The BBC | Tim Davie resigns as Director General over Trump documentary edit (p 187)

Well yes, but the BBC does not need to make a profit so it should not be about pleasing any audience. It should be about providing hard facts and then let the viewer/listener/reader make up their own mind. In theory that should be easy. The problem may well be that their intake of employees are still stuck in "University Protest" mode rather than "Journalistic Rigour" mode. i.e they are letting the tail wag the dog. There's an article today in the Times from an ex editor basically saying how the Pro Trans lobby at the BBC ran the roost and anti Trans stories were neglected. Now clearly no unbiased news organisation should ever be in a position where that is allowed. Poor and probably weak leadership.
The non-profit aspect is a fair point; same with NPR and PBS here (which our President materially defunded). However, I’m not certain what a “pro-trans lobby” is.
 
If you have the time google the 'Cognitive Bias Codex' it's fascinating and if you have some more time a bit of a dive into a few of them is often a bit of an eye opener. We're learning more about how the brain works each day and one of the things we've learnt is that incredible things though they are, they generally don't function as rationally as we might like to think.

Sounds interesting.

After I finish Pep the Evolution. And the Numbers game. I will definitely have a read.

I did a fair bit of psychology and some Sociology, I also did a Social Sciences course that did include units about the Media and BBC.

I Trust no Institutions and very few people. People are very flawed.
Some base their beliefs on the Daily Mail -:)
 
I wouldn’t go that far with it! The shitting in their own well bit I would.

They're renaming their news channel ;-)

klKcHBRdhOpxleS4lzt62XrG5f4CPY_original.jpg
 
I remember you because you chat bollocks and start 10 threads a week.
Hmmmm, well your memory is not very good then.

Do you know how many threads I have started in the past FOUR YEARS? I just checked. It is five. Roughly one per year on average over the 17 years I've been posting on here.

Hardly "10 per week".

Fair cop on the "chatting bollocks" part though ;-)
 
Maybe the BBC were responsible for being cunts and not reporting the news as it is mate?

You know, chat shit and get banged.
The problem they have is they claim/pretend to be unbiased and that puts them on a high pedestal from which to fall.
Its hard to square being unbiased / professional with being obsessively anti trump. This is why they are in the shit - if they were open about their editorial slant like say fox, cnn, MSNBC, GB news etc this would not be a story.
 
The problem they have is they claim/pretend to be unbiased and that puts them on a high pedestal from which to fall.
Its hard to square being unbiased / professional with being obsessively anti trump. This is why they are in the shit - if they were open about their editorial slant like say fox, cnn, MSNBC, GB news etc this would not be a story.

Agree 100%.

They collect the levy from the public and claim to be our national channel then go on to misrepresent the President of the United States, you'd have thought they thought they would get away with it like they did burying sex crimes in their own house.

It's the arrogance that's goading mate.
 
Agree 100%.

They collect the levy from the public and claim to be our national channel then go on to misrepresent the President of the United States, you'd have thought they thought they would get away with it like they did burying sex crimes in their own house.

It's the arrogance that's goading mate.

To be fair, it misrepresented his speech, it didn’t misrepresent him ;)

They’ll have to say it did now though.
 
So the board are all ex-Tories are they ? Or are the rest so weak that they allow themselves to be swayed by one right wing member ?
Did I say that-no!

However Gibb and the rest of the board are also expected to be impartial especially if it involves any editorial input. His wiki page suggests this is certainly not the case:

In 2020, he led a successful consortium bid to buy The Jewish Chronicle. The consortium's bid was backed by journalist Sir William Shawcross, former Labour MP John Woodcock, and journalist John Ware.Gibb has refused to say who funded the consortium bid, believed to be around £3.5 million. In his declaration of interest on the BBC website, Gibb stated that he owned a 100 per cent holding in Jewish Chronicle Media. Alan Rusbridger, writing in The Independent, made the point that, "the BBC board's own website commits them to 'submit themselves to whatever scrutiny is appropriate to their office'. They should restrict information 'only when the wider public interest clearly demands'." Rusbridger continued by saying that Gibb had "flatly ignored my questions about his role as the sole named director of the JC. Nor will he tell anyone whose money is behind the paper he 'owns'"

According to former Chronicle journalist Lee Harpin, Gibb made a habit of coming into the office and checking what stories were topping the news list; Harpin was told the new owners wanted more views "well to the right of the Tory party" According to Harpin, Gibb interviewed candidates for a senior editor position and appointed Jake Wallis Simons.

Gibb departed as a director of the Chronicle on August 20, 2024, passing ownership to Jonathan Kandel, a fellow consortium member, and the ex-Labour peer Lord Austin of Dudley. The people ultimately responsible for the company's debts remained unknown. Gibb retained sole directorship of "The JC Media and Culture Preservation Initiative", a community interest company sharing a correspondence address with The Jewish Chronicle.

Gibb described himself as a "Thatcherite Conservative".

He was an editorial advisor for GB News prior to its launch in 2021

In August 2022, former BBC presenter Emily Maitlis stated that Gibb was an "active agent of the Conservative party" who played a significant role in determining the nature of the corporation's news output
.

In September 2024, after The Jewish Chronicle was forced to apologise for publishing a string of fabricated stories about the Gaza war, Alan Rusbridger queried how Gibb could, as a member of the BBC's editorial guidelines and standard committee, sit on a panel and participate in an upcoming review of the impartiality of the BBC's war coverage

In July 2025, Gibb's impartiality was again questioned in an open letter from over 400 media figures to the BBC, which stated: "we are concerned that an individual with close ties to the Jewish Chronicle … has a say in the BBC's editorial decisions in any capacity, including the decision not to broadcast
 
Last edited:
The problem they have is they claim/pretend to be unbiased and that puts them on a high pedestal from which to fall.
Its hard to square being unbiased / professional with being obsessively anti trump. This is why they are in the shit - if they were open about their editorial slant like say fox, cnn, MSNBC, GB news etc this would not be a story.
Are you serious? GB News open about their slant.
Read their mission statement below:

The People’s Channel​

At GB News, we are deeply proud to be the People’s Channel, a beacon of hope and truth for the entire nation. We stand for more than just delivering the news - we stand for the values that unite us, inspire us and drive us forward as a nation. We believe in the power of journalism to uplift, to inform and to bridge the divides in our society, bringing light to every corner of Britain.

The last sentence must be the biggest lie of all time.
 
To be fair, it misrepresented his speech, it didn’t misrepresent him ;)

They’ll have to say it did now though.


We have got to be honest about this mate and it's embarrassing that an editor/reporter has enough stupidity to think they could get that past muster.

The way people go on you'd think he hadn't been voted in.

Obviously the TDS mob will always think this way but you don't expect it of your so called national broadcaster.
 
The non-profit aspect is a fair point; same with NPR and PBS here (which our President materially defunded). However, I’m not certain what a “pro-trans lobby” is.
We get PBS here in the UK (or at least their History channel?). It's very dry, non sensational and trustworthy. I know several others who rate it's content very highly. Not surprised that Trump does not like it. The trans activists are basically insisting that a trans woman is every bit as much a woman as, for want of a better word, real women. Not surprisingly this has led to problems with changing rooms, toilets, prisons, sport etc. It also seems a huge problem at the BBC where the activists are trying to shut down opposition. We recently had a woman BBC newsreader disciplined for having the audacity to change the words written on her autocue from 'pregnant people' to 'women'! Apparently some her fellow BBC workers were among the complainers and the news reader was disciplined.
 

Don't have an account? Register now and see fewer ads!

SIGN UP
Back
Top