A news item including children in Wales being questioned about their views on Brexit. Three were interviewed. After two offered their reasons for being against ‘leaving Brexit’, I awaited at least a third one to balance the item with a view reflecting the Welsh vote , if not the entire nation’s. But this is radio 4 . All three , aged 7-11, were against Brexit. As a remain voter, I see every attempt by BBC radio 4 to re-present the vote as an insult to democracy and, in this instance, an embarrassment. I don’t need to resort to presenting the uninformed views of children to reinforce an argument. I would add that I support Wales asking children and young people their opinions.
The World At One broadcast today a specific item introduced by statement along the lines of “The majority of over 18 year olds in Wales voted to leave the EU, but what do the children think?”. The article then broadcast the opinions of four 11-year olds, in succession, from a school in Wales. All 4 opinions were anti-Brexit. No pro-Brexit opinion was mentioned. Indeed, the interviewer asked if any other chid wanted to say something, but there was no response. I have to ask, what on Earth do the BBC think they are doing interviewing 11-year old children, in a school group environment, as part of a serious news programme?! Does the BBC not understand child psychology, or child peer pressure in a group environment? Does the BBC really think that 11-year olds are capable of expressing independent thought or opinions with no influence from parents or teachers? Did their parents approve of their children being broadcast? Were their parents and teachers pro- or ante-Brexit? – that would have been relevant. Such exploitation of children in furtherance of an anti-Brexit agenda is intolerable.
A report of a close vote in Thatcham to use historically public open land to build a new school was alluded to by the reporter to mirror the divisive UK vote for Brexit. Surely it was just an important vote in a small community which effectively impacted to similar effect to both sides or the problem and Brexit had no relevance in the vote. To me this was an example of an inexperienced reporter trying to be cutting edge and probably reflects Thee BBC Remain preference.
While listening to date line london every single member of this panel was pro eu. There was no balance whatsoever. I observed with my own eyes and ears that the bbc is biased. This is a disgrace, i dont pay my tv licence to listen to a remainer patronise every one. The bbc should be reminded that many people who are licence holders voted leave. Therefore your presenters should reflect this.
On the main page under the ‘Full Story’ section there is an editorial piece entitled ‘Have voters changed their minds on Brexit?’ yet hidden away in ‘World – Europe’ a story about the cronyism of the EU Commission – ‘Martin Selmayr: The man at the heart of a Brussels saga’. Clearly the BBC is still attempting to push their agenda. There is no need for the editorial piece and isn’t ‘news’ other than to sway public opinion that another referendum is needed / wanted.
An otherwise worthwhile programme, in picking its guests, displays a consistent bias against Brexit. With only a few rare exceptions, hardly any of the guests have anything positive to say on the subject, so any claim of balance is laughable. And as someone who lives outside the “London Media Bubble” I have to say that the contempt shown by the producers of this programme towards the rest of the viewing UK, is the reason the reputation of the BBC is so low. The blatant bias exemplified particularly by the last 2 shows, has now stopped me (and others) watching what was previously a commendable programme.
The very first politician interviewed by the BBC after Theresa May’s brexit speech? The well known remainer troublemaker Anna Soubry. No other politicians in favour were interviewed.. it’s bias bias bias all the way with the Brexit bashing BBC. Sick of paying my licence fee for it
Anna Soubry at least 3 times before 3pm on BBC today. The breakfast programme on Radio 4, the lunchtime politics, Afternoon Live. Every time I tried to hear the news, I was subjected to an anti-Brexit rant from this zealot, totally uncontradicted by a balanced view. And she’s on again on Question Time. Also, I am fed up with hearing anything from the discredited ex- PM Tony Blair. Every time he speaks the BBC gives him a lot of air time, usually unbalanced, and provides him with a platform for his views.
BBC world service prior to Prime Ministers EU statement Commentator and interviewee (BBC reporter) talking about Brexit 1) states Conservative party Is 50/50 Brexit/remain 2) gives huge credibility to 2 format Prime Minister Major and Blair who are diametrically opposed to Brexit 3) dismissed Brexiteers as a disparate group of people ( only 17.4 million of us) 4)mentioned that other people in the world regard Brexit as crazy (the current US administration doesn’t) 5) stated people didn’t understand what they were voting for – Cameron/Osborne and Gove/Johnson said we would leave the customs union and single market- everyone knew what they were voting for
Interview with Rachel Reeves MP regarding damage to the UK car industry if there is no deal and the U.K. leaves on WTO terms. Ms. Reeves spent a lot of time listing all the perceived damage to the U.K. car manufacturers , including the loss of thousands of U.K. jobs. Her prophesies were treated as fact and there was no one present to describe the far greater damage to EU manufacturers from trading on WTO tariffs. This interview confirmed my suspicion of BBC bias in favour of remainers and a little research has uncovered reports of many similar imbalances. The BBC needs to produce a series of reports, describing the EU, how it works, where the main EU institutions are situated, which countries benefit most from their membership, trade flows between member countries, etc. More facts please and less bias.
Headline “Rising number of EU nationals leaving the UK”. This headline and it’s subtitle were delibetratly misleading and alarmist. Once you open the article and read in deatail, you see there are more EU nationals migrating to the UK than leaving (90,000). The headline presents a bias, by picking one part of the statistic that favours their position on Brexit.
An interview with John Major, yet again pushing for a new referendum, no alternative view was put forward and he was barely challenged on his anti democratic views. The minority leave voters were apparently not being heard, according to Sir John, and needed to have him championing their grievances, give us some balance please!
Anti Brexit John Major was interviewed 3 times interspersed with other remainers only few second interview time for ian Duncan Smith. This must surely be the most anti brexit bias the BBC has taken, How can the BBC be brought to book Just now watching (6.42pm)North West tonight saying despite Brexit Bentley is increasing sales. The despite brexit line is used all the time by the BBC when reporting good news about manufacturing
The lady interviewer of Boris Johnson was clearly biased in favour of staying in the EU. She was recounting Labour’s latest revision of its position as if it were the answer to all outstanding issues in negotiations with the EU (which it is not), without any acceptance that remaining in the Customs Union would limit our freedom to negotiate trade deals for ourselves. Mr Johnson’s attempt to point out with facts that our growth rates in trade with countries outside the EU are and have been growing faster than our trade within the EU were drowned out by her continuously speaking over him and stating what were obviously her strongly held personal views in favour of remaining in the Customs Union.
On the news report, they reported that the former senior Civil Servant Sir Martin Donnelly at International Trade had criticised plans to leave the Single Market and Customs Union. 60% of UK trade was either with the EU or with countries which have agreements with the EU, replacing that with Bi-lateral trade deals was “like replacing a 3-course meal with a packet of crisps”. Totally unbalanced comment, no counter arguments or explanations.
Sir Keir Starmer given a free and gentle ride by Marr, whilst announcing that Labour have finally come off their fence and are now going to defy the people and stay in the customs union. Ian Duncan Smith was savaged and constantly spoken over, not allowed to finish and interrupted constantly.
Half of the program dedicated to anti brexit comedy sketches. Request for viewers to share satirical brexit video on social media.
Question time week after week have more remainders on the panel and audience. It is not a fair representation of the public or of the Brexit panellers. It is as though the left reporting on the News and Question time knows no bounds as to how they can stop Brexit. Tonight’s panel, four remains and a Theresa Villiers Brexit, plus Dimbelby a remainer. How is that not unbiased. Stop the BBC getting taxpayers money, it mocks us
Continued bias against Brexit. Day in and day out. Looking in any nook or cranny to find a scrap of bad news for Brexit. Even found eventually a drop in numbers of Europeans coming to work in the U.K. as a sign that Brexit is a bad move. Disgusting continued propaganda against the group vernment and doing all they can to promote leftist labour. What is it about the BBC and the Film & Theatre industry that they hate all that the government is doing for the people of Great Britain? Have just st decided that will not watch or listen to another programme on BBC as my protest to the so called free BBC.
Clearly showing only possible negative outcomes as a result of Brexit..It implys that there is very little to view in a positive light regarding Brexit.The whole programme seems to promote a scaremongering mentality, implying nothing good can come of brexit,as if we are on an unstoppable downward spiral.and indeed has a very disruptive and divisive feel as if anyone who has a glimmer of insight would wish to remain. Usual bbc promotion.British Brainwashing Corporation.What a pity the Brexit voters don’t withold their licence fee, I’m sure Europe would pay the shortfall?
Under the terms of its Charter, the BBC has a duty to be impartial in reporting on all matters, be they social, economic, political, or other topics. By implication this duty should extend to representing the views of all UK citizens, including those held by the 17.4 million people who voted to leave the EU. The most blatant offender breaching this duty whenever the opportunity arises is Nick Robinson, co-presenter on the BBC 4 ‘Today’ programme. This morning Robinson took BBC pro-EU bias to a new level when interviewing a range of no doubt carefully selected individuals, among whom were officials in Calais, a representative of carmaker Citroen / Peugeot and a former French ambassador to the UK. During each interview Robinson posed leading questions clearly designed to elicit the most dire and catastrophic predictions of what lies ahead for the UK once we leave the EU e.g. we will become a third world country, there will be colossal logjams at Channel ports, French car imports to UK will plummet, and so on. What the BBC has so far failed to report is the positive news emerging yesterday in an exclusive report in Business Insider about a change of tack in the EU negotiating position whereby the European Parliament is to call for Britain to have ‘privileged’ single market access after Brexit. http://uk.businessinsider.com/european-parliament-brexit-resolution-association-agreement-single-market-2018-2 Could it be that the BBC takes such a negative view of Brexit because of a hidden agenda aimed at securing further EU grants over and above the £3million awarded a few years ago, which was ostensibly to fund the costs of unspecified research and development projects?
The program was predominantly reported From France and was completely biased towards remaining, telling us all the horrors, job losses, etc. that face us if we don’t change our minds. There was no balance or discussion of the gains from trading outside the EU or from controlling our own destiny.
The BBC are claiming there are no customs checks at Dover and Calais at the moment – this is not true, cars are checks, passports are checked, vans and trucks are scanned and paperwork checked. Secondly the statement that there will be continuous 19 mile queues of trucks at Calais is clearly rubbish – if the queue is the same length all the time then trucks are being handled at the same speed they arrive – QED there is no need for the queue to exist (apart from French bolshy behaviour)
Once more Question Time continuously invites “Remain” speakers v “Brexiteers” on a ratio of 2 or 3 to one, even 4 if you include Dimbleby. Newsnight with Evan Davis, a rabid Farage hater, is another example of bias. All my long life the Beeb was balanced on Political coverage. Now it opines openly against Brexit and Sopel’s predjudice on the News Channels about Trump are sad. His sneering embitterments at being banned from the White House, broadcast now in front of the railings aren’t worth watching, buy the Guardian instead. From Ian Hislop to Jo Cockburn this band of metro do-gooders are so predictable it’s nauseous to endure.
A broadcast of Teresa May arguing for the need and benefits of continued close co-operation between the UK and the EU on security matters was stopped just as Mrs May was making some very strong points that no pro-EU advocates could effectively counter. The coverage clumsily interupted May’s excellent presentation only to go to a weather forecast item that even appeared to catch the program’s presenters off guard. The BBC’s anti-brexit bias is undeniable and should end public funding of the organisation, if not its very existance.
Started with just naked abuse of Boris. Couple of actual attempts at humour during the news section (joke about Nordic names and sporting terms during the Winter Olympics), and then reverted to full on unapologetic Brexit bashing with absolutely no pretence at balance. No apparent attempt at humour. Then a full session of naked abuse of Jacob Rees-Mogg, before another full on attack on everything Brexit with no apology, wit, humour or balance. Shameless and shameful.
Throughout the day, the BBC Radio 2 news has provided a cursory report of Boris Johnson’s Brexit speech followed by extensive comments from numerous remain supporters dismissing the speech and Boris Johnson, then followed this article with a triumphant announcement of the Eurozone economy powering ahead, even though growth in the last quarter actually fell back.
Pro European remainer bias. No counter argument or positive viewpoint for leave put forward.
Four guests and one presenter/chairman. All clearly pro EU with many “jokes” (most insults) in favour of the EU, many also using false premises to make said jokes.
Just logged onto the BBC Business page. I have found this:- Inflation is expected to have eased at the start of the year, giving consumers a further reprieve from the Brexit-induced jump in the cost of living. On what grounds can they make this claim ? there are numerous reasons why inflation goes up and down I.E price of Crude oil, consumer spending, Currency fluctuations etc etc. So again bias none balanced statements of ‘facts’ come out of this pathetic excuse for a news broadcastor. Brussels Broadcasting Corporation !
Significant time, and at least 4 bashes at BREXIT/BREXIT supporters with no balance despite the fact that George Soros, “The man who broke the Bank of England” has just given £400,000 to the remain campaign. He is a Hungarian American who made at least $1 Billion dollars at the expense of the UK government in 1992. What is his motivation this time. He can obviously see a quick buck to be made. There was no mention of this, yet this is a significant potential threat to UK democracy. This is not the first time this program has shown extensive bias. I can only think of one occasion when they have poked fun at the Remain campaigners, yet they are constantly bashing BREXIT. It’s outrageous the BBC allow this level of bias. Where is the balance i their BREXIT coverage? I’m not seeing it.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/av/uk-42909466/the-activists-who-are-still-fighting-brexit Content like this really makes me feel as though the BBC should no longer be publicly funded. Its very clear that they will not be producing a second video highlighting those who are upholding democracy and the will of the people, fighting for the Brexit that the majority of the UK voted for. There is a constant barrage, aimed at both the young and old, who’s sole purpose appears to be nothing more then trying to convince people to change their mind and stay in the UK. I always knew that the BBC was somewhat biased, but ever since the Brexit vote, its downright appalling how bad they have gotten.
Reports of Michelle Barnier’s comments about the extraction of the UK from the Customs Union, only state what Mr Barnier said; “Trade Barriers will be unavoidable outside the Customs Union”. There has been no ANALYSIS of this, implying that this will adversely affect only the UK. In reality, it will also adversely affect the richer countries in Europe – France, Germany, Spain etc. who export significant amounts to the UK. The BBC are very keen to analyze to death, any statements supporting BREXIT, putting a Pro-remain counter. Not so when the situation is reversed.
BBC bias against Brexit. The reporter consistently talked about the detrimental effect on Europol caused by the UK leaving the EU, despite comments to the contrary by Nick Hurd thePolicing Minister. It was only right at the last that the reporter grudgingly admitted that a ‘special deal’ may be possible. All in all, the article said nothing because no government will downgrade its security committments-it was just another dig at Brexit.
Kamal Ahmed saying the “EU is our biggest trading partner and the US is the second largest trading NATION”…….the EU is, as we know, not one nation. Very misleading information
This prog (apartf from openly racist content) contained a gag …‘…calling leave voters racist is harsh, but there again so is being told to piss off back to where you came from’. Not so bad in isolation, but in the same programme ‘tez’ states, ‘I am turning in to what a hate – a white person’… Evidently the controller considered that depicting Brexit voters as racists was ok, as was an open hate comment against white people. I wonder if the same comment had been made by a white comedian about hating Muslims, this would have been considered appropriate. Possible this statement was in fact criminal.
Anti brexit Jim O’Neil sympathetically interviewed followed by a pro brexit advisor to Boris Johnson who had to argue his case with an anti-brexit female economist, origin unknown.
Bulletin featured two reports, one concerning the racist comments made by the girlfriend of UKIP leader Henry Bolton, the other concerning the death of Cranberries lead singer, Dolores O’Riordan. Neither story concerned Brexit or the EU but both featured VTs in which several EU flags were prominent in the background. A typical example of BBC ‘dog-whistle’ anti-Brexit propaganda.
Every edition of QT includes questions on Brexit. However the panel always comprises of two panelists supporting Brexit and three Remainers. How can there be a balanced discussion when the panel is always so unbalanced?
There was a scene in the launderette between Karen Taylor and Masood Ahmed fighting over a job. It eventually results in a tirade by Karen shouting “Roll on brexit!” and the usual “taking our jobs” and “go back to where you came from” slurs to Masood despite him being born in the UK. It was clearly stereotyping leave voters as thick, unemployed, racists, uneducated, lower class etc etc, all the usual rubbish. To think we’re forced to choose between paying for this propaganda regardless of which broadcaster we watch or having their goons turn up at your property unwanted and demanding access with a policeman on each shoulder. It’s basically corporate thuggery.
I have complained before (many times!) and have mostly stopped watching the BBC News but yesterday succumbed and it was same old same old!! Negative comments about President Trump and negative comments about Brexit. Recently I have been appalled at the reporting concerning the recent book which was published about the President which contained unverified gossip which the BBC gleefully quoted ad infinitum. It seems everybody I speak to feels the same. ( I could go on!)
As sent to Radio 4 Today complaints: Norman Smith and the BBC’s editorial team show themselves to be either badly informed or to be trying to mislead their audience on issues related to the UK’s departure from the EU. This morning’s Today report from Norman Smith presented, without any scrutiny, that the EU’s members are unified in their position on a potential trade deal with the UK and that services would not be included in their negotiating position. Among others, Ireland and Hungary recently called for a UK-EU deal that doesn’t restrict trade in goods and services, in the past few weeks an Italian minister for economy has also called for a Canada plus-plus-plus deal, which is what the UK government want. Although it is obvious that the BBC’s editorial position is to prevent the UK’s departure from the EU it has a duty to report impartially, which it consistently fails to do.
Misinformation about UK-EU trade un-challeneged by presenters and uncorrected after request to correct: Jane Foley, of Rabo Bank, a regular commentator on 5 Live & Radio 4, stated that most UK trade goes to the EU: this is not correct, a maximum of 44% of UK trade is attributed to EU destinations. Of this 44% a significant proportion, while initially going to EU ports such as Rotterdam, is actually in transit and destined for non-EU countries, so is not trade with the EU. I texted requesting a correction which was ignored, thus perpetuating the exaggeration of economic benefit from EU trade as part of the Remain strategy. The apiece was in response to the very good news that UK manufacturing and exports are at the highest level in 10 years. The commentator appeared reluctant to acknowledge how good this news is, and seemed to be trying to use the figures to support the Remain proposition that the UK is dependent on the EU for trade. The BBC should correct such blatantly incorrect misinformation, it chooses not to because of its own very obvious Remain bias.
BBC international news service Sally Bundoch repeatedly 8th & 9th [Thailand dates] broadcasts India was UK PM May’s “first visit outside the European Union since Brexit” [strange & false] and failed to report on UK PM May’s September 2016 ‘secret’ US meeting with Rupert Murdoch. The BBC did report on PM May’s 2016 New York US UN speech. The BBC evaded the issues & Ofcom but CEO Sharon White claims administrative errors [incompetence, maladministration, corruption] in correspondence posted to https://rjrbtsrupertsfirstnewspaper.wordpress.com/2017/12/29/bbc-fake-news-2016-complaint-update-more-lies-ofcom-apologizes-for-its-incompetence-maladministration/ The BBC & sally Bundock remain silent.
Coverage regarding withdrawing from the Customs Union. As part of the story the BBC brought in an expert who talked about the advantages of the Customs Union. The Economic Editor, Kamal Ahmed, then explained what the customs union is and its advantages. However, it was a story half told. There was no attempt to explain why leaving the Customs Union might also be advantageous, leaving the impression that exiting the Customs Union is wholly a bad thing. We need to see some more balanced coverage on the whole EU debate.
Reporting drop in diesel car sales are part of Brexit uncertainty! Maybe the fact that diesel car owners are about to be taxed to death may be a more accurate reason?
Discredited ‘Teflon’ Tony Blair was yet again given some 17 minutes of primetime radio to spout off incoherently in his characteristically shrill voice when trying to explain why he was committed to overturning the EU referendum result. According to polling organisation You Gov, Blair has a public approval rating of minus 50 yet he still maintains he is right despite 17.4 million citizens, many of whom were Labour supporters, voting to leave the EU. Would he campaign so vigorously against a General Election result if voters came up with the ‘wrong’ answer? It beggars belief that the BBC gives such an antidemocratic has-been so much airtime but well done to John Humphrys for giving him a hard time – an extremely rare event among BBC presenters.
The hate of Nigel Farage expressed by David Tenant and the pontificating attitude of the BBC in general was and is obvious in most programmes. Whilst I accept the “celebs” have views they all have a PC background I guess promoted in the circles they have to be in to get work, these views are divorced from the people I work and relax with it appears the 4-5 Million votes for UKIP are being ridiculed and effectively being “no platformed” All the talk is of not promoting hate and yet hear it is in prime time TV with no balance.
The panellist of the day consists of 3 eminent remainers and one credible leaver and one comedian. Except for Isabel Oakshott,, no one really spoke much about leaving the EU. The chair person, David Dimbleby quite happily promoted reaminers view and especially prompting Mr.Winston to say if Brexit may not actually happen. Whatever BBC may like to say to justify their impartiality stance, we are not fooled. A balanced debate is pre-requisite of democracy. In fact the programme relied upon one brave audience to put constructive and factual case for UK to leave EU. BCC should be brought to books for failing to remain impartial. I have lodged a similar complaint in September this year and usual response received full of hot air and zero substance
I never realised how generally pro-EU the BBC is until I heard on Radio 4 news 9.00am 19th June 2017 the announcement that ‘Michel Barnier will start Brexit negotiations today with his British counterpart David Davis…’. The BBC is 100% funded by British tax payers and despite this the Radio 4 News Department chooses to the lead item from the European rather than the British perspective!!
Almost every day Jeremy Vine uses the subject of the day to reopen the discussion of the possibility of reversing Brexit. His daily bias is so unashamedly transparent it is laughable. I often have to change channels.. He gives unfair advantage to those speaking against Brexit and repeatedly guides the general inferance that people who voted for Brexit were stupid & didnt know what they were doing. Jeremy would be surprised how many Academics, Landowners, business owners, young professionals, farmers, Lawyers, even financial services people here in the North voted to leave Europe and knew exactly why and what the immediate and long term consequences would be and will be. This was a democratic decision by the largest electoral turnout in history and Jeremy Vine and the wider BBC need to accept it or I am afraid your days as an independent and impartial broadcaster are over. NOBODY in this country wants a State TV service like in North Korea and the BBC is fast becoming such. The BBC used to be impartial..But no more, and everybody knows it. It is a big shame because the technical quality of the service is second to none.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-42330511 A typically anti brexit passive aggressive BBC article. Brits remain Europe’s biggest buyers of touring caravans and the UK market is second only to the US. John Lally, head of the industry body, the NCC, attributes this rise in sales to a change in holiday behaviour. The slide in the value of the pound since the EU referendum has made that decision easier for many, he adds: “Regardless of Brexit… people still want to go on holiday, ‘staycations’ are becoming more popular.”
Caught this programme on ‘Catch Up.’ Disgusting anti-Farage insult left the left wing audience whooping for joy and Paul Merton nodding in approval. Appalling line ending with something being inserted into Farage’s anus. The show’s female presenter, Mel Giedrylc was heard to say about someone else, ‘but they are all right wing’…whoops what a give away Madam. Comes on the back of a similar whooping and approval from Hislop and Merton in the week UKIP’s Paul Nutall resigned as leader. This programme has seriously lost its way. It used to be an impartial satire show but has morphed into a pro-EU anti Brexit propaganda platform. Who the script writers are I have no idea.
Whenever the BBC refers to a no deal Brexit it is always ‘crashing out’ of the EU. There is no such thing as crashing. We will exit to trade comfortably on WTO rules, as do 85% of the countries in the World. Crashing is emotional and meant to instil fear. When one crashes one is injured. There will be no injury if we trade on WTO rules. I have been running a business which exports over a £1.0 million in services a year for 30 years. I have always refused to bid for EU work as I find it bureaucratic and biased in favour of the big corporations. Post Brexit I will still continue to trade successfully deal or no deal. Furthermore the BBC reporters appear not to know the difference between the ‘Single’ market(i.e. the regulated EU market) and the European market, which is the market for goods and services in Europe, from which we can never be excluded! Biased or ignorant, I am not sure which.
Four panel members and a host – all anti-Brexit, making snide comments about anyone pro-Brexit. The programme isn’t funny any more – it’s just out of touch and almost every week, espouses left wing liberal pro EU views.
Report on latest Brexit negotiations. Interviewed just 2 people, one a pro remainer Labour (by their own admission). He pushed for extremely soft Brexit, eg within the Single Market and the other a self declared spokesman for the ‘the 3 million’ EU citizens in the UK, who still moaned that despite being given special superior status to other UK citizens he and others would have to apply for UK citizenship within 8 years. Representing the other 52% of voters. Zero people.
Once again the pro-brexit campaigner was out numbered 3 to 1 by panel members, without Dimbleby’s thinly veiled opposition to anything suggesting leaving the EU. Together with a Karnal Ahmed and Nick Watts in other places, these days the BBC is so unobjective that it’s become boring. The Daily Politics (Jo Cockburn see above), Newsnight (Evan Davis) or The Marr programme which is really a ‘remainer’ political broadcast with the namesake embarrassingly complete Brussels advocate. David Dimbleby’s insistence that the audience is ‘selected’ to avoid bias is simply axiomatically disproportionate to view. Doesn’t anyone in the BBC actually watch what happens objectively any more. I’m 72 years of age and was (up till the Referendum) an avid lifetime follower of the Beeb’s current affairs programmes including ‘Today’ and Jonathen Dimbleby’s Radio 4 audio alternate to his brother’s visual presentation. My life now has something missing, trust and a real feeling of dispossession …
Reporting from Grimsby, a BBC correspondent twice talked of ‘mitigating the effects of Brexit’. Now you don’t mitigate against something good, do you. A tiny sign, but a sure one, of institutional bias.
Not for the first time (by any means) I am amazed that the producers of “Question Time! managed to concoct a largely pro -“Remain” panel and audience in a place such as Scarborough – where the EU referendum vote was 62% in favour of “Leave”! Even David Dimbleby remarked on the imbalance at one point in the programme. I further recall only a few weeks ago when on another episode of QT, MP Jacob Rees-Mogg also criticised the producers for similar blatant pro-“Remain” bias. this bias is so widespread throughout the BBC that it would be a national joke if only it were not so serious. This is not just some widely held perception – it is a disgraceful fact. Can I have a discount on my TV Licence fee please?
I am sick and tired of the BBC bias over Brexit and the USA president Donald Trump, daily and I mean daily news is focused on negative stories on Brexit and Trump, last nights PM that Trump is a women molester, extended interview played at length on the programme, never heard anything like it before on the BBC, totally biased reporting, added to the permanent anti Brexit stories, I haven’t heard anything positive re Brexit or Trump, there must be positives why aren’t we hearing that from our state broadcaster who are becoming a Russia Today!
Unbalanced news reports on Brexit always have time to show one side of the argument ie pro European union the sky will be falling in. Feeding the negative again!
In reporting the problems with EU Anglo/Irish negotiations the bulletin referred to Theresa May “scrambling” to get an agreement before the deadline. Various other less perjorative words could have been chosen, striving; fighting; working; trying; attempting; determined etc. The word scrambling implies desperation, lack of focus, incompetency, panic all of which may or may not be true but it is not objective reporting and the word is emotive and frankly judgemental and not impartial.
This week relentless one sided satire – it is so sad. Not so much comedy as campaigning. A bit of balance – we know you can’t work in the BBC if you voted conservative or Brexit but it’s customary to make jokes at everyone. So bloody sad.
It is disgraceful of the BBC to feature regular interviews with the discredited former Prime Minister Tony Blair ever since he left office and mainstream politics. As usual Blair spouted sanctimonious drivel in his trademark messianic voice on subjects such as the urgent need for the UK to develop ‘progressive’ (aka lefty) policies for this, that and the other. Prompted by Shaun Ley, the interview inevitably moved onto Brexit whereupon Blair stated categorically that he and his institute, the so-called Tony Blair Institute for Global Change, were going to do everything in their power to reverse Brexit. Ley made few attempts to interrogate these views and left the arrogant Blair to drone on, uninterrupted, for several minutes. Can anyone, apart from the BBC, give credence to a man who ‘misled’ Parliament and along with his ‘best buddy’ George W Bush took the UK into what many believe was an illegal war in Iraq, and is now trying his hardest to thwart democracy? Shame on you BBC: how can you give airtime to a yesterday’s man who clearly hasn’t got a clue about the meaning of the word democracy?
Two of the guests who were giving comments on the Sunday Papers were Ayesha Hazarike and Nigel Farage. Ayesha Hazarike continually interrupted and spoke over Nigel Farage during the time he was trying to make his comments, at Andrew Marr’s request, on Brexit and other subjects in the papers. My complaint is that Andrew Marr did nothing to prevent this but allowed these continuing and infuriating interruptions to continue which meant we could not hear what Nigel Farage was trying to say and probably prevented his saying more. Would the BBC please prevent this sort of thing happening in the future by getting Andrew Marr to act as a proper Chairman of the programme. I would add that Andrew Marr is quick enough to interrupt the talk of Brexiteers but not that of Remainers or left-wing speakers which once again shows the BBC’s anti-Brexit bias.
Item doing vox-pops etc. with people in The Irish Republic: every voice opposed Brexit and the reporter did not question this.
Irish Border : Republic and N Ireland. Very old footage of the border was shown during the time of the troubles. A military watch tower loomed in the background. The while tenure and tone was of if NO agreement is reached then it is a step back to the bad old days. In fact there have been no commercial customs in place since 1922 and the Government has stated continually they do not want any physical infrastructure in place at the Irish border. No one does. It’s not in anyone’s interests. As someone who has lived in 5 European countries and worked extensively in Europe over 20 years I’ve seen the EU close up. Consequently I have a very good first hand insight to the EU. Europe is a wonderful place. The EU is not.
Sent to the BBC: Yet again your participants were confusing the political project of the EU with a geographical area known as ‘Europe’. That we have chosen to leave the political project, of ‘ever closer union’, does not mean that we are detaching ourselves from the geographical area in which we are placed. You are aware of this, so why, like the politicians, are you deliberately deluding your viewers? And why the angst over the sentience of animals? The EU Withdrawal Bill is not the place to cover this issue. Furthermore the Bristish have, and always will, be far more concerned for the well being of animals than our continental neighbours. Take the export of live animals for example. The British ruled that this practice was illegal, only to have the ruling overturned by the EU Court. Once freed from the EU and ECJ Britain will, once more, be able to make its own rules – and abide by them.
When discussing the EU yet again the Daily Politics, hosted by Jo Coburn, had an over abundance of Remainers – in the form of a Guardian correspondent, a ‘musician’ and Coburn herself – against the one Brexiteer, Melanie Phillips. When will this heavily biased presentation ever end?
Unbelievable even by her own poor standards: the supposed commentary started with “suppose she had not got the cabinet to agree” – and then continues with the usual one-sided criticism, based on no facts at all. A final flourish is a P.S. saying ministers are tight lipped (I.e there is no information), but watch this space. BBC Political journalism at its very worst – again.
BBC Radio 4. Used to be a fan of the show but Hugh Denis along with the majority of BBC TV Panel ‘comedy’ shows, are completely biased towards Brexit. They still cannot accept the result and after six months plus I am finally fed up of the whole process being completely undermined by these so called comedians… How can the public have any confidence when they continually talk everything down (you say things enough times and people start to believe it)…. to the point of pretending not to be biased. We know London voted remain… and doesn’t it just show via the London based BBC….
Laura Kuenssberg report left me aghast at the level of bias in her report. There was a clip of the PM walking into parliament. He commented that the PM had to avoid being hit by the speakers mace. There was then a clip of some Remain protesters outside the Houses of Parliament, followed by a long interview with Anna Surbry (extreme pro remain) followed by a negative comment on the Brexit process. Where was the balance.
Yet more anti-Brexit comments as well as continuing attempts to bring down the Government. The BBC and its employees seem hell-bent on bringing-down the current Government with niggling comments ands hi-jacking of interviews with MPs.
The BBC repeatedly state the that if the UK leave the EU without a deal, then we’re “Crashing out” which is clearly designed to communicate a negative result. In fact, not even “an expert” can possibly know if that would be a Positive or a Negative in the Short or Long term. The term is clear BBC bias.
We are in our 70s and until a few years ago were staunch supporters of the BBC and its “British” values of fairness, honesty and patriotism, not any more. It seems to us that the BBC has become a pseudo political party in its own right currently engaged in not only outrageous political bias but almost an anti establishment crusade. The announcement by David Davis 13/11/2017 has again brought to our screens the bitter caustic and twisted reporting from Laura Kuenssberg and the inevitable wheeling out of Anna Soubry and Ken Clarke for extended biased interview coverage. Where is the impartiality, where is the balance, where is the opposing view ?? We now switch over to ITV and Aljazeera for a more balanced view and to find out what is happening in the rest of the world not just the ‘Brexit bubble’. There HAS to be something that can be done as we strongly object to funding this political party through our license fee. The answer – Axe the BBC News division from the rest of the corporation and let it become self funding.
Long interview with arch remoaner Anna soubrey – no brexiter being asked to offer alternative comments. The interviewer did not challenge her statements when a clean break with the eu is what us leavers voted for. It seemed the interviewer was almost agreeing with her.
Repeated reference to Britain “CRASHING” out of the EU by both the main newsreader and Laura Kuenssberg. This implies that leaving the Union without a deal because of the intransigence of EU’s negotiators would be disastrous – hardly impartial reporting. #crash and burn….
Congratulations to Andrew Marr on his Sunday 12th November show and his James Dyson interview. However Dyson’s comments go completely unreported on other BBC news and internet BBC news. Dyson suggested UK should walk away from extortionate EU money demands.
45 second opinion piece in the middle of an opera programme by the presenter saying how brexit would have made his career impossible followed by ‘ode to joy’. Vomit.
The guest remainer said blatantly that there has to be another referendum because leavers only voted because of immigration. I voted to leave because I am sick of being told what to do by the Green Party because of European proportional representation they have power and they have inflicted their stupidity on Britain year after year
When the BBC news offers an opinion on Brexit it needs to cover both sides of the story rather than their typical any Brexit rants.The BBC is still too focused on the negatives of Brixit. Poor journalism, fake new BBC, very disappointed.
Your report on progress of negotiations for brexit was not balanced and highly biased. It concentrated on the negatives if agreement was not reached and how bad it would be for U.K. exports. No mention was made of the equally deterimental effect it would have on EU exports to the UK. Again it was followed by a comment from a spokesperson that the transfer of statutes could be reversed. It seems at times from your reporting that it is one way street and that the EU have no vested interest in selling to the almost 70million people in the U.K. Can we please have a balanced view in the future highlighting both positives and negatives for both sides.
The female interviewer was heard to say ‘over 50% of the population’ voted to leave Europe. This is untrue. About 17 million people voted to leave out of a population of over 65million. About 37% of the people registered to vote actually voted to leave Europe. On this point they were perpetrating some untrue propaganda put forward by the organisations who support Leave.
The country voted 52% in favour of brexit, the BBC questiontime should at least 50% of the time have a brexit majority panel, however not once has the program had a majority brexit panel. 18 months of majority remain panels. BBC should be repremanded and forced to redress this bias and imbalance
Almost resigned to the constant inference that anyone of the majority who voted to quit the EU is educationally stunted and racist but on this occassion my complaint is in response to a rant by a guest comedian against the wearing of British Legion Poppies. The claim was that the appeal has been hijacked by extreme nationalists with highly selective voicing of illiterate twitter ‘quotes’ to justify telling us to stick our Poppies somewhere unpleasant. Outrageous.
Yet again, the headline news is quoting that 75000 city jobs will be lost and stating that this fact came from the Bank of England. In fact it seems that this figure was invented by a consultant in a report to a lobby group in Oct 2016 and is old news, even if it was news then. This is another example of the doom laden bias repeatedly trotted out by our public funded TV station. Surely the days of the BBC being funded by the public must be ended.
The article about the impact of Brexit on dairy farming last night allowed some farmers to give the impression that trade with China would be much easier after Brexit – that the Chinese say it is much easier to deal with one country than twenty seven. Farmers were seen ‘benefiting’ from this new freedom. There was no corrective to this impression – the obvious points being that nothing prevents one country (e.g. the UK) or even one company from trading with China. The complications are in negotiating the underlying treaties with all countries. And, on the evidence, this dairy farmers/ cooperatives/ companies now setting up new trade with China are doing so within the EU – we haven’t left yet. It is important for the BBC not to fall into the trap of uncritical acceptance of Brexit. Half the voters were against it, and those that were for it have not yet been able to say what on earth it means, beyond looking roughly like ‘remain’!
Almost the entire opening of a piece about how badly the dairy farming industry would be impacted by Brexit, read by Fiona Bruce, ran to about 4 sentences and was quite negative concerning labour supply. It was ‘balanced’ with 1 sentence of how many farmers felt positive about leaving the EU. The actual piece was quite balanced, highlighting farmers exporting milk to Qatar and China and a farmer concerned about potential labour issues.
Seems to me a very shallow report which supposedly assessed the price of “food on your plate” should the EU refuse to agree a trade deal of any sorts as a result of Brexit. It was a highly selective scare story with little scrutiny or challenge. The impression given that we are doomed if we join the huge number of Countries from beyond the EU who trade with Europe ,and the rest of the world , via WTO arrangements and other trade deals, is surely a distorted one ? Why is the BBC seemingly so eager to promote anything negative which so obviously undermines the decision the Country has taken, that is, to leave the E U.?
The growth figure of the EU was used in a report to highlight the lower growth of the UK. You never see this the other way round. I have never heard the growth figure of the UK quoted to highlight the low growth of the EU in the past. Why start comparing now? In the past the growth figure is just stated, not compared. I find it very divisive and misleading. Positive economic stories are spun in spite of brexit while negative ones are spun as because of brexit. The narrative of the BBC is incredibly biased and definately not impartial.