Given that they are public sector seems strange that they are not yet embracing the 80% carbon cut target.

This has to do with the BBC how? I’ll play the game anyway.
1. I don’t buy any of Mr Murdoch’s products.
2. No one else is obliged to either

Are you saying since Mr Murdoch has a party line ( I don’t actually know if he does, but for the sake of argument lets say he does ) then the BBC must too, otherwise the lefties will feel left out?

What grounds do left of spectrum folk get to say the BBC should be left leaning because the Murdoch empire is supposedly to the right?

After all, you have The Guardian (Lets not mention the Scot trust), The Independent, The Mirror, The Observer, lately the left seem to have infiltrated The Telegraph too. That leaves the Times and the Sun, the only noteworthy item in The Sun is page three.

DBC REED: “‘Rupert Murdoch’ .. [snip] .. the vacuum may be filled by a billionaire Oxford educated Australian emigre with American citizenship who appears to decide British elections.

Well then judging by the result of the last three elections Rupert Murdoch must be a fully paid up member of the Labour party. Can we spike that ridiculous claim now? The Sun manages to catch the *prevailing mood* then prints the corresponding headline. “We won it for the Tories”, well the last time the Sun printed a headline like must be Oh, a decade ago, perhaps two. The left have fastened on to it and wheel it out any time their little game looks like being exposed.

DBC REED: “Sitting zapper at the ready in front of my big-screen television (compulsory to left wing slackers),”

Glad to see you have embraced the benefits of Capitalism.

So you don’t like ‘DAVE’ nor the shopping channels. Guess what, have zapper, then zap!

DBC REED: “John Redwood on telly, I enjoyed his going ballistic with Geoffrey Robinson on Newsnight, but the danger is that he’s been type-cast as a de-regulator who’s likely to lose it when so accused .. ”

Only if, from the perspective of the interviewer, the questions about Mr Redwoods position on ‘de regulation’ are framed in advance in the manner, “when did you stop beating your wife”.

DBC REED: “livening up rather dull BBC programmes and making the job of producers,”

They are only dull because there is no true exchange of ideas. Take for example a generic Question time panel. There is that old lefty Dimbleby of course, then you might have a Friends of the Earth spokesman, someone from the Liberal party, Someone from the Labour party a token Tory, for example Ken Clarke the result? A discussion among lefties centering around should we allow tax payers to keep quite so much of their money and how the solution to every problem is to take more and spend it in as reckless a manner as possible.

Talk about four wolves and a sheep discussing dinner!

DBC REED: “whose private education has turned them off private provision completely, very much easier.”

You can lead a horse to water, but you can’t make it drink!
Take Polly Toynbe, one such, she is always banging on, and on about how everyone would like to pay more tax. Polly dear, I have news for you. Get you check book out and pay more tax. Go on dear, just do it!

Anyway, you like the BBC so much, you won’t mind subscribing to the service they offer when the licence fee has been abolished? If they have a shortfall, perhaps Polly will get her check book out to make up the difference. For once, lets see a Leftie put his/her money (rather than someone else’s money ) where his/her mouth is.

Since the BBC has been captured by the Left, one might expect a self confessed leftie to say just this sort of thing, pretending there is balance when it is clear there isn’t. The ‘Left’ have long adopted the philosophy of Humpty Dumpty, a word “means just what I choose it to mean, neither more nor less”. Hence; bias is balance, spending is investment, dissipation is prudence so on and so forth, ad nauseam.

DBC REED: “More to the point, the BBC has backed the” house prices will always rise” argument with any number of “property porn” programmes .. ”

Yes, the BBC has been directly responsible for whipping up a buyer frenzy. Leading people to believe that you need do no more than splash a coat of paint on any old pile of bricks to sell it for a small fortune, is actually immoral.

Instead the BBC should have been presenting programs to educate viewers in finance. That might have fallen with in the so called “public service broadcasting” remit, but instead we get Jonathan Ross.

I wonder what action – if any – the BBC is now going to take against the presenter (Huw Edwards) and the producers of a BBC Wales documentary on devolution – “Wales: Power And The People – Back to the Future”?

The BBC’s own editorial complaints unit ruled this week (see Daily Telegraph) that this documentary breached impartiality guidelines by “not seeking a balanced range of views”.

The programme set out to “examine” what it claimed to be “Wales’s relationship with Lady Thatcher, and the changes that took place between 1979, when the country voted against devolution, and 1997, when it voted for the National Assembly”

The BBC Editorial Standards Committee has now upheld a complaint that Lady Thatcher was not treated “fairly or unbiasedly” in the programme. Hardly a surprising finding in the light of the fact that “hardly any” of the contributors chosen to take part in the documentary spoke about her in a positive light.

The committee reporter that “A number of contributors expressed themselves in terms which were explicitly or implicitly critical of the Thatcher Government, while only one (Lord Peter Walker) could be regarded as speaking favourably about Mrs Thatcher or her approach to Wales.”

The committee added that the lack of balance was accentuated at the end of the documentary when the Conservatives were seen in “an unnecessarily negative light”. Among them is left-wing playwright Sir David Hare who says he’s been recruited to provide what the BBC calls “balance”.

“When you were at the Treasury you couldn’t possibly have foreseen a downturn like this?”

– the opening gambit in a ‘political’ discussion with MP’s from the three main parties.

I cannot imagine Humphries, Naughtie, or even Carney opening in such an easy manner if it were to a (ruling) Tory spokesperson in charge of such a calamitous situation.

If that is a serious point, you must share my frustration to see your money, taken from you to promote “right-wing” views. In that event, I can only assume you would support the abolition of the licence fee.

But I watched the programme and thought a fair point was being made. Until your blog.

You’re right.

It is prejudicial reporting.

Not on the BBC. I saw him on Newsnight last week and I cannot remember last time I saw him.

What an excellent idea.

A lot of people might agree with you.

Mr Redwood might agree with you.

Unfortunately Mr Cameron, thinks he has a better plan. A £5 rebate on your license fee. How bold.

I watched you on TV the other evening on the BBC alongside Vince Cable and the Labourite, is it me or does the BBC hate you?

That paper report looked like it should have been on childrens television is was so arrogant as if we are all thick and cannot understand what they are talking about.

Be it enacted by the Queen’s most Excellent Majesty, by and with the advice and consent of the Lords Spiritual and Temporal, and Commons, in this present Parliament assembled, and by the authority of the same, as follows:

The BBC licence fee is abolished immediately

Indeed, it might be worth mentioning it to them if you want fair treatment.