🧵 While the BBC remains fairly well trusted overall and one of the most trusted media sources in the country, the broadcaster has an image problem with Reform voters who are much less likely than average to say they trust the broadcaster and are split between trust/distrust.
The bigger problem isn't the right wing oldies, its youngsters, the BBC doesn't exist to them.
Nor does ITV I presume?
Graun just published this, as it happens, if anyone is interested. Haven'#t read it as I DGAF about Traitors (still don't know or care what it is about) but the blurb stuck in my mind:
"Fandom memes, influencers and TikTok deal helped secure industry’s holy grail: gen Z loyalty"
Watching a show for 2 hours a week for 4 weeks then getting on with the rest of your lives != loyalty.
For decades this has been my biggest bugbear with people who defend the BBC by claiming one decent show, often years ago, shows how valuable it is. No, it does not.
It takes more than just 1 show to inspire loyalty and young people today, quite rightly, are not loyal to a failed and frankly boring outdated behemoth from the past.
Just because someone watched Traitors for an hour does not mean they will now watch Bargain Hunt or the rest of the drivel linearly broadcast.
Its also how poor they are at exploiting hit shows, Strictly and now Traitors being an exception.....I mean the sort of box set high quality drama shows.
I mentioned the other day I rewatched McMafia the other week. A really good show. And of course they didn't sign up the actors, they delayed, COVID came, then Ukraine / Russia, and now its a dead franchise. Taboo was another from a similar time, they spent a fortune on having Tom Hardy, was part of their big Christmas / New Year schedule....and dead...Compare to Slow Horses, they filmed the 2 two seasons back to back, they signed up Jackson Lamb for 5 seasons from the get go.
They did do the recent two seasons of Dr Who back to back. Shame they had a lead who couldn’t really commit to it and the show was tat
I presume that was because Disney was putting a load of money in. The message the BBC will probably take from it was too rushed, we need to do Peaky Blinders and spend 10 years to get 30 odd episodes. Rather than wrong lead, and a writer who has lost the plot where everything has to be political and gay.
🧵 While the BBC remains fairly well trusted overall and one of the most trusted media sources in the country, the broadcaster has an image problem with Reform voters who are much less likely than average to say they trust the broadcaster and are split between trust/distrust.
The bigger problem isn't the right wing oldies, its youngsters, the BBC doesn't exist to them.
Nor does ITV I presume?
Graun just published this, as it happens, if anyone is interested. Haven'#t read it as I DGAF about Traitors (still don't know or care what it is about) but the blurb stuck in my mind:
"Fandom memes, influencers and TikTok deal helped secure industry’s holy grail: gen Z loyalty"
Watching a show for 2 hours a week for 4 weeks then getting on with the rest of your lives != loyalty.
For decades this has been my biggest bugbear with people who defend the BBC by claiming one decent show, often years ago, shows how valuable it is. No, it does not.
It takes more than just 1 show to inspire loyalty and young people today, quite rightly, are not loyal to a failed and frankly boring outdated behemoth from the past.
Just because someone watched Traitors for an hour does not mean they will now watch Bargain Hunt or the rest of the drivel linearly broadcast.
Its also how poor they are at exploiting hit shows, Strictly and now Traitors being an exception.....I mean the sort of box set high quality drama shows.
I mentioned the other day I rewatched McMafia the other week. A really good show. And of course they didn't sign up the actors, they delayed, COVID came, then Ukraine / Russia, and now its a dead franchise. Taboo was another from a similar time, they spent a fortune on having Tom Hardy, was part of their big Christmas / New Year schedule....and dead...Compare to Slow Horses, they filmed the 2 two seasons back to back, they signed up Jackson Lamb for 5 seasons from the get go.
They did do the recent two seasons of Dr Who back to back. Shame they had a lead who couldn’t really commit to it and the show was tat
I presume that was because Disney was putting a load of money in. The message the BBC will probably take from it was too rushed, we need to do Peaky Blinders and spend 10 years to get 30 odd episodes. Rather than wrong lead, and a writer who has lost the plot where everything has to be political and gay.
It looks like they’re seeking another partner to fund it, talk of Paramount, and the Beeb want RTD to stay on.
The problem with Gatwa was signing him on when he couldn’t fully commit to it and now he appears to be being thrown under the bus. Same happened to Eccleston.
I don't think the recent narrative of Gatwa being at fault holds water. Yes he bailed when it became apparent the series wouldn't be renewed soon, and he didn't bellyfeel the show, but he played the part and the words he was given and did them well. The fault has to lie with RTD: two series' climaxes that ruined the show, returning villains nobody except you or I had heard of, bad CGI, excruciating Israel and trans references, christ knows what happened with the Ruby Sunday arc, that child genius, and the fact that a series based on the Buffy structure worked in 2004 but doesn't now in 2025. Aaargh...
So after paying for my uni tuition that the boomers got for free, I now have to pay tax on my pension contributions when the boomers didn't, just to make sure that the boomers get an even more generous state pension with their final salary pensions, of which I will get neither. https://x.com/ebullienteddie/status/1987057199714037978
The price of not voting as much as the oldies do. Its expensive.
I listened to a podcast recently that argued that compulsory voting (as in Australia) would have the effect of evening that up, and thus going some way to breaking the grip that pensioners and near-pensioners have on British politics. I instinctively rebel at the suggestion of compelling voting, but it's an interesting idea.
My preference would be to grant the vote to everyone, from birth, with the primary care giver casting a vote by proxy for the child until they claim the vote for themselves. I think that's the only way to decisively break the hold of the gerontocracy on British politics.
Interesting that resigning head of news denies the BBC is biased.. they just don't get it. Corrupt.. biased... call it what you like. If you can't trust the BBC then something is terribly wrong. To call a disgraceful edit that had to be by design.. "a mistake" is not fooling anyone.
The BBC was forced to make 215 corrections in the last two years over the coverage by its BBC Arabic arm ( funded through our licence fee) of the Gaza conflict.
This is why it isn't really the Trump thing, although that will be all the focus.
The BBC is biased to the right if one is left of centre (me) and biased to the left if one is right of centre (the PB Tory massif).
Clearly one can offset those 215 pro Gazan corrections with the 215 or so times the BBC has relied on Eylon Levy and other assorted ghouls for "unbiased" commentary on the Gaza war.
There is a lot of merit in the first sentence. Personally I think the bias is not left/right, it’s more metropolitan/young vs rural/old. It’s the advert conundrum in another form. Young BBC staffers living young urban lives are surrounded by people from all kinds of backgrounds that crucially share most of the same values. So that’s the view that dominates. It reminds me of all the uni staff who never met anyone who voted for Brexit. Well of course, because their circle didn’t.
So after paying for my uni tuition that the boomers got for free, I now have to pay tax on my pension contributions when the boomers didn't, just to make sure that the boomers get an even more generous state pension with their final salary pensions, of which I will get neither. https://x.com/ebullienteddie/status/1987057199714037978
The price of not voting as much as the oldies do. Its expensive.
I listened to a podcast recently that argued that compulsory voting (as in Australia) would have the effect of evening that up, and thus going some way to breaking the grip that pensioners and near-pensioners have on British politics. I instinctively rebel at the suggestion of compelling voting, but it's an interesting idea.
My preference would be to grant the vote to everyone, from birth, with the primary care giver casting a vote by proxy for the child until they claim the vote for themselves. I think that's the only way to decisively break the hold of the gerontocracy on British politics.
Was that the “past, present, future” podcast? Or at least they did one that made a similar argument. To be honest I always thought the only thing we can learn from Australian politics was the “Democracy Sausage,” however the podcast I listened to made the point that if everyone votes (so young and also non-university educated) then you have at least got to make an effort of convincing them to vote for you (or at least not voting against you).
What that means for policy is not clear - but given it was something I thought daft (I think Terry Prachett must of mocked compulsory voting at some point) I now think that maybe there is something in it.
By far the biggest issue with the press misreporting Trump is the sanewashing, which essentially all the media in the UK does. The best way of reporting Trump is to do so in full and verbatim, and then everyone can see what a dishonest, crooked, moron he is, and draw their own conclusions. e.g. He should be in a padded room, or jail cell, not the Oval Office.
Nobody needs to do anything underhand to make Trump look bad, just let people listen to him for 60 seconds or so.
Problem being Trump's mental decline and obvious health issues are getting no coverage on mainstream US media. They have to frame what he says very carefully just to block out his failings. You don't get that 60 seconds.
Worse than anything the BBC did. Week after week.
All the more reason for the BBC not to resort to smoke & mirrors.
A curious titbit; it wasn't BBC smoke or mirrors- not directly, anyway.
October Films, the independent production company that made the Trump Panorama, is said to be working on a film about Nigel Farage.
We have a new type of rule now. Not one man rule or rule of aristocracy or plutocracy, but of small groups elevated to positions of absolute power by random pressures and subject to political and economic factors that leave little room for decisions. They are representatives of abstract forces who have reached power through surrender of self. The iron-willed dictator is a thing of the past.
There will be no more Stalins, no more Hitlers. The rulers of this most insecure of all worlds are rulers by accident; inept, frightened pilots at the controls of a vast machine that they cannot understand, calling in experts to tell them which button to push.
So after paying for my uni tuition that the boomers got for free, I now have to pay tax on my pension contributions when the boomers didn't, just to make sure that the boomers get an even more generous state pension with their final salary pensions, of which I will get neither. https://x.com/ebullienteddie/status/1987057199714037978
90% of boomers never went to university. The tweeter will also get the triple lock as it stands when they retire
I wouldn't bet on the triple lock still being in place by the time that Tweeter retires.
It will unless a party wants to commit electoral suicide. At most it might be means tested
Rachel can be brave and scrap the triple lock 2026. CPI only for state pensions. £10bn (roughly) saved
1% on income tax (2% on higher and additional rates) £10bn
Freeze on thresholds to 2030 £10bn
Total £30bn sorted! If there's a shortfall we can always increase inheritance tax 👍
So after paying for my uni tuition that the boomers got for free, I now have to pay tax on my pension contributions when the boomers didn't, just to make sure that the boomers get an even more generous state pension with their final salary pensions, of which I will get neither. https://x.com/ebullienteddie/status/1987057199714037978
The price of not voting as much as the oldies do. Its expensive.
I listened to a podcast recently that argued that compulsory voting (as in Australia) would have the effect of evening that up, and thus going some way to breaking the grip that pensioners and near-pensioners have on British politics. I instinctively rebel at the suggestion of compelling voting, but it's an interesting idea.
My preference would be to grant the vote to everyone, from birth, with the primary care giver casting a vote by proxy for the child until they claim the vote for themselves. I think that's the only way to decisively break the hold of the gerontocracy on British politics.
Was that the “past, present, future” podcast? Or at least they did one that made a similar argument. To be honest I always thought the only thing we can learn from Australian politics was the “Democracy Sausage,” however the podcast I listened to made the point that if everyone votes (so young and also non-university educated) then you have at least got to make an effort of convincing them to vote for you (or at least not voting against you).
What that means for policy is not clear - but given it was something I thought daft (I think Terry Prachett must of mocked compulsory voting at some point) I now think that maybe there is something in it.
I don’t quite get how compulsory voting works. What happens if you don’t vote?
So after paying for my uni tuition that the boomers got for free, I now have to pay tax on my pension contributions when the boomers didn't, just to make sure that the boomers get an even more generous state pension with their final salary pensions, of which I will get neither. https://x.com/ebullienteddie/status/1987057199714037978
I stop reading as soon as someone uses phrases like "boomer", "Gen X", etc.
Interesting that resigning head of news denies the BBC is biased.. they just don't get it. Corrupt.. biased... call it what you like. If you can't trust the BBC then something is terribly wrong. To call a disgraceful edit that had to be by design.. "a mistake" is not fooling anyone.
The BBC was forced to make 215 corrections in the last two years over the coverage by its BBC Arabic arm ( funded through our licence fee) of the Gaza conflict.
This is why it isn't really the Trump thing, although that will be all the focus.
The BBC is biased to the right if one is left of centre (me) and biased to the left if one is right of centre (the PB Tory massif).
Clearly one can offset those 215 pro Gazan corrections with the 215 or so times the BBC has relied on Eylon Levy and other assorted ghouls for "unbiased" commentary on the Gaza war.
There is a lot of merit in the first sentence. Personally I think the bias is not left/right, it’s more metropolitan/young vs rural/old. It’s the advert conundrum in another form. Young BBC staffers living young urban lives are surrounded by people from all kinds of backgrounds that crucially share most of the same values. So that’s the view that dominates. It reminds me of all the uni staff who never met anyone who voted for Brexit. Well of course, because their circle didn’t.
Since 80% of the population don't live in rural areas, the rural/urban imbalance is hardly the same thing as bias.
So after paying for my uni tuition that the boomers got for free, I now have to pay tax on my pension contributions when the boomers didn't, just to make sure that the boomers get an even more generous state pension with their final salary pensions, of which I will get neither. https://x.com/ebullienteddie/status/1987057199714037978
The price of not voting as much as the oldies do. Its expensive.
I listened to a podcast recently that argued that compulsory voting (as in Australia) would have the effect of evening that up, and thus going some way to breaking the grip that pensioners and near-pensioners have on British politics. I instinctively rebel at the suggestion of compelling voting, but it's an interesting idea.
My preference would be to grant the vote to everyone, from birth, with the primary care giver casting a vote by proxy for the child until they claim the vote for themselves. I think that's the only way to decisively break the hold of the gerontocracy on British politics.
Was that the “past, present, future” podcast? Or at least they did one that made a similar argument. To be honest I always thought the only thing we can learn from Australian politics was the “Democracy Sausage,” however the podcast I listened to made the point that if everyone votes (so young and also non-university educated) then you have at least got to make an effort of convincing them to vote for you (or at least not voting against you).
What that means for policy is not clear - but given it was something I thought daft (I think Terry Prachett must of mocked compulsory voting at some point) I now think that maybe there is something in it.
I don’t quite get how compulsory voting works. What happens if you don’t vote?
So after paying for my uni tuition that the boomers got for free, I now have to pay tax on my pension contributions when the boomers didn't, just to make sure that the boomers get an even more generous state pension with their final salary pensions, of which I will get neither. https://x.com/ebullienteddie/status/1987057199714037978
90% of boomers never went to university. The tweeter will also get the triple lock as it stands when they retire
I wouldn't bet on the triple lock still being in place by the time that Tweeter retires.
It will unless a party wants to commit electoral suicide. At most it might be means tested
Rachel can be brave and scrap the triple lock 2026. CPI only for state pensions. £10bn (roughly) saved
1% on income tax (2% on higher and additional rates) £10bn
Freeze on thresholds to 2030 £10bn
Total £30bn sorted! If there's a shortfall we can always increase inheritance tax 👍
And wipe the Labour Party out at the next GE too. Fine by me!
So after paying for my uni tuition that the boomers got for free, I now have to pay tax on my pension contributions when the boomers didn't, just to make sure that the boomers get an even more generous state pension with their final salary pensions, of which I will get neither. https://x.com/ebullienteddie/status/1987057199714037978
The price of not voting as much as the oldies do. Its expensive.
I listened to a podcast recently that argued that compulsory voting (as in Australia) would have the effect of evening that up, and thus going some way to breaking the grip that pensioners and near-pensioners have on British politics. I instinctively rebel at the suggestion of compelling voting, but it's an interesting idea.
My preference would be to grant the vote to everyone, from birth, with the primary care giver casting a vote by proxy for the child until they claim the vote for themselves. I think that's the only way to decisively break the hold of the gerontocracy on British politics.
Was that the “past, present, future” podcast? Or at least they did one that made a similar argument. To be honest I always thought the only thing we can learn from Australian politics was the “Democracy Sausage,” however the podcast I listened to made the point that if everyone votes (so young and also non-university educated) then you have at least got to make an effort of convincing them to vote for you (or at least not voting against you).
What that means for policy is not clear - but given it was something I thought daft (I think Terry Prachett must of mocked compulsory voting at some point) I now think that maybe there is something in it.
That was the podcast, yes. I thought the podcast they did on referendums was also really interesting.
So after paying for my uni tuition that the boomers got for free, I now have to pay tax on my pension contributions when the boomers didn't, just to make sure that the boomers get an even more generous state pension with their final salary pensions, of which I will get neither. https://x.com/ebullienteddie/status/1987057199714037978
The price of not voting as much as the oldies do. Its expensive.
I listened to a podcast recently that argued that compulsory voting (as in Australia) would have the effect of evening that up, and thus going some way to breaking the grip that pensioners and near-pensioners have on British politics. I instinctively rebel at the suggestion of compelling voting, but it's an interesting idea.
My preference would be to grant the vote to everyone, from birth, with the primary care giver casting a vote by proxy for the child until they claim the vote for themselves. I think that's the only way to decisively break the hold of the gerontocracy on British politics.
Was that the “past, present, future” podcast? Or at least they did one that made a similar argument. To be honest I always thought the only thing we can learn from Australian politics was the “Democracy Sausage,” however the podcast I listened to made the point that if everyone votes (so young and also non-university educated) then you have at least got to make an effort of convincing them to vote for you (or at least not voting against you).
What that means for policy is not clear - but given it was something I thought daft (I think Terry Prachett must of mocked compulsory voting at some point) I now think that maybe there is something in it.
I don’t quite get how compulsory voting works. What happens if you don’t vote?
Transportation to Australia - or something *shrugs shoulders*
So after paying for my uni tuition that the boomers got for free, I now have to pay tax on my pension contributions when the boomers didn't, just to make sure that the boomers get an even more generous state pension with their final salary pensions, of which I will get neither. https://x.com/ebullienteddie/status/1987057199714037978
The price of not voting as much as the oldies do. Its expensive.
I listened to a podcast recently that argued that compulsory voting (as in Australia) would have the effect of evening that up, and thus going some way to breaking the grip that pensioners and near-pensioners have on British politics. I instinctively rebel at the suggestion of compelling voting, but it's an interesting idea.
My preference would be to grant the vote to everyone, from birth, with the primary care giver casting a vote by proxy for the child until they claim the vote for themselves. I think that's the only way to decisively break the hold of the gerontocracy on British politics.
Was that the “past, present, future” podcast? Or at least they did one that made a similar argument. To be honest I always thought the only thing we can learn from Australian politics was the “Democracy Sausage,” however the podcast I listened to made the point that if everyone votes (so young and also non-university educated) then you have at least got to make an effort of convincing them to vote for you (or at least not voting against you).
What that means for policy is not clear - but given it was something I thought daft (I think Terry Prachett must of mocked compulsory voting at some point) I now think that maybe there is something in it.
I don’t quite get how compulsory voting works. What happens if you don’t vote?
In Australia they send you a letter telling you that they noticed you didn't vote and giving you a choice of writing to them to explain why you didn't vote (there are exemptions for those who claim a religious bar against voting), or of paying a modest fine.
Interesting that resigning head of news denies the BBC is biased.. they just don't get it. Corrupt.. biased... call it what you like. If you can't trust the BBC then something is terribly wrong. To call a disgraceful edit that had to be by design.. "a mistake" is not fooling anyone.
The BBC was forced to make 215 corrections in the last two years over the coverage by its BBC Arabic arm ( funded through our licence fee) of the Gaza conflict.
This is why it isn't really the Trump thing, although that will be all the focus.
The BBC is biased to the right if one is left of centre (me) and biased to the left if one is right of centre (the PB Tory massif).
Clearly one can offset those 215 pro Gazan corrections with the 215 or so times the BBC has relied on Eylon Levy and other assorted ghouls for "unbiased" commentary on the Gaza war.
There is a lot of merit in the first sentence. Personally I think the bias is not left/right, it’s more metropolitan/young vs rural/old. It’s the advert conundrum in another form. Young BBC staffers living young urban lives are surrounded by people from all kinds of backgrounds that crucially share most of the same values. So that’s the view that dominates. It reminds me of all the uni staff who never met anyone who voted for Brexit. Well of course, because their circle didn’t.
Since 80% of the population don't live in rural areas, the rural/urban imbalance is hardly the same thing as bias.
So rural views don’t matter. Townyfile is the perfect embodiment.
So after paying for my uni tuition that the boomers got for free, I now have to pay tax on my pension contributions when the boomers didn't, just to make sure that the boomers get an even more generous state pension with their final salary pensions, of which I will get neither. https://x.com/ebullienteddie/status/1987057199714037978
90% of boomers never went to university. The tweeter will also get the triple lock as it stands when they retire
I wouldn't bet on the triple lock still being in place by the time that Tweeter retires.
It will unless a party wants to commit electoral suicide. At most it might be means tested
Rachel can be brave and scrap the triple lock 2026. CPI only for state pensions. £10bn (roughly) saved
1% on income tax (2% on higher and additional rates) £10bn
Freeze on thresholds to 2030 £10bn
Total £30bn sorted! If there's a shortfall we can always increase inheritance tax 👍
And wipe the Labour Party out at the next GE too. Fine by me!
Interesting that resigning head of news denies the BBC is biased.. they just don't get it. Corrupt.. biased... call it what you like. If you can't trust the BBC then something is terribly wrong. To call a disgraceful edit that had to be by design.. "a mistake" is not fooling anyone.
The BBC was forced to make 215 corrections in the last two years over the coverage by its BBC Arabic arm ( funded through our licence fee) of the Gaza conflict.
This is why it isn't really the Trump thing, although that will be all the focus.
The BBC is biased to the right if one is left of centre (me) and biased to the left if one is right of centre (the PB Tory massif).
Clearly one can offset those 215 pro Gazan corrections with the 215 or so times the BBC has relied on Eylon Levy and other assorted ghouls for "unbiased" commentary on the Gaza war.
There is a lot of merit in the first sentence. Personally I think the bias is not left/right, it’s more metropolitan/young vs rural/old. It’s the advert conundrum in another form. Young BBC staffers living young urban lives are surrounded by people from all kinds of backgrounds that crucially share most of the same values. So that’s the view that dominates. It reminds me of all the uni staff who never met anyone who voted for Brexit. Well of course, because their circle didn’t.
Since 80% of the population don't live in rural areas, the rural/urban imbalance is hardly the same thing as bias.
So rural views don’t matter. Townyfile is the perfect embodiment.
That's not what I said - or indeed the case with the BBC. But you carry on with your own biased view.
Interesting that resigning head of news denies the BBC is biased.. they just don't get it. Corrupt.. biased... call it what you like. If you can't trust the BBC then something is terribly wrong. To call a disgraceful edit that had to be by design.. "a mistake" is not fooling anyone.
The BBC was forced to make 215 corrections in the last two years over the coverage by its BBC Arabic arm ( funded through our licence fee) of the Gaza conflict.
This is why it isn't really the Trump thing, although that will be all the focus.
The BBC is biased to the right if one is left of centre (me) and biased to the left if one is right of centre (the PB Tory massif).
Clearly one can offset those 215 pro Gazan corrections with the 215 or so times the BBC has relied on Eylon Levy and other assorted ghouls for "unbiased" commentary on the Gaza war.
There is a lot of merit in the first sentence. Personally I think the bias is not left/right, it’s more metropolitan/young vs rural/old. It’s the advert conundrum in another form. Young BBC staffers living young urban lives are surrounded by people from all kinds of backgrounds that crucially share most of the same values. So that’s the view that dominates. It reminds me of all the uni staff who never met anyone who voted for Brexit. Well of course, because their circle didn’t.
Since 80% of the population don't live in rural areas, the rural/urban imbalance is hardly the same thing as bias.
So rural views don’t matter. Townyfile is the perfect embodiment.
That's not what I said - or indeed the case with the BBC. But you carry on with your own biased view.
The divide that matters imo is urban vs suburban/rural which makes it more like 50/50.
Interesting that resigning head of news denies the BBC is biased.. they just don't get it. Corrupt.. biased... call it what you like. If you can't trust the BBC then something is terribly wrong. To call a disgraceful edit that had to be by design.. "a mistake" is not fooling anyone.
The BBC was forced to make 215 corrections in the last two years over the coverage by its BBC Arabic arm ( funded through our licence fee) of the Gaza conflict.
This is why it isn't really the Trump thing, although that will be all the focus.
The BBC is biased to the right if one is left of centre (me) and biased to the left if one is right of centre (the PB Tory massif).
Clearly one can offset those 215 pro Gazan corrections with the 215 or so times the BBC has relied on Eylon Levy and other assorted ghouls for "unbiased" commentary on the Gaza war.
There is a lot of merit in the first sentence. Personally I think the bias is not left/right, it’s more metropolitan/young vs rural/old. It’s the advert conundrum in another form. Young BBC staffers living young urban lives are surrounded by people from all kinds of backgrounds that crucially share most of the same values. So that’s the view that dominates. It reminds me of all the uni staff who never met anyone who voted for Brexit. Well of course, because their circle didn’t.
Since 80% of the population don't live in rural areas, the rural/urban imbalance is hardly the same thing as bias.
So rural views don’t matter. Townyfile is the perfect embodiment.
That's not what I said - or indeed the case with the BBC. But you carry on with your own biased view.
I’m glad people have picked up on the Beeb’s town and city bias. They rely far too much for their “voice of the people” schtick on voxpops from elderly shoppers during weekday lunchtimes in Bury and Stoke.
They need to get out into the proper countryside more. Places like Tiverton and Honiton, North Shropshire or Westmorland and Lonsdale.
By the way good evening from North California where I’ve been following in Leon’s recent footsteps. Touring Napa, Sonoma and the Anderson Valley tasting as I go, walking through groves of giant redwoods, eating oysters on the beach facing a flooded section of the San Andreas fault where they’re grown, and now in an unseasonably sunny and warm San Francisco where the purported human hellhole I’d been led to expect by MAGA is stubbornly failing to show itself.
Photo for the day: a surfer catches a wave off Salmon Creek beach.
Interesting that resigning head of news denies the BBC is biased.. they just don't get it. Corrupt.. biased... call it what you like. If you can't trust the BBC then something is terribly wrong. To call a disgraceful edit that had to be by design.. "a mistake" is not fooling anyone.
The BBC was forced to make 215 corrections in the last two years over the coverage by its BBC Arabic arm ( funded through our licence fee) of the Gaza conflict.
This is why it isn't really the Trump thing, although that will be all the focus.
The BBC is biased to the right if one is left of centre (me) and biased to the left if one is right of centre (the PB Tory massif).
Clearly one can offset those 215 pro Gazan corrections with the 215 or so times the BBC has relied on Eylon Levy and other assorted ghouls for "unbiased" commentary on the Gaza war.
There is a lot of merit in the first sentence. Personally I think the bias is not left/right, it’s more metropolitan/young vs rural/old. It’s the advert conundrum in another form. Young BBC staffers living young urban lives are surrounded by people from all kinds of backgrounds that crucially share most of the same values. So that’s the view that dominates. It reminds me of all the uni staff who never met anyone who voted for Brexit. Well of course, because their circle didn’t.
To an extent but the BBC to its credit also still does Countryfile, Farming Today, the Archers etc
Interesting that resigning head of news denies the BBC is biased.. they just don't get it. Corrupt.. biased... call it what you like. If you can't trust the BBC then something is terribly wrong. To call a disgraceful edit that had to be by design.. "a mistake" is not fooling anyone.
The BBC was forced to make 215 corrections in the last two years over the coverage by its BBC Arabic arm ( funded through our licence fee) of the Gaza conflict.
This is why it isn't really the Trump thing, although that will be all the focus.
The BBC is biased to the right if one is left of centre (me) and biased to the left if one is right of centre (the PB Tory massif).
Clearly one can offset those 215 pro Gazan corrections with the 215 or so times the BBC has relied on Eylon Levy and other assorted ghouls for "unbiased" commentary on the Gaza war.
There is a lot of merit in the first sentence. Personally I think the bias is not left/right, it’s more metropolitan/young vs rural/old. It’s the advert conundrum in another form. Young BBC staffers living young urban lives are surrounded by people from all kinds of backgrounds that crucially share most of the same values. So that’s the view that dominates. It reminds me of all the uni staff who never met anyone who voted for Brexit. Well of course, because their circle didn’t.
Since 80% of the population don't live in rural areas, the rural/urban imbalance is hardly the same thing as bias.
So rural views don’t matter. Townyfile is the perfect embodiment.
That's not what I said - or indeed the case with the BBC. But you carry on with your own biased view.
The divide that matters imo is urban vs suburban/rural which makes it more like 50/50.
So after paying for my uni tuition that the boomers got for free, I now have to pay tax on my pension contributions when the boomers didn't, just to make sure that the boomers get an even more generous state pension with their final salary pensions, of which I will get neither. https://x.com/ebullienteddie/status/1987057199714037978
That seems an out of time, unaware comment.
The boomers also paid for the national infra where investment stopped or slowed in the 1980s - reservoirs, roads, motorways, change to natural gas, and for all the investment in Council houses when they were still being built, and paid off the war debt whilst living less affluent lifestyles than now, and so on.
Every generation has built infrastructure. The debt was inflated away in the post-war period more than paid off. I agree they financed the building of a bunch of crappy slums though.
The state pension should be merged with incapacity benefit and restricted to those genuinely unable to work. If people want to stop working early or downshift, fine they can do what they want, but I can't see why the overtaxed young, burdened with disastrous student loans and staggering housing costs, should pay for their end-of-life gap years or decades.
And as for millionaire pensioners getting free public transport while the minimum waged young have to pay full price ...
Comments
My preference would be to grant the vote to everyone, from birth, with the primary care giver casting a vote by proxy for the child until they claim the vote for themselves. I think that's the only way to decisively break the hold of the gerontocracy on British politics.
How an Adam Schiff indictment could shake the Senate
If Schiff is indicted, it would mark the first time Trump’s pursuit of political adversaries has directly affected a sitting member of the Senate.
https://www.politico.com/news/2025/11/09/adam-schiff-indictment-trump-doj-00643603
AOC: 55%
Schumer: 36%
Data For Progress / March 31, 2025 / n=767
https://x.com/USA_Polling/status/1908136312537756069
What that means for policy is not clear - but given it was something I thought daft (I think Terry Prachett must of mocked compulsory voting at some point) I now think that maybe there is something in it.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oXurmD0XtLM
We have a new type of rule now. Not one man rule or rule of aristocracy or plutocracy, but of small groups elevated to positions of absolute power by random pressures and subject to political and economic factors that leave little room for decisions. They are representatives of abstract forces who have reached power through surrender of self. The iron-willed dictator is a thing of the past.
There will be no more Stalins, no more Hitlers. The rulers of this most insecure of all worlds are rulers by accident; inept, frightened pilots at the controls of a vast machine that they cannot understand, calling in experts to tell them which button to push.
1% on income tax (2% on higher and additional rates) £10bn
Freeze on thresholds to 2030 £10bn
Total £30bn sorted! If there's a shortfall we can always increase inheritance tax 👍
Hegseth thinks it’s a training manual.
But you carry on with your own biased view.
They need to get out into the proper countryside more. Places like Tiverton and Honiton, North Shropshire or Westmorland and Lonsdale.
Photo for the day: a surfer catches a wave off Salmon Creek beach.
https://x.com/PressSec/status/1987591745610359152#m
https://x.com/PressSec/status/1987623529177838045#m
The state pension should be merged with incapacity benefit and restricted to those genuinely unable to work. If people want to stop working early or downshift, fine they can do what they want, but I can't see why the overtaxed young, burdened with disastrous student loans and staggering housing costs, should pay for their end-of-life gap years or decades.
And as for millionaire pensioners getting free public transport while the minimum waged young have to pay full price ...