For Logical-- BBC admits to bias

[SBK]

I read this and thought of Logicals comments a few months back about how BBC was a shining example of journalistic integrity. ROFL

(I suppose that we can hope that they held this meeting to get a handle on the problem and correct it. Seems to be the message they convey here.)


http://www.dailymail.co.uk/pages/live/articles/news/news.html?in_article_id=411846&in_page_id=1770

We are biased, admit the stars of BBC News

By SIMON WALTERS, Mail on Sunday Last updated at 21:11pm on 21st October 2006

It was the day that a host of BBC executives and star presenters admitted what critics have been telling them for years: the BBC is dominated by trendy, Left-leaning liberals who are biased against Christianity and in favour of multiculturalism. A leaked account of an 'impartiality summit' called by BBC chairman Michael Grade, is certain to lead to a new row about the BBC and its reporting on key issues, especially concerning Muslims and the war on terror. It reveals that executives would let the Bible be thrown into a dustbin on a TV comedy show, but not the Koran, and that they would broadcast an interview with Osama Bin Laden if given the opportunity. Further, it discloses that the BBC's 'diversity tsar', wants Muslim women newsreaders to be allowed to wear veils when on air. At the secret meeting in London last month, which was hosted by veteran broadcaster Sue Lawley, BBC executives admitted the corporation is dominated by homosexuals and people from ethnic minorities, deliberately promotes multiculturalism, is anti-American, anti-countryside and more sensitive to the feelings of Muslims than Christians. One veteran BBC executive said: 'There was widespread acknowledgement that we may have gone too far in the direction of political correctness. 'Unfortunately, much of it is so deeply embedded in the BBC's culture, that it is very hard to change it.' In one of a series of discussions, executives were asked to rule on how they would react if the controversial comedian Sacha Baron Cohen
) known for his offensive characters Ali G and Borat - was a guest on the programme Room 101. On the show, celebrities are invited to throw their pet hates into a dustbin and it was imagined that Baron Cohen chose some kosher food, the Archbishop of Canterbury, a Bible and the Koran. Nearly everyone at the summit, including the show's actual producer and the BBC's head of drama, Alan Yentob, agreed they could all be thrown into the bin, except the Koran for fear of offending Muslims. In a debate on whether the BBC should interview Osama Bin Laden if he approached them, it was decided the Al Qaeda leader would be given a platform to explain his views. And the BBC's 'diversity tsar', Mary Fitzpatrick, said women newsreaders should be able to wear whatever they wanted while on TV, including veils. Ms Fitzpatrick spoke out after criticism was raised at the summit of TV newsreader Fiona Bruce, who recently wore on air a necklace with a cross. The full account of the meeting shows how senior BBC figures queued up to lambast their employer. Political pundit Andrew Marr said: 'The BBC is not impartial or neutral. It's a publicly funded, urban organisation with an abnormally large number of young people, ethnic minorities and gay people. It has a liberal bias not so much a party-political bias. It is better expressed as a cultural liberal bias.' Washington correspondent Justin Webb said that the BBC is so biased against America that deputy director general Mark Byford had secretly agreed to help him to 'correct', it in his reports. Webb added that the BBC treated America with scorn and derision and gave it 'no moral weight'. Former BBC business editor Jeff Randall said he complained to a 'very senior news executive', about the BBC's pro-multicultural stance but was given the reply: 'The BBC is not neutral in multiculturalism: it believes in it and it promotes it.' Randall also told how he once wore Union Jack cufflinks to work but was rebuked with: 'You can't do that, that's like the National Front!' Quoting a George Orwell observation, Randall said that the BBC was full of intellectuals who 'would rather steal from a poor box than stand to attention during God Save The King'. There was another heated debate when the summit discussed whether the BBC was too sensitive about criticising black families for failing to take responsibility for their children. Head of news Helen Boaden disclosed that a Radio 4 programme which blamed black youths at a young offenders', institution for bullying white inmates faced the axe until she stepped in. But Ms Fitzpatrick, who has said that the BBC should not use white reporters in non-white countries, argued it had a duty to 'contextualise' why black youngsters behaved in such a way. Andrew Marr told The Mail on Sunday last night: 'The BBC must always try to reflect Britain, which is mostly a provincial, middle-of-the-road country. Britain is not a mirror image of the BBC or the people who work for it.'

[SBK]

Anybody want to clean that up. I copied and pasted it and it didn't look like that when I submitted it.

It's easier to read if you just click the link.

[CRONUS]

I have no idea who you are SBK but the article was interesting. I only wish the American media was more like the BBC.

[SBK]

I have no idea who you are SBK but the article was interesting. I only wish the American media was more like the BBC.

I'm just messing with you about this anyway. The way the article sounds is that they are recognizing the problem, and moving to fix it. If that's the case then I would very much like to see American media emulate the BBC.

We'll have to wait and see.

[|Zach|]

Journalism isn't in a vacuum. I don't believe journalists try to act like there is no bias...that isn't how humans function.

There is no such thing as an objective point of view.

No matter how much we may try to ignore it, human communication always takes place in a context, through a medium, and among individuals and groups who are situated historically, politically, economically, and socially. This state of affairs is neither bad nor good. It simply is. Bias is a small word that identifies the collective influences of the entire context of a message.

Politicians are certainly biased and overtly so. They belong to parties and espouse policies and ideologies. And while they may think their individual ideologies are simply common sense, they understand that they speak from political positions.

Journalists, too, speak from political positions but usually not overtly so. The journalistic ethics of objectivity and fairness are strong influences on the profession. But journalistic objectivity is not the pristine objectivity of philosophy. Instead, a journalist attempts to be objective by two methods: 1) fairness to those concerned with the news and 2) a professional process of information gathering that seeks fairness, completeness, and accuracy. As we all know, the ethical heights journalists set for themselves are not always reached. But, all in all, like politics, it is an honorable profession practiced, for the most part, by people trying to do the right thing.

The press is often thought of as a unified voice with a distinct bias (right or left depending on the critic). This simplistic thinking fits the needs of ideological struggle, but is hardly useful in coming to a better understanding of what is happening in the world. I believe journalism is an under-theorized practice. In other words, journalists often do what they do without reflecting upon the meaning of the premises and assumptions that support their practice. I say this as a former journalist. I think we may begin to reflect upon journalistic practice by noticing that the press applies a narrative structure to ambiguous events in order to create a coherent and causal sense of events.

[|Zach|]

Bias in the news media

Is the news media biased toward liberals? Yes. Is the news media biased toward conservatives? Yes. These questions and answers are uninteresting because it is possible to find evidence--anecdotal and otherwise--to "prove" media bias of one stripe or another. Far more interesting and instructive is studying the inherent, or structural, biases of journalism as a professional practice--especially as mediated through television. I use the word "bias" here to challenge its current use by partisan critics. A more accepted, and perhaps more accurate, term would be "frame." These are some of the professional frames that structure what journalists can see and how they can present what they see.

1. Commercial bias: The news media are money-making businesses. As such, they must deliver a good product to their customers to make a profit. The customers of the news media are advertisers. The most important product the news media delivers to its customers are readers or viewers. Good is defined in numbers and quality of readers or viewers. The news media are biased toward conflict (re: bad news and narrative biases below) because conflict draws readers and viewers. Harmony is boring.

2. Temporal bias: The news media are biased toward the immediate. News is what's new and fresh. To be immediate and fresh, the news must be ever-changing even when there is little news to cover.

3. Visual bias: Television (and, increasingly, newspapers) is biased toward visual depictions of news. Television is nothing without pictures. Legitimate news that has no visual angle is likely to get little attention. Much of what is important in politics--policy--cannot be photographed.

4. Bad news bias: Good news is boring (and probably does not photograph well, either). This bias makes the world look like a more dangerous place than it really is. Plus, this bias makes politicians look far more crooked than they really are.

5. Narrative bias: The news media cover the news in terms of "stories" that must have a beginning, middle, and end--in other words, a plot with antagonists and protagonists. Much of what happens in our world, however, is ambiguous. The news media apply a narrative structure to ambiguous events suggesting that these events are easily understood and have clear cause-and-effect relationships. Good storytelling requires drama, and so this bias often leads journalists to add, or seek out, drama for the sake of drama. Controversy creates drama. Journalists often seek out the opinions of competing experts or officials in order to present conflict between two sides of an issue (sometimes referred to as the authority-disorder bias). Lastly, narrative bias leads many journalists to create, and then hang on to, master narratives--set story lines with set characters who act in set ways. Once a master narrative has been set, it is very difficult to get journalists to see that their narrative is simply one way, and not necessarily the correct or best way, of viewing people and events.

6. Status Quo bias: The news media believe "the system works." During the "fiasco in Florida," recall that the news media were compelled to remind us that the Constitution was safe, the process was working, and all would be well. The mainstream news media never question the structure of the political system. The American way is the only way, politically and socially. In fact, the American way is news. The press spends vast amounts of time in unquestioning coverage of the process of political campaigns (but less so on the process of governance). This bias ensures that alternate points of view about how government might run and what government might do are effectively ignored.

7. Fairness bias: No, this is not an oxymoron. Ethical journalistic practice demands that reporters and editors be fair. In the news product this bias manifests as a contention between/among political actors (also re: narrative bias above). Whenever one faction or politician does something or says something newsworthy, the press is compelled by this bias to get a reaction from an opposing camp. This creates the illusion that the game of politics is always contentious and never cooperative. This bias can also create situations in which one faction appears to be attacked by the press. For example, politician A announces some positive accomplishment followed by the press seeking a negative comment from politician B. The point is not to disparage politician A but to be fair to politician B. When politician A is a conservative, this practice appears to be liberal bias.

8. Expediency bias: Journalism is a competitive, deadline-driven profession. Reporters compete among themselves for prime space or air time. News organizations compete for market share and reader/viewer attention. And the 24-hour news cycle--driven by the immediacy of television and the internet--creates a situation in which the job of competing never comes to a rest. Add financial pressures to this mix--the general desire of media groups for profit margins that exceed what's "normal" in many other industries--and you create a bias toward information that can be obtained quickly, easily, and inexpensively. Need an expert/official quote (status quo bias) to balance (fairness bias) a story (narrative bias)? Who can you get on the phone fast? Who is always ready with a quote and always willing to speak (i.e. say what you need them to say to balance the story)? Who sent a press release recently? Much of deadline decision making comes down to gathering information that is readily available from sources that are well known.

9. Glory bias: Journalists, especially television reporters, often assert themselves into the stories they cover. This happens most often in terms of proximity, i.e. to the locus of unfolding events or within the orbit of powerful political and civic actors. This bias helps journalists establish and maintain a cultural identity as knowledgeable insiders (although many journalists reject the notion that follows from this--that they are players in the game and not merely observers). The glory bias shows itself in particularly obnoxious ways in television journalism. News promos with stirring music and heroic pictures of individual reporters create the aura of omnipresence and omnipotence. I ascribe the use of the satellite phone to this bias. Note how often it's used in situations in which a normal video feed should be no problem to establish, e.g. a report from Tokyo I saw recently on CNN. The jerky pictures and fuzzy sound of the satellite phone create a romantic image of foreign adventure.

[SBK]

Journalism isn't in a vacuum. I don't believe journalists try to act like there is no bias...that isn't how humans function.

There is no doubt that they pretend as if there is no bias. How you can claim otherwise is quite strange.

[|Zach|]

There is no doubt that they pretend as if there is no bias. How you can claim otherwise is quite strange.
I think you if you went to those journalists and asked them if there is NO bias they would say it is impossible.

['Hamas' Jenkins]

There is no doubt that they pretend as if there is no bias. How you can claim otherwise is quite strange.

No rational or honest person is going to tell you that points of view are completely unbiased. Our experiences control and shape our subjecthood.

[SBK]

No rational or honest person is going to tell you that points of view are completely unbiased. Our experiences control and shape our subjecthood.

So is the media biased?

[|Zach|]

So is the media biased?
Wow, reading comprehension.

[SBK]

Wow, reading comprehension.

The reason I ask is because whenever the subject comes up people will tell you there is no bias. jAZ will start 10,000 threads this year about a "conservative" bias in the media, and will tell everyone that there is no liberal bias. Every conservative here, and in the country, will tell you that the media has a liberal bias.

Benard Goldberg wrote the book about the media, "BIAS," and they claimed he was off his rocker.

The reason that this story about the BBC is newsworthy is because they actually ADMIT to having a bias. I don't seem to recall ever hearing the NY Times, Fox News, CNN, PMSNBC or any other news outlet admit to having a bias.

[|Zach|]

The reason I ask is because whenever the subject comes up people will tell you there is no bias. jAZ will start 10,000 threads this year about a "conservative" bias in the media, and will tell everyone that there is no liberal bias. Every conservative here, and in the country, will tell you that the media has a liberal bias.

Benard Goldberg wrote the book about the media, "BIAS," and they claimed he was off his rocker.

The reason that this story about the BBC is newsworthy is because they actually ADMIT to having a bias. I don't seem to recall ever hearing the NY Times, Fox News, CNN, PMSNBC or any other news outlet admit to having a bias.
So you are surprised it is something they don't shout from the mountain tops?

Interesting.

[banyon]

Why does the Article title say that "the BBC admits to bias", when it's really just a collection of anecdotal partial quotes thatare likely without context.

The only guy who really spoke directly on the subject was a political pundit and not an executive or journalist with the company.

Maybe "the Mail" and Simon Walters are biased too?

[patteeu]

I think you if you went to those journalists and asked them if there is NO bias they would say it is impossible.

That may be, but too many of them think they are being objective which is equally impossible.

[patteeu]

Wow, reading comprehension.

Wow, do you find it hard to give a straight answer?

[patteeu]

Why does the Article title say that "the BBC admits to bias", when it's really just a collection of anecdotal partial quotes thatare likely without context.

The only guy who really spoke directly on the subject was a political pundit and not an executive or journalist with the company.

Maybe "the Mail" and Simon Walters are biased too?

Perhaps because the first line of this news report is:

It was the day that a host of BBC executives and star presenters admitted what critics have been telling them for years: the BBC is dominated by trendy, Left-leaning liberals who are biased against Christianity and in favour of multiculturalism.

Maybe there is a different spin that can be put on the events described though. When you find it, post it for us. :p

[banyon]

Perhaps because the first line of this news report is:



Maybe there is a different spin that can be put on the events described though. When you find it, post it for us. :p

No, that's Simon Walters accusing the BBC of bias and offering his reading of events, not an admission by the BBC.

[patteeu]

No, that's Simon Walters accusing the BBC of bias and offering his reading of events, not an admission by the BBC.

Offering his reading of events. Isn't that what reporters do? The events he's reading constitute, at least according to him, an admission by the BBC. The "at least according to him" (or her) caveat could be applied to any news story, right?

[banyon]

Offering his reading of events. Isn't that what reporters do? The events he's reading constitute, at least according to him, an admission by the BBC. The "at least according to him" (or her) caveat could be applied to any news story, right?

I don't think so. There's a difference between an interpretation and a simple factual statement that "So-and-so said "x" today".

[CRONUS]

Perhaps because the first line of this news report is:



Maybe there is a different spin that can be put on the events described though. When you find it, post it for us. :pI love that quote, I wish our media was equally biased against Christianity and in favor or multiculturism. It would make for a better media and a better country.

[patteeu]

I don't think so. There's a difference between an interpretation and a simple factual statement that "So-and-so said "x" today".

I think that's true, but we don't get that from any of our major newspapers, or from the BBC for that matter.

That article contained the same kind of reporting that our own newspapers contain, for better or for worse. Your criticism of this particular example could just as easily have been leveled at a whole bunch of articles that have been posted in DC over the years.

BBC executives admitted the corporation is dominated by homosexuals and people from ethnic minorities, deliberately promotes multiculturalism, is anti-American, anti-countryside and more sensitive to the feelings of Muslims than Christians. One veteran BBC executive said: 'There was widespread acknowledgement that we may have gone too far in the direction of political correctness. 'Unfortunately, much of it is so deeply embedded in the BBC's culture, that it is very hard to change it.'

But beyond this quibble, I think Logical was the only person who really thought the BBC was a shining example of journalistic integrity to begin with and even though he's still humping their philisophical leg, he seems to accept that they are biased now.

P.S. I do agree with the point you are making about reporting raw facts versus providing interpretation.

[CRONUS]

I think that's true, but we don't get that from any of our major newspapers, or from the BBC for that matter.

That article contained the same kind of reporting that our own newspapers contain, for better or for worse. Your criticism of this particular example could just as easily have been leveled at a whole bunch of articles that have been posted in DC over the years.



But beyond this quibble, I think Logical was the only person who really thought the BBC was a shining example of journalistic integrity to begin with and even though he's still humping their philisophical leg, he seems to accept that they are biased now.

P.S. I do agree with the point you are making about reporting raw facts versus providing interpretation.

The article is emphasizing the entire BBC not just the new branch.

[patteeu]

The article is emphasizing the entire BBC not just the new branch.

So what? There isn't really any dispute about the BBC being a left leaning news outlet, the only question is how long it will take for you to recognize what everyone else already knows.

[CRONUS]

So what? There isn't really any dispute about the BBC being a left leaning news outlet, the only question is how long it will take for you to recognize what everyone else already knows.

Your opinion and you are entitled to it.