[hnlmorg]

I cannot about the NYT, but the BBC is one of the most impartial sources available.

So much so that the left and the right accuse the BBC of biasing the other in equal measures!

If you want to talk about bias in the UK press then you’re better off looking towards The Sun, The Mail and anything owned by Murdoch (that guy has done so much damage to the world it’s unreal).

[anukin]

BBC is impartial till it reports on anything which has to do with its old colonies. Then it becomes high brow British aristocrat weapon of propaganda.

[abletonlive]

> but the BBC is one of the most impartial sources available.

I almost spit out my coffee in laughter reading this. Entirely ridiculous assertion. You are completely blind to the fact that the BBC is insanely partial by picking and choosing what it reports on and what it doesn't. This is just level 2 detection of bias that you aren't reaching, imagine all the other things you're missing.

[hnlmorg]

You’d need to have literally infinite resources if you wanted to avoid a situation of having to pick and choose what you report on.

What matters is that all sides of the debate get representation. And the BBC does this almost to a fault.

The ironic thing is the fact that BBC is so good at doing this, everyone feels their voice is marginalised and then complains of bias.

So when people call the BBC “biased”, and as ferociously as you have, what they’re actually saying is “the BBC airs too many opinions that oppose my own biases”

[whatsupdog]

> BBC is one of the most impartial sources available.

I really hope that is sarcasm. BBC is highly skewed to the left. No debate on that. Can you show me any story on BBC that is biased to the right?

[retsibsi]

> Can you show me any story on BBC that is biased to the right?

They're saying that the BBC is relatively impartial, not that it is biased to the right.

If you're saying that the BBC has left-biased stories, and therefore the claim of impartiality requires evidence of counterbalancing right-biased stories, I think you need to start by providing evidence of the former. (Even if you think it's blindingly obvious that the left-biased content exists, your examples will clarify what would be required to balance it out.)

[hnlmorg]

> BBC is highly skewed to the left. No debate on that.

The fact that you argued that shows there is some debate. ;)

> Can you show me any story on BBC that is biased to the right?

No, because my point is that it isn’t biased to the left nor right.

What the BBC does is offer both sides of the political spectrum to have equal time sharing their arguments.

If you think that’s biased then what you’re actually saying is that the left deserves less time than the right. Thus it’s not the BBC exhibiting bias.

[pixl97]

Is the BBC highly skewed to the left, or is reality?

[tolerance]

I don’t think this is the flex you think it is.

[lazyant]

their treatment of Israel-Palestine

[rithdmc]

or, both in modern times and during 'The Troubles', Ireland.

Biased does not mean it has to skew to a certain political leaning all of the time.

[ptaffs]

I hope you're being sarcastic. If you do want a debate, there's plenty of research on bias at the BBC, and there are examples of bias left and right, pun intended.

[semanticist]

The left accuse the BBC of bias because, eg, the new Green Party leader has not been on any relevant BBC politics programs while Farage and other right wing politicians are regular fixtures.

The right accuse the BBC of bias because they fact-check them when they lie.

These things are not equivalent.

The BBC has lost a lot of credibility over the last decade or so. I can completely understand why they rolled over (often pre-emptively) to placate a Tory government that talked a lot about defunding them, but ultimately it has not served them well.

The newspaper situation in the UK is diabolical for sure.