As Parliament's Opposition does not possess the same reach, influence or platform as that of the BBC directly to the public, the BBC now has more influence on British political news than parliament ever had. As well as more citizens per capita than any free democratic country in the world fed primarily on the version of right wing political News (and Views) compared to neutral/left wing news?No political party can place the same message across television, radio, websites, apps, podcasts and social media every hour of every day. No opposition party enjoys that level of access to public attention.
*The BBC does (currently for the last 2 years since Labour came to power) and it favours right wing news*
For the past two years, political reporting has increasingly revolved around the actions, decisions, disputes and perceived failures of the Labour Government. Government difficulties dominate headlines. Government controversies dominate discussion. Government mistakes dominate analysis.
1/. Of course governments should be scrutinised. That is not the issue.
The issue is what happens when the largest media platform in the country devotes so much of its political energy to criticism of the Government that it begins to fulfil the practical role of an opposition movement itself.
No opposition party reaches as many people. No opposition party repeats its message as frequently. No opposition party has anything approaching the BBC's ability to shape the political agenda from morning until night. When political parties seek to influence public opinion, we call it politics. When multi billionaire owned right wing newspapers seek to influence public opinion through dominance, it's called opinion?
2/. “WHEN BILLIONAIRES OWN THE NEWS, BBC NEWS SERVES BILLIONAIRES”
When the BBC does exactly the same thing through that same right wing selection of political subjects, headlines and prominence, we are told it is merely reporting. That distinction becomes harder to accept with every passing year - when the other side rarely gets the same coverage.
There is another question. Who scrutinises the scrutineer? The BBC routinely examines governments, businesses, regulators, councils, public bodies and political parties. It demands accountability. It demands transparency. It demands an explanation.
Yet when citizens apply those same standards to the BBC itself, they are often expected to justify why such scrutiny is necessary at all. Why is the question - but never comes with an answer?
If scrutiny is healthy for every powerful institution in Britain, then it must be healthy for the most powerful media institution in Britain. No institution should be exempt. Not the government. Not Parliament. Not business. Not regulators. And DEFINITELY not the BBC.
3/. THIS IS NOT A QUESTION OF PERMISSION:
The BBC comments on Britain's political life every day. Free to choose, BBC Journalists create stories of choice, draw their own conclusions every day. Editorial decisions shape public understanding every day.
*Citizens possess the same right to draw conclusions about the BBC when they hear these facts TOO*
4/. GB2GB's conclusion is simple:
Britain's most influential opposition force is no longer necessarily found on the opposition benches of the House of Commons. It is increasingly found behind a microphone, in a television studio and on the front page of the nation's most powerful media platform - and even reproduced across the world..
If you agree to a FAIR & BALANCED BBC Click Here with the words *NO TO BBC BIAS*