Impartial Journalism? BBC Radio 4; The "Liberal Media Bubble"; Truth, Trust and Propaganda; Mainstream Broadcasters and the Internet

Impartial Journalism in a Polarised World, BBC Radio 4 - Listen (45 minutes)


"Polarised politics, cacophanous culture wars and the advent of unchecked, unchallenged news at the click of a button. Can impartial journalism win out in a world of alternative facts and the re-tweet echo chamber of Twitter? If it doesn't, what becomes of democracy?

When radio arrived, it gave politicians the means of mass propaganda. Television brought us the politics of the soundbite and the twenty-four hour news cycle. But the digital age - unmediated opinion, unchecked sources - has put old-fashioned, impartial news itself under the spotlight. Are we - the BBC and others - any longer believed? Are we trusted? And what happens when we aren't? Do democracy and digital sit comfortably together or is one currently winning at the expense of the other?

James Harding was editor of The Times and then took the helm at BBC News. After 2016, the Brexit referendum and the election of Donald Trump, he started to think that a different approach was needed, focused on slow news and opening up journalism. He set up Tortoise. In this noisy discussion, James and other journalists grapple with all of these matters, and attempt to navigate a digital future without losing our democratic past.

He's joined by the political editor of ITN, Robert Peston; staff writer on The Atlantic, Helen Lewis; presenter of BBC Radio 4's The World this Weekend, Mark Mardell; Talk Radio host, Julia Hartley-Brewer; and Gavin Haynes, editor-at-large of Vice UK".

See also: https://www.bbc.co.uk/sounds/play/m0004f5s


"Amid the anger increasingly directed at broadcast journalists from those who claim that the so-called "mainstream media" can't be trusted, a battle is being fought over impartiality. The big, regulated broadcasters - including the BBC, ITV, Channel 4 and Sky - argue that their output has to meet the test of "due impartiality"; their critics claim that too often programmes in fact evince bias. In this documentary, Jonathan Coffey - who has worked on major stories for "Panorama" for over a decade - explores what impartiality means as our politics and national discourse have become increasingly polarised. Does it still matter as a concept for broadcasters? And how should broadcasters approach controversial issues like Brexit, immigration and transgenderism? He considers how well impartiality is understood, the arguments advanced by the broadcasters' critics about alleged failures of impartiality; the BBC's track record on reflecting significant strands of thinking; the "liberal media bubble"; how far broadcasters are open-minded in avoiding biases; and if a more rigorous and radical open-minded journalistic approach is needed, especially in the coverage of deep value disputes. Among those taking part: columnist, Rod Liddle; Kerry-anne Mendoza, a supporter of Jeremy Corbyn and editor-in-chief of the news website, "The Canary"; BBC director of editorial policy and standards, David Jordan; presenter of Channel 4 News, Krishnan Guru-Murthy; Emily Maitlis, presenter of BBC TWO's "Newsnight" and author of "Airhead: The Imperfect Art of Making News"; ITV's political editor, Robert Peston; Richard Sambrook, a director of BBC News from 2001 to 2010; and philosopher Jason Baehr, author of "The Inquiring Mind".


A response to The Noble Liar: How and Why the BBC Distorts the News to Promote a Liberal Agenda,  by Robin Aitken ? Not a book that I feel the need to read (I have read a Kindle sample), even though I've always been interested in the decoding of textual messages and the 'deconstruction' of hidden ideological bias in print and the other media.

From the publisher:

"To some, it is the voice of the nation, yet to others it has never been clearer that the BBC is in the grip of an ideology that prevents it reporting fairly on the world. Many have been scandalised by its pessimism on Brexit and its one-sided presentation of the Trump presidency, whilst simultaneously amused by its outrage over 'fake news'.

Robin Aitken, who himself spent twenty-five years working for the BBC as a reporter and executive, argues that the Corporation needs to be reminded that what is 'fake' rather depends on where one is standing. From where his feet are planted, the BBC's own coverage of events often looks decidedly peculiar, peppered with distortions, omissions and amplifications tailored to its own liberal agenda.

This punchy polemic from the author of Can We Trust the BBC? galvanises the debate over how our licence-fee money is spent, and asks whether the BBC is a fair arbiter of the news, or whether it is a conduit for pervasive and institutional liberal left-wing bias".

Updates:

John Humphrys savages bias at the BBC, MailOnline

"That there is a form of institutional liberal bias, however, I have no doubt...the growth of groups of employees who conflate and, perhaps, confuse their own interests with those of the wider world".

"Now that I’ve finally taken the decision to retire from Today, this is the first time in half a century that I have been able to write a single sentence for publication without the tiniest fear, somewhere in the back of my mind, that the BBC might not approve. The rules are perfectly clear. If you are employed by the BBC as a journalist, you have to submit to a higher authority everything you write for publication....there is a certain pleasure in knowing that I no longer have to submit to the BBC Thought Police my subversive musings on everything from the nation’s favourite bird to whether all politicians are, indeed, liars. (They’re not, by the way.)"

“There’s a lot wrong with it as an organisation and it is facing massive challenges from social media and changing behaviour, but I believe we need the BBC as much now as we ever have done. I simply cannot imagine this country without it.” The Guardian

John Humphrys attacks BBC's 'liberal bias' days after retiring, The Guardian