Originally Posted by
GlosMikeP
Since they are financed through the licence fee, they don't need scoops. They must achieve accuracy, though. If they have the right to demand payment of the licence fee (where independents have to make a commercial gain) they have the responsibility to get their story straight, and be known for doing so.
That is exactly what they used to do, and were renowned for in the 40's and the 50's, as I have previously said. The fundamental reason why they no longer practice that, is that they now, unlike then, have an agenda. It is certainly left of centre and basically hostile to our armed forces. I remember the outrage when the Beeb reported the fortunes of the British and Argentinian forces in the Falklands Conflict in the same measured even handed way. Plenty of balance there, but not appreciated by anyone who felt a British affinity in the proceedings. Of course one must also recall the infamous Mr McDonald (?) at the MOD and his doom laden statements read out at very slow dictation speed! It is war that points up these shortcomings and attitudes, and this war will be no exception. As long as the BBC affords itself the luxury of having a corporate political view, rather than merely an objective one, the way they deal with the success or failure of our Armed Forces will be biased, and that bias will show whether intended or not. I think we have to have Armed Forces, we don't have to have a broadcaster funded by an annual tax on TVs! For my money, and maybe others' as well, they are past their sell by date. It would be ironic if the BBC is added to the casualty list of Bliars wars, would it not?