Wednesday, May 25, 2011
Comparing How the BBC Slant the Little they do Report
Recently I wrote of how BBC party political censorship means they give 40 times more coverage to the Green Party than to UKIP. I did not then look at how that coverage was slanted so lets see by taking the top 6 links to BBC news on each:
UKIP
1 http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-13398966 Total, UKIP mention is 2 paragraphs, obviously edited near the end "UKIP MEP Nigel Farage said: "We want to make it clear that not a penny more of British taxpayers' money should be spent on Euro bail-outs...and we regard giving £40m a day to Brussels for our membership of this union is giving us bad value for money. "So from that little lot you get a fairly big shopping list of real, good, sensible cuts that could be made and we could perhaps keep a few more local libraries open." The TUC, who weren't there, got the last word.
2 http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-wales-politics-13442881 A fair review of Welsh LDs being suspended in which the UKIP member, who was a major protagonist gets reasonable mention.
3 http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-norfolk-13280066 The existence of one UKIP councillor in North Norfolk is mentioned in passing, as it would have to be since all the other parties are. Then the existence of Green councillors elsewhere gets a sub-headline mention.
4 http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-shropshire-13232375 another local council election where the UKIP leader is allowed a few words.
5 http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-wales-13312164 Welsh Assembly elections "But there was no breakthrough for either the Green Party or UKIP, which had each hoped to secure an AM through the regional list vote." Note the ordering there though UKIP got more votes than the Greens.
6 http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-13265843 Another council election story "UKIP leader Nigel Farage said the party, which currently has just 19 councillors, was putting more effort into the campaign this year than at previous polls." The Greens get the last line and get more supportive coverage (ie they don't mention their low numbers and even more importantly say what the Green policies are (against cutting spending).
GREENS
1 http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-northern-ireland-13277156 Entire page is given over to the Green representative (with photo)saying outlining the programme he is standing on.
2 http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-northern-ireland-13340071 BBC predicting, though unnamed "sources" that a Green candidate will win in NO. He didn't.
3 http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-13461243 About the EU Parliament regularly moving between Strasbourg and Brussels. Green quoted "Ending the shuttle could cut 20,268 tonnes of CO2 emissions annually, the Green Party says.". No UKIP mention on this EU story which does tend to support the parties main raison d'etre. UKIP are the second British party in the EU Parliament, Greens are nowhere but still the Greens get the coverage.
4 http://www.blogger.com/post-create.g?blogID=9146273 Listing of winners in NI. Green, properly, gets a mention. Perhaps the disproportionate coverage of NI is because the BBC there are more hard working - it would be churlish to suggest candidates don't get listed when there are UKIP or BNP winners.
5 http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/northern_ireland/northern_ireland_politics/9478423.stm NI again. Results as they happen. Green candidate not elected.
So lets compare
Where article is largely given over to them UKIP 0 Green 1 - bias towards the greens
Where over a few lines is given to them UKIP 1 Green 2 - bias towards the greens
Involving national politics rather than just a local/regional result UKIP 1 Greens 1 - equal
BBC prediction of success that doesn't happen UKIP 0 Green 1 - bias towards the greens
Where the party is allowed to say what its policy is UKIP 1 Green 2 - bias towards the greens
BBC broadly actually supportive UKIP 0 Green 3 (1,2,3) - bias towards the greens
So out of 6 instances the Greens get 5 1/2 and UKIP 1/2.
11 to 1. Not solid maths but a good indication (in fact I think it underplays the BBC bias in ways not so easily measurable like on air interviews).
If any allowance is put in for BBC support of the main Green policy - fighting alleged catastrophic warming having had 10s of thousands of hours of supportive propaganda - and opposition to UKIP's main policies (zero hours having been given to allow warming sceptics to put their case and it feels like zero to eurosceptics. Lets limit that to counting as the same level of bias again though I think the bias ratio is clearly far greater than that.
So effective coverage of the Greens is biased in a ratio of 4840:1 [ 40 X 11 X 11] in favour of the ecofascists and against UKIP.
Of course maybe somebody will wish to argue that democracy and freedom are not being perverted because even if the BBC were giving 4840 times more coverage to UKIP they wouldn't be likely to pick up any more votes, let alone the 9 times more they would need to form a majority government. Anybody think that??
I will send this to them and see if any of them wish to dispute that this wholesale party political propaganda, rather than the "balance" the BBC claims, is how they really behave.
UKIP
1 http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-13398966 Total, UKIP mention is 2 paragraphs, obviously edited near the end "UKIP MEP Nigel Farage said: "We want to make it clear that not a penny more of British taxpayers' money should be spent on Euro bail-outs...and we regard giving £40m a day to Brussels for our membership of this union is giving us bad value for money. "So from that little lot you get a fairly big shopping list of real, good, sensible cuts that could be made and we could perhaps keep a few more local libraries open." The TUC, who weren't there, got the last word.
2 http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-wales-politics-13442881 A fair review of Welsh LDs being suspended in which the UKIP member, who was a major protagonist gets reasonable mention.
3 http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-norfolk-13280066 The existence of one UKIP councillor in North Norfolk is mentioned in passing, as it would have to be since all the other parties are. Then the existence of Green councillors elsewhere gets a sub-headline mention.
4 http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-shropshire-13232375 another local council election where the UKIP leader is allowed a few words.
5 http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-wales-13312164 Welsh Assembly elections "But there was no breakthrough for either the Green Party or UKIP, which had each hoped to secure an AM through the regional list vote." Note the ordering there though UKIP got more votes than the Greens.
6 http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-13265843 Another council election story "UKIP leader Nigel Farage said the party, which currently has just 19 councillors, was putting more effort into the campaign this year than at previous polls." The Greens get the last line and get more supportive coverage (ie they don't mention their low numbers and even more importantly say what the Green policies are (against cutting spending).
GREENS
1 http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-northern-ireland-13277156 Entire page is given over to the Green representative (with photo)saying outlining the programme he is standing on.
2 http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-northern-ireland-13340071 BBC predicting, though unnamed "sources" that a Green candidate will win in NO. He didn't.
3 http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-13461243 About the EU Parliament regularly moving between Strasbourg and Brussels. Green quoted "Ending the shuttle could cut 20,268 tonnes of CO2 emissions annually, the Green Party says.". No UKIP mention on this EU story which does tend to support the parties main raison d'etre. UKIP are the second British party in the EU Parliament, Greens are nowhere but still the Greens get the coverage.
4 http://www.blogger.com/post-create.g?blogID=9146273 Listing of winners in NI. Green, properly, gets a mention. Perhaps the disproportionate coverage of NI is because the BBC there are more hard working - it would be churlish to suggest candidates don't get listed when there are UKIP or BNP winners.
5 http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/northern_ireland/northern_ireland_politics/9478423.stm NI again. Results as they happen. Green candidate not elected.
So lets compare
Where article is largely given over to them UKIP 0 Green 1 - bias towards the greens
Where over a few lines is given to them UKIP 1 Green 2 - bias towards the greens
Involving national politics rather than just a local/regional result UKIP 1 Greens 1 - equal
BBC prediction of success that doesn't happen UKIP 0 Green 1 - bias towards the greens
Where the party is allowed to say what its policy is UKIP 1 Green 2 - bias towards the greens
BBC broadly actually supportive UKIP 0 Green 3 (1,2,3) - bias towards the greens
So out of 6 instances the Greens get 5 1/2 and UKIP 1/2.
11 to 1. Not solid maths but a good indication (in fact I think it underplays the BBC bias in ways not so easily measurable like on air interviews).
If any allowance is put in for BBC support of the main Green policy - fighting alleged catastrophic warming having had 10s of thousands of hours of supportive propaganda - and opposition to UKIP's main policies (zero hours having been given to allow warming sceptics to put their case and it feels like zero to eurosceptics. Lets limit that to counting as the same level of bias again though I think the bias ratio is clearly far greater than that.
So effective coverage of the Greens is biased in a ratio of 4840:1 [ 40 X 11 X 11] in favour of the ecofascists and against UKIP.
Of course maybe somebody will wish to argue that democracy and freedom are not being perverted because even if the BBC were giving 4840 times more coverage to UKIP they wouldn't be likely to pick up any more votes, let alone the 9 times more they would need to form a majority government. Anybody think that??
I will send this to them and see if any of them wish to dispute that this wholesale party political propaganda, rather than the "balance" the BBC claims, is how they really behave.
Labels: BBC, British politics, Media
