I find the same about the BBC news as well now. Whether or not they used to report a ‘balanced’ news I really don’t know. I look back and think they did but maybe that was youthful naivety and more of a belief that the establishment had my best interests at heart. The older I get, the more cynical and intolerant I become and with that comes a belief that the establishment cares only for the continuation of the establishment. I think I’ve read 1984 too many times!!
But to report news is to give your opinion. It's impossible not to. You can try to be balanced but it's subjectivity and opinion that shapes how the article is told. What information is presented and what is held back as irrelevant or less relevant to the story. Some of the most opinionated news presents no kind of opinion at all. The only way of getting a non biased version of events is to watch the events unfold.
I agree with Disco on this. Many of the great human endeavours- art, literature, music, interpretation of an archaeological site- are influenced by and reflect the opinions of the person carrying out those endeavours. That can be done consciously or sub-consciously but it's impossible to completely remove. So news reporting will always carry some of the bias of the news reporter. What I find interesting about the BBC is that 'the left' constantly complain that it is right leaning and 'the right' constantly complain that it's left leaning. Which suggests to me that it's probably getting things about right.
I wouldn't agree with that statement in that form, no. It's too sweeping and without balance. I might take on board the opinion of an organisation like Counterfire but I wouldn't rely on it or regard it as truthful.
I very much doubt it gets things about right. News readers are tasked with imparting factual information,without influence or opinion in altering the tone of their voice or slightly shaking their head in despair,as we've witnessed countless times over recent years. One of the main issues I find,is that they are so desperate to bring "breaking news" that they impart such minor information as they have,instead of collecting the actual facts and then reporting them. I've lost count of the number of times we get some such news....let's say,for example,of a suspicious death somewhere......and all we see are pics of bunches of flowers at the scene and comments from people saying how lovely and kind the victim was. Does that actually fulfil the job description of informing the public of the events? Of course it doesn't. They're scared is the answer.....of being left behind by social media and other organisations,and of saying or presenting something,not properly researched,which is going to upset the people who seem to need to be upset,usually on behalf of others,and who seek to control our thought processes to suit their own agenda.
I think the bit in bold is a product of 24hr news channels. Something happens, if they don't mention it the purpose of 24hr news is negated, but limited information will be available in the early stages so there's not much to be said. I'm not sure how you can improve TV News reporting overall. It can't just be a list of all the things that have happened that day. But my point was that the BBC get things broadly right in terms of bias.
