP ‘what planet are you on’ Clearly showing his own views – he should resign!
BBC news website, main news article headlined: ‘British Attitudes Survey: More Britons ‘back higher taxes’ also in the subheading ‘peeople are also becoming more sceptical of the EU, and more socially liberal’. When you click to read the article the Brexit related info is buried towards the end, with a shocking statistic that ‘76% of people said the UK should leave the EU’. The BBC has been running relentless pro EU and Anti Brexit articles on its website for a sustained period of time, one would have thought that a statistic of ‘76% of people said the UK should leave the EU’ would have been the main headline – in the interests of balanced reporting, but as usual the BBC website editors like to use subtle techniques to bury pro Brexit news and promote pro remain views.
BBC Newsnight ran a report which appeared to ‘blame’ the brexit vote in part on a right wing-funded mass hypnotism plot.
This was on the BBC website and the intention seems to be to link Brexit with American right wing extremism in the mind of anyone who sees the headline. Ironically the broadcast was about how Cambridge Analytics allegedly used “psycho-graphics” to help Leave and Trump. The evidence for this is weak yet most people with little time will just remember the strapline. The BBC are themselves using psychographical techniques to link Brexit with extremism, subterfuge and charges that the referendum result might be invalid. No counter argument that the alt-left attempt to hijack the campaign for remain would EVER be made by the BBC. No argument has ever been aired that the remain voters did not know what they are voting for or that the EU (and not the UK) are playing politics with people’s lives over the residency negotiations. The whole thing is such a blatant disgrace it is beyond the pale.
Showing alleged German people here who feel second class citizens despite being told they can stay here.Plus Brits who live in Germany who claim not to like the brexit back home. Its constant anti Brexit tone every night on BBC
As always the ‘speakers’ were in the majority for the ‘remain’ argument and Dimbleby increasingly struggles to restrain his neo-liberal stance. The audience is dominated by left wing ‘boo-boys’ and the lack of people like Freddie Forsythe, Dr David Starkey, Norman Littlejohn Nigel Farage etc, is lamentable. Metropolitan, cloistered £150k + leftiy BBC apparatchiks who just use this platform as a Remainer propaganda conduit. God BBC take a look at yourselves!
It was like watching a party political broadcast from the ‘Stay in the EU party’ all hypothetical hystery and no facts or balance. Nigel Farage appeared for two 20 second comments and the rest was doom and gloom and dispear. The finale where the two reporters pleading with viewers to see sense as the credits rolled really reminded me of a party political broadcast. I think this level of bias shows how enboldened the BBC has become especially since the election. I believe there is a procedure where if a petition is started and it receives so many signatures parliament has to debate the matter. Maybe such a partition should be started to protect us from this propoganda machine?
Heavily biased towards negative implications of brexit with little to no coverage of any benefits. Mostly focuses around the south east.
The BBC seem to be distorting the offers made by the governent to EU nationals and creating their own news, where none existed before. This a general theme regarding many reports. I feel the BBC is demonstrating significant bias and should stick to reporting the news
Business sector – prospects appear good DESPITE BREXIT
As usual the BBC presenter takes a highly aggressive and rude stance, so obviously biased against Brexit and the government . Instead of polite questions the BBC now seems to revel in presenters speaking over the guests, interrupting them with rude and repetitive questions, personalised biased leading questions or rather statements, that show so clearly they are not impartial and time something was done . In last night’s program Andrea Ledson did well to keep calm and was not even allowed to ask the presenter why the broadcasters were not patriotic, which many feel they are not. The BBC appears to be impervious to any criticism and beyond the law. Its time for a change!
BBC now interrogate rather than interview, as shown in the Emily Maitlis interview with Andrea Leadsom this morning. They seem to have a clear agenda to undermine and belittle all Brexit discussions. Surely at this critical point for the country, they should be presenting solid support, to create a positive united country, to the rest of the EU, during the Brexit negotiations. Why also do BBC presents insist on talking over their invited guests. This is very disrespectful and forces their guests to have to do the same for their voices to be heard. Disgraceful BBC.
One year on: how many Brexit claims came true? This article features prominently in BBC News online alongside a picture of a Leave campaign bus featuring the slogan ‘We send the EU £350 million a week Let’s fund our NHS instead’ The article discredits this slogan and other statements made by the leave campaign. It only briefly examines the remain campaign’s forecast of economic doom but quickly backtracks saying the economy could well crash at a later date. We are subsequently provided with a large graph of the pound falling in value against the dollar but no mention of a soaring stock market or increased exports. Instead, the steady stream of ‘Remain’ sentiment continues.
BBC quote themselves on article on: Chagos legal status sent to international court by UN They said:- “Most EU countries abstained from the vote, which BBC diplomatic correspondent James Landale described as an “embarrassing diplomatic defeat” for the UK. He said it signalled that Britain’s diplomatic clout had waned after the vote for Brexit.”
Programme had an EU resident who was anti Brexit discussing protection for EU residents in Uk. Apart from being anti-May she was unable to string a sentence together or put forward a comprehensive argument/case It would appear as if they simply looked for somebody who was anti Brexit rather than someone who has genuine concerns.
All BBC news has omitted to report the latest immigration figures which show the highest number of immigrants to the UK ever. Surely this is news worthy of reporting unless you have an agenda which it doesn’t support?
One line on the announcement of the biggest population explosion in 70 years and no report whatsoever. Probably biggest single issue in the referendum and this news almost totally buried. Why not interviewing of people up and down the country as it affects our daily lives. Reports on shortage of foreign labour to man fruit picking farms but no mention of this huge increase and the social impacts caused. Disgusting but typical of the way the BBC is becoming increasingly politicised
The programme was biased towards pro immigration ideas with the presenter putting forward pro immigration quotes and ideas in a positive manner but any anti immigration ideas in a negative manner. The show was blatantly an extension of the presenters own ideas and beliefs. In this current climate there needs to be a balanced discussion, if the presenter is unwilling to do this than a second presenter should be used to bring balance to the conversation.
Angry tone and Raised volume plus aggressive negative reporting about brexit negotiations by Laura political reporter. This approach has been ongoing since the referendum and it is depressing that reporting is biased in this way and cannot be delivered as news using impartiality. It is highlighting doom and gloom unnecessarily instead of a positive accurate approach, hence this complaint of your reporters being allowed to show consistent negative opionated tones
Utterly flabbergasted to watch the BBC’s ‘Brexit Means Brexit’ programme. I voted Remain but this is appalling – incredibly biased, this non impartial reporting makes a mockery of the BBC. Just embarrassing to watch. Really saddened and ashamed of the BBC for broadcasting this.
On BBC1’s News at 1pm today, the presenter said (twice) that BoE governor Mark Carney said in his Mansion House speech that Brexit will “likely make people poorer”. Of course he did not. The copy of his speech* shows quite clearly that what he actually said was that, “Monetary policy cannot prevent the weaker real income growth likely to accompany the transition to new trading arrangements with the EU.” There are three parts to that statement which belies the BBC’s negative interpretation: ‘weaker real income growth’ merely means that in Carney’s opinion real income GROWTH will not be as great — not that real incomes will likely decline; second, Carney claims only that ‘monetary policy’ cannot influence that ‘weaker’ growth, thus not ruling out any other policies that may do so; finally, he mentions only the expected “trading arrangements with the EU” without balancing it against the new arrangemnets expected with the rest of the world. Unfortunately it is this kind of manipulation of comments made by government ministers or bank officials which the BBC is becoming increasingly adept at in its attempts to rubbish Brexit. Fake News abounds. *http://www.bankofengland.co.uk/publications/Documents/speeches/2017/speech983.pdf
Evan Davis clearly biased towards a, so called, soft brexit. Pushing a pro EU stance on Kier Starmer. Disgraceful.
I pay my license to listen to an impartial news and currant affairs radio station. No chance of that with you people, constantly reporting we did not know what we voted for, yes we did, OUT. All those lovely interviews with the super well off and famous stars telling us how this has divided us, what rubbish, it was a vote to leave the EU nothing more. I am also fed up with being called right-wing. I Am 57 years old and work self-employed for about £20,000 a year, mass immigration has kept my wages low, so it’s difficult, But of course it won’t affect BBC presenters so it’s easy for you to judge , up until now I have always voted labour, unlike the so called educated elite I can give many reasons why we can’t take in and look after many from all over the world,(Controlled fine)and I love the idea of freedom for the next generations to have their country back and not being told what we can and can’t do , Theresa May who even after the big giveaway by Corbin still won nearly 60 seats more than labour she is constantly being put down, I don’t know how she keeps going, if it not Brexit it something else. It borders on bullying. From your privilege position you should give a balanced view. You always give Tory and Brexit MPs a hard time but labour get away with awful policies and spending are money to gain votes. Tell us about Corbin and abbots past and keep rubbing it in like you would if it were Theresa May and co. Please look outside of your lovely little world and give her a chance. You won’t because you can’t get over democracy can you? All those thick racists out voted you, let me tell you they are just normal people with more common sense than you. Why not be confident in are great country? Move forward together (all) and support are people, both sides of the argument. Grow up you are supposed to be intelligent.
During Adrian Chiles program he had a discussion between Dan Hannan (Leave) & another (remain) about the forth coming Brexit discussions during which each of the two guests put their points across, then come the news bulletin after the programme you chose to only play an exert from another (remain) spouting his pessimistic outlook, why wasn’t there also a clip of Dan Hannan’s more positive outlook played?
We switched on to hear Jeremy Vine saying that the country just had no appetite for Brexit and we should just forget about it! He should be impartial but along with the rest of the BBC he is clearly just using his programme to spout his pro remain views and will not accept the democratic decision of the British people. The BBC are intent on whipping up hysteria to try to stop Brexit. There is no such thing as a hard or soft Brexit as the negotiations haven’t even started yet – again this is a tool used by the media to try a frighten people. The BBC is so intent on halting Brexit it is obsessed with Tory bashing at every opportunity to achieve it. I’ve always been a Vine fan but not any more. Needless to say we switched off!
Disgusted at how biased and left wing the BBC is in regards to Brexit. Jeremy Vine’s show has taken it to a new low today. I know the BBC doesn’t want Brexit to happen but it is required by law to be impartial. They want Theresa May to fail only ever reporting negative news on all programs and I believe by doing this they think it is more likely to secure a soft Brexit. A term made up after the referendum.
I listen to the news every morning at 8:00 am on Radio 4. The BBC just cannot get over the fact that the EU referendum went the “wrong way”. Is it a crime to be free once more? People are more willing to pay the price for independence than they realise. Currently we have less control over our laws than a developing country; thanks to the EU. They are wasting their time because BBC propaganda against Brexit will fail. If a team loses a football match 4-5, the game is still lost and one cannot ask for a rematch nor keep harping on about the four goals scored. Only Nick Robinson is fair and even remotely close to impartial out of that lot!
Laura Kuenssberg shouting across to the Prime Minister as she left to see the Queen “Is this strong and stable Prime Minister?” is quite simply rude and unnecessarily combative. Her questioning of the PM throughout the election campaign had been rude throughout and she seems to be forgetting that she is interviewing the Prime Minister of the United Kingdom and whether she agrees with her policies or not she should be respectful. I interview many senior business leaders in my job but I am never rude. It is neither clever nor productive. The BBC should replace Kuenssberg with someone who understands how to hold an interview such as Nick Mason or James Landale.
The continuing lack of impartial reporting from BBC News 24 BBC News 24 – too much spin and too few facts: What is distasteful over the current events of the weekend is that everyone appears to be on a band wagon indicating that the National reduction in Police Officers equates to the reason that the recent improvised terrorist attacks succeeded. The reality is the way in which these attacks occurred is hard if not impossible to predict – a person clearly bent on such action can simply decide to just pick a target and attack without warning. Fostering the idea that Teresa May is responsible is totally deplorable and inappropriate at this time. This is a serious problem and there is no one solution and above all no one person to blame, a fact that some people in power fail to see. We all need to work together not play a blame game which seems to be what the BBC presenters are generating. I have watched the BBC over BREXIT and on many occasions I have found them to be objectionable and biased – which decries their remit to provide factual and unbiased news – there appears to be a good deal of supposing going on. The BBC has a responsibility – their freedom to report on any subject is a privilege – personal preferences should not spill over into any reporting. I am saddened at the way they have behaved and the air time given to those that would divide us as a Nation over those who would seek to Unite us all.