The Brown Broadcasting Corporation

(Previously the Blair Broadcasting Corporation - as suggested by a comment on this blog recently).

There are a number of websites which analyse documentary radio programmes, and TV programmes also, and record signs of bias.

What must be accepted, I think, is that editorial policy influences reporting. There are many examples, such as the refusal to call Palestinian fighters "terrorists" but rather "militants". This is so consistent that it must reflect editorial policy. Other examples could be be the use of slightly derogatory adjectives in introducing items about Sarah Palin.

The steady drip, drip, drip of these and many others could be conditioning listeners or viewers to the same values as the BBC, and do reflect a lack of objectivity.

Is there a wider bias?

Yes - it certainly seems to be the case that the BBC supports the EU, and also Republicans in the USA, both in the balance of time awarded to other positions and in summaries.

In part it may reflect the progressive philosophy prevalent among many intellectuals. The BBC seems to have favourites when inviting interviewees on radio and Television, - Menzies Campbell and Vince Cable, for instance, who are paraded at every opportunity, and certainly out of all proportion to the size of their party and their position in it.

There seems to be a preference for Labour over the Conservatives. In the dog days of the Major government, the PM or any minister was bound to be invited to comment on current problems, and was often interviewed on the telephone. There followed in the studio a rebuttal whtout evidence with no possibility for comeback by the previous government speaker. Since the change of government, the order has been reversed - first the opposition speaker, then a Government rebuttal to rubbish without challenge what has just been said. It happens so consistently that it cannot be a coincidence.

The style of interview tends to differ also, - aggressive with the Tories, matter-of-fact with NuLabour. The supreme example is the Marr programme, with an endless series of government spokesmen able to parade their views without serious challenge. There is also a kind of deference shown to Bottler Brown, - perhaps because at the least sign of challenge he will recite a litany of facts (well, at least facts as he pretends), and this may not make interviewing easy.

Is it bias? Yes, I think so. The BBC may not show the visceral aggression shown by Nulabour and other so-called progressives against the caricature of nasty Tories of the past, but there is a consistency which suggests a strong bias. This is supported by Robin Aitken in his book, "Can We Trust the BBC?" last year.

The bias may even be defensive. It is becoming progressively harder for the BBC to maintain its monopoly of the licence fee to maintain dominance in many areas of the media, and to avoid regulation like all other broadcasters. The Tories may be the party most likely to want reform. If they are elected, some of the self-indulgence at the BBC may be under threat from the possibility of a Tory Government.