BBC World News shames our nation


BBC World News shames our nation

BBC bias is a national shame. Without an influx of open minds, BBC World News will continue to broadcast news in a biased way for years to come, says Rory Broomfield.

It’s nearing a week since the death of the brutal dictator Fidel Castro in Cuba and, frankly, the response of the Left in British politics has been shameful.

This was mentioned in an excellent article by William Walter earlier this week; however, what adds to the worry is that the Left still retain a key tool in its propaganda projections: the BBC.

Sat in my hotel room last week, I watched the BBC’s World News coverage of Castro’s death, Brexit, US President-elect Trump’s nominees for key roles and other issues besides. I found it deeply frustrating. Time after time they had the same sort of talking heads on – the so called “experts” from the so called “liberal elite” – who constantly peddled a leftist agenda without any desire to give balance. They were being paraded onto show after show and going unchallenged by the presenters hosting the programmes. One guest, another “expert” from the LSE, in her interview tried to justify Castro’s human rights record by saying that he wasn’t as bad as the previous regime – despite Castro’s horrific record itself. Was she challenged by the presenter on the premise that two wrongs don’t make a right? Maybe the presenter said that just because others have been brutal and murderous it doesn’t mean that Castro had to be? Did the presenter do anything?! Did they heck!

Unfortunately, this was a common occurrence throughout the programming. It was also exhibited by reports from journalists “in the field” (well, in places like Washington, New York and Miami…) where they covered issues in a typically selective way. For instance, when describing the President-elect’s nominee for the US Ambassador to the UN, the best the BBC could describe Nikki Haley as is “not as bad as the other possibilities” (presumably meaning someone like Jon Bolton, who the BBC would hate to see back in a position of power). In doing so, the reporter illustrated biases that is evident throughout the channel. Even when talking about something non-political, presenters couldn’t stop themselves from forming a narrative of praise for a leftist political agenda – even ones like Castro’s Cuba. Such an example was when one journalist was looking at the restoration of the El Capitol building in Havana – heaping praise on it for the initiative. Did he mention the poverty that surrounds the building though? Maybe he highlighted that Cuba is ploughing money into a project costing £100 million, despite a poverty-stricken economy where the average wage of a worker is roughly $20 a month? Nope!

Finally, on Dateline London with Gavin Esler, there was a roundtable of Europhiles talking about, guess what, what a disaster Brexit is going to be. And all this broadcast on a television channel that has an estimated 76 million viewers per week. The programme – and the entire channel – gives the UK a bad name; it does the UK down and is an obvious play-thing for BBC staff who want to project their bias globally.

The crazy thing is that the BBC World News is funded by subscription and advertising revenue. Not by the BBC licence fee (TV tax). It shows that without the relic and anachronism that is the TV tax, programming can still survive and thrive (as if ITV, Channel 4 or Sky didn’t prove that already). However, it also shows that when the BBC licence fee is phased out in the future – and I predict that it will happen one day – there needs to be more (substantially more) emphasis on encouraging non-biased lefties to join as presenters and reporters.

Without an influx of new open minds, the BBC World News will be broadcasting news in a biased way for years to come. Those that want to see the BBC report in a balanced and credible way (rather than those on the left that want to see it as their chance to “influence the world”) should sign up. If we don’t have new people involved in the programme making, what’s projected is an unaccountable and unrepresentative view for the rest of the world to see. We should do better.

4.84 avg. rating (96% score) - 80 votes
  • contribute
  • Rory Broomfield
    Rory Broomfield
    Rory Broomfield is Director of The Freedom Association and the Better Off Out campaign. He is an authority on the EU and has written a number of books including his latest, co-authored with Iain Murray, Cutting the Gordian Knot: A Roadmap for British Exit from the European Union. He has previously worked in the City of London and in Westminster for a number of Members of Parliament, including the current Prime Minister, Theresa May; the current Chairman of the 1922 Committee, Graham Brady; and Sir Richard Shepherd.
    • Christopher Wood

      A few years ago, we moved to live on a boat in the Mediterranean and purchased an expensive radio to hear broadcasts from the BBC expecting to hear news about the UK. After all, is that not, supposedly the purpose of the World Service; to promote Britain.
      We quickly found that a number of English speaking European stations provided all we wanted, while the BBC seemed more interested in, for example, the plight of Sub Saharan Arabs. Diversity and Equality seemed to be a favourite subject, and always, of course from its metropilitan elite viewpoint. If 76 million listen, I suspect it is most likely to brush up their English. Today, I never watch any of their news or political programs.

    • John Smith
    • John Smith

      We all know it but the establishment props it up

    • Grammar Grub

      I have had the pleasure of occasionally lunching with a bunch of Beeboids. They ALL say the BBC is not biased. I was chatting to ‘the voice of the BBC online’, in other words all their website output, about the Referendum, knowing that it might cause a little upset. The guy practically imploded. “A bunch of dim Northern f**kers spoiled everything for us”.

    • TheRightToArmBears

      Stop paying the TV tax.
      I haven’t paid it for years. I get a monthly threatening letter, usually sequenced with a 1) soft, 2) informative, 3) stern, 4) threatening, then 5) a date for a visit, which never happens unless I’m very lucky. I say lucky because its as likely as winning the lottery.

      The bunnies that do call have no legal right of access or of any response. The last time I met one I said I was house-sitting and he was satisfied. He was an ordinary chap needing a job and he wasn’t looking for trouble, so be pleasant but uninformative.

      Its all a con to further the left and fund Dimblebee’s platinum pension schemes.

    • mike watterson

      The BBC is a disgrace to Britain….FULL STOP!

    • evad666

      Why no debate of Prof Stephen Hawkings piece on the BBC:-

    • Debs

      The BBC shames our nation full stop. Obsessed with Islam and diversity and anti British.
      I’m another one who doesn’t bother with it anymore ,especially not for news or current affairs.

    • alecto

      I cannot bear to watch the BBC any more so have not renewed the licence and have unplugged the aerial. Videos and CDs are all we watch on TV. The internet provides the news the library provides books and I have rediscovered my music library.

    • Queeker

      BBC World Service generally seems reasonably unbiased. Don’t know why this should be when domestic BBC peddles constant left wing bias – as of course does Channel 4 which is even worse

    • Iskender Haci
    • Unimpressed

      The BBC offers nothing relevant to me; the cultural Marxist agenda pervades the programming schedule in its entirety. The organisation is managed merely to ensure its continued existence whilst being in receipt of taxpayers money. Whilst it is undoubtedly a self policing sounding chamber for its employees, predominantly recruited from left leaning newspaper advertisements, its national relevance amongst younger generations is also slipping. My son rarely watches TV, and is entertained by videos hosted on YouTube and Netflix. He watches what he wants, when he wants and if he wants. It needs to modernise, increase its appeal and relevance, or die.

    • gillardgone

      The BBC is a biased organisation and has been for years, we saw it at the last election and in the EU referendum vote, there needs to be a wholesale culling of the leftist that have infiltrated this former British organisation, the vile left have ruined it beyond belief.

    • Derek

      Best not to watch the BBC for news as its a rest home for highly paid liberals who will never experience a single thought outside their own comfort zone.

      • TheRightToArmBears

        RT. is best.

    • UKSteve
    • My kikds are watching CBBC right now. I just heard the line, “Just because she’s rich doesn’t mean she’s not a human being.” So I guess there’s hope for the future.

    • Mojo

      The BBC should have its charter completely taken away. They should become totally commercial and the government should stop using them as they first port of call for Media announcements. It says a lot about government to allow this disgraceful display of arrogant socialism to carry on being aired. No one is saying it should be shut down but the fact thT our government condone its tone by using it as a forum is quite unacceptable. Even when BBC are bombarded with complaints they manage to slide off the responsibility perch by claiming they couldn’t find anyone willing to defend ‘the other option’.

      Our household hasn’t actually turned the TV on for a couple of years for anything. Even at Christmas, because so much of it is poor quality. There have been one or two documentaries and dramas where we used catchup. But even BBC radio has become a no go.

      The future is definitely the Internet and folk will use their tablets and phones to search out their own news sources. Good or bad the media as we know it is on the wayout. Nigel Farage was again spot on when he told the media conference in Amsterdam that they had themselves created their own demise by so much opinionated bias and untruthful news reporting.

    • SonofBoudica

      The BBC News runs, effectively, a Labour and Liberal, sometimes Green, and often European Commission, party political broadcast every single night with its Six O’Clock News. It selects stories purely on basis of those which support its liberal-left-green-EU agenda without any semblance of impartiality. I remember when the pompous Huw Edwards reported the migrant story from Budapest. He said “and now let’s hear what ordinary Hungarians think of the influx” and turned to three young students who all had radical pro-immigration views (not surprisingly). No attempt to talk to working people. The interviewees were selected purely on the basis of supporting the BBC’s pro-migrant slant. Has it got something on our government with which it can blackmail them, to prevent it being held to account for its bias?

    • ratcatcher11

      Heard another load of anti Brexit tripe on Radio 2 lunchtime. Every excuse why Brexit negotiations should be put to Parliament before they take place and not a single pro leave expert on the show to challenge the BBC group think. The BBC are one of the most despised organisations in the country yet still they go their merry way, pandering to the leftist minority that think the organisation is wonderful. They used to be mainstream now they are simply government funded click-bait for leftists.

    • NigelRHolder

      The BBC traditionally included one left wing and one right wing talking head when discussing a political topic – so as to demonstrate balance and an absence of bias. Now however, I see a tendency to include left and right talking heads who are both remainers. And no matter what the topic under discussion, they can both agree that Brexit will be a disaster. As a matter of urgency the BBC needs to pay less attention to left / right balance and move towards Leave / Remain balance in all its programing. Otherwise the BBC will be complicit in the undermining of democracy.

    • Dodgy Geezer

      The BBC website has a piece on ‘Chernobyl Myths’. One of these is that ‘The Exclusion Zone is fairly safe’ The response is ‘No it is not, it will be dangerous for 20,000 years!’

      This is not true. Radiation safety is a complex topic, made worse by the (incorrect) assumption that there is NO ‘safe’ level. Parts of the Exclusion Zone have lower radiation levels than Scandinavia at the moment, and people are living there with no immediate ill-effects – in the same way as they live in Cornwall with no immediate ill-effects. The figure of 20,000 years was one stated by the ex-Installation Manager, when asked about the time it would take for the site of the REACTOR to be handed back for agricultural use. This was his estimate of the time the reactor core would take to drop to safe levels naturally. In practice, of course, we are most likely to clean the site ourselves at some point in the next 100 years if there are good economic reasons to do so.

      But never mind – BBC journalists are both anti-nuclear, and unable to understand technical issues…

      • The Debunker No 2 BS

        BBC rule : if you have a science or engineering topic to report on, make sure the reporter has a qualification in arts.

        • Bernard from Bucks

          Preferably – ‘media studies’.

    • ilma630

      They are not just biased, but brazenly use wrong information in their news ‘presentations’; pseudo-facts that are easily checked. For example, their recent item about the Great Barrier Reef yet again blamed it on ‘climate change’, specifically the extra “carbon emissions” (wrong again, it is CO2) that was being absorbed by the warming oceans! WRONG!! A warming ocean OUTGASSES CO2, whereas a COOLING ocean absorbs it. How can they be that wrong, but for it being deliberate, based on their biases.

    • Andrew Mitchell

      I stopped buying a TV licence about 6 years ago, I had a Licence man turn up asking to see my licence, I told him I didn’t have one and wouldn’t be getting one, I said “the BBC is openly bias in favour of the left, I don’t support the left and I won’t help pay for the lefts propaganda, I added there’s a law in this country that states no person can be forced into handing over money to an organisation that promotes a political view, they don’t support” “it was brought in to stop the unions operating a closed shop”, he had my name and address, wrote down what I said, and I haven’t heard anything from that day to this.

      • ilma630

        That’s a great defence, effectively putting the onus onto the Licence man to not aiding and abetting the breaking of the law.

    • rick hamilton

      Of course we expats who do have access to CNN and other channels don’t believe anything the BBC says. We know they exist in an echo chamber talking only to people like themselves. We have worked out long ago that they are so inherently biased to the left that they don’t even know it.

      I can just about stomach Dateline London when Janet Daley is on but most of the time it’s the standard smug, knowing, politically correct crap from ‘liberals’ who are best ignored. What upsets me is that this garbage is going round the world and viewers who are not aware of the bias might think the BBC speaks for the British in general.

      At the end of the day they are just babbling observers and commentators, not news makers themselves , and they should damn well remember that.

      • ArchiePonsonby

        A good alternative guest to Janet Daley is Alex Deane. A thoroughly sound fellow!

    • seac

      I made this point on another website.

      I am based in an Anglophile ME country , and for years , the BBC was trusted . It is so laden with left wing propaganda now that people are seeking other sources. Yet the BBC World staff on both radio and TV think they can do no wrong.

    • Muttley

      I loathe the BBC more than anyone, but I wonder whether it being there and thrusting all their blatant metropolitan nonsense down our throats day after day has helped provoke or accelerate the current backlash. Without the Beeb splurging it everywhere, it could have taken another decade for people to realise just what was going on. In a way, maybe we have to thank them.

      • Roanoake

        Now at least, a majority of the voting public can see the BBC in their true colours.

      • Kingstonian

        “I loathe the BBC more than anyone” – not while I’m alive you don’t !

        • Muttley

          Wanna take it outside???

          • marc biff


    • Little Black Censored

      “Sat in my hotel room…” The word should be “seated” or “sitting”.

      • The Debunker No 2 BS

        Sat works for me.
        Past participle can be used to refer to a state (but not for all verbs).
        I was sat in my room. Thus you can have a participle phrase. “Sat in my hotel room”.
        Seated doesn’t work for me
        I was seated by the stewardess. You see “seated” implies someone else did the action.
        Sitting needs “whilst”, “Whilst sitting in my hotel room

    • Weygand

      BBC news presentation and analysis is uniformly poor and lacking objectivity. Most of those involved share the same perspective and simply echo each others views, smugly congratulating themselves on their own enlightenment, while deploring the ignorance of ‘populist’ objections.
      Is a symptom of the intellectual decline of the country over recent decades; a decline which seems set to continue, as emerging nations overtake us in educational and economic achievement.

    • gelert

      Castro was worse than the previous regime. Before Castro, Cuba was a lot better off than most countries in Latin America – now the situation is reversed.

      Pinochet prevented Chile from turning into another Cuba by Castro’s stooge, Allende. He ran a brutal regime but eventually had an election and accepted defeat. Yet he is excoriated by the left at every opportunity.

    • geordieboy

      The BBC is so biased that it doesn’t even try to hide it anymore. The Culture and Media Secretary should announce that unless they change their ways the Telly tax will be made voluntary from the 1st April 2017. That would put the s***s up them.

      • stewart

        Don’t hold your breath the previous culture secretary John Whittingdale was in favour of funding the so-called-BBC from the community charge. (Reason given? the licence fee is unfair to the poor ) can you imagine how the BBC would act liberated from the job of collecting their funding or the pretence of representing the views of those that pay for it
        The Tories believe that if they are nice enough to the BBC they will stop picking on them ( this is one area were they really could learn from Donald Trump)
        Mass no payment will not work as the BBC will use that as a reason to get funding from direct taxation (they are already floating the ‘ selfish non-payers endangering our BBC’ narrative)
        The answer is subscription only. If, as they say, the BBC is a national treasure beloved by all and such amazing value for money they will have no problem finding enough people to pay the 2/6d a day they say it costs and if not then the mass audience programs ( dead headers or the great British dance off) will find a natural home on free to air channels like C5 or ITV3 Audiences are not put from watching their commercial channel equivalents ( Emmerdale or coronation street) by adverts so that wont be a problem and the hard ware will be no harder to roll out than it was for digital which the SCBBC loved
        In fact there is no ethical or technical reason why the BBC shouldn’t be funded by subscription and if the Tories had any backbone they would instigate it without hesitation , but like I say don’t hold your breath

        • Old Gerry

          If forced to finance themselves by subscription, the BBC will surely bundle together programmes like S-C-Dancing and Bake-Off with their version of news and current affairs, then claim that the massive support gives them carte-blanche to present these things ‘in the way our viewers prefer’.

          • stewart

            Isn’t that what they do already? the only difference is I wouldn’t be forced to fund it
            And have they not lost the great Bourgeois wank off to C4? Having lost there biggest cash cow ,top gear, its hard to see what they are going to bundle the sinking ship newsnight with , citizen Khan?

        • Red

          I’m not holding my breath – just my cash! The BBC is way beyond repair and has become unfit for purpose so I have not paid the tv tax for years and have no intention of ever paying it again. I’ve had their bully boys turn up at my door wanting to “ask me a few questions” which is when I say “well, me first then; what colour underwear do you have on?” When they start getting uptight I just remind them that it was they who chose to turn up on my doorstep unasked so they could ask me questions which is fine by me if they answer my questions first. Haven’t seen them since.

    • obbo12

      The BBCs inherent Liberal assumptions are what will keep the right in power for next 20 years. Unless you want the left to win again shhhh.

    • CheshireRed

      Biased BBC indeed. Just refuse to pay their TV tax. I haven’t for 6 years. Never going to pay it again either. They can jog on.

    • Tad Stone

      I don’t bother with the BBC news for anything important. Castro was a thug.

      • SonofBoudica

        Unfortunately the BBC has a hugely dominant position in Television and Radio news broadcasting and a massive budget courtesy of the taxpayer for this (to send the pompous Huw Edwards frequently around the World to host news stories that are important enough to warrant his imperial presence).

      • Widggget

        Indeed, but the BBC has to be stopped from peddling this disinformation, as they are brainwashing a whole generation. No wonder colleges are needing their ‘safe spaces’.

        It’s not only Brexit, but climate change, the Middle East, Islam, to name a few, that they only represent their own view without any attempt at balance.

        The BBC are in serious breach of their charter obligations, and I’m coming to the view that the only way they can be halted is a licence fee boycott by viewers.

    We’re committed to providing a free platform to host insightful commentary from across the political spectrum. To help us expand our readership, and to show your support, please like our Facebook page: