IAN Small’s riposte to The National’s article (Letters, August 8) fails to address the simple fact that the BBC are losing credibility (and relevance) as an impartial reporter of Scottish news – which, based on the many examples that are available (the website thoughtcontrolscotland.com is a rich source), I see as a very positive and realistic outcome. And delving a little deeper, basically he’s saying the BBC (in) Scotland is not perceived to be as bad as the others (yet – give it anther month or so).
READ MORE: From the BBC: 'Coverage of Ofcom report was cherry picked'
There are, I’m sure, plenty of folks who engage with their light entertainment and drama output, but more and more people in Scotland have been made aware of the BBC’s remit to “promote cohesion” across the UK, and how their news and political coverage has reflected that remit. There is an excellent academic study of the BBC’s coverage of the 2014 indy referendum by Dr John Robertson, which shows how the BBC favoured the No campaign. (Dr Robertson was subsequently harassed by senior management of the BBC, who contacted his employer. Telling the truth has consequences!)
We’ve seen and heard “sweetheart” interviews of Ruth Davidson (and other pro-Union figures), where she has (and they have) been allowed to spread disinformation without challenge, and we have seen and heard “attack dog” interviews directed at leading figures in the SNP, where questions satisfactorily answered 50 times already are trotted out like clockwork.
These interviews are conducted by journalists who apparently haven’t bothered to do the research or background investigation to verify their sources before asking their questions. So either they have and are ignoring this to score political points, or they haven’t bothered and are revealing a complete lack of professionalism or worse, incompetence. I know which scenario best fits the outcome.
To put this in perspective, trust in the media in the UK is very low compared to our European neighbours. As Ian drew our attention to comparisons of the BBC with the newspapers, it’s worth mentioning a survey of the printed media conducted every year by the EU in 33 countries. It was highlighted in a 2018 BBC Newsnight interview with John Cleese, where he showed that the UK’s “trust level” was only 23% (the lowest on the chart, and diametrically opposite to the Dutch, who managed 77%).
So, do I expect the BBC and BBC (in) Scotland to suddenly aspire to the journalistic standards they claim to uphold? Of course not; they have their remit, which in time of “war”
(Boris Johnson has set the tone here!) means using the “state” media to spread disinformation, and plenty of propaganda-rich support of the state is expected. And the government “tone”, the one the BBC is supporting, is one of ongoing deceit. Similar to that practised in the 70s with the suppression of the McCrone report and the government disinformation campaign on the quantities of oil in Scottish waters. All done for reasons of national economic security, so that was OK (yeah, right)! Repeat same exercise in 2014 with suppression of the Clair oil field information until after the indy vote.
Also consider that the UK has dropped oil tax revenues to a “mates rates” level of ZERO per cent, which is also very handy when “running the numbers” and promoting the idea that
Scotland wouldn’t manage the “burden” of oil as it apparently has no “intrinsic” value to the exchequer, and would actually be a drain as the oil companies earn tax rebates. Strange how every other oil producer on the planet has managed to maintain higher tax returns? Any comment on that, BBC?
Alistair Potter
via thenational.scot
Why are you making commenting on The National only available to subscribers?
We know there are thousands of National readers who want to debate, argue and go back and forth in the comments section of our stories. We’ve got the most informed readers in Scotland, asking each other the big questions about the future of our country.
Unfortunately, though, these important debates are being spoiled by a vocal minority of trolls who aren’t really interested in the issues, try to derail the conversations, register under fake names, and post vile abuse.
So that’s why we’ve decided to make the ability to comment only available to our paying subscribers. That way, all the trolls who post abuse on our website will have to pay if they want to join the debate – and risk a permanent ban from the account that they subscribe with.
The conversation will go back to what it should be about – people who care passionately about the issues, but disagree constructively on what we should do about them. Let’s get that debate started!
Callum Baird, Editor of The National
Comments: Our rules
We want our comments to be a lively and valuable part of our community - a place where readers can debate and engage with the most important local issues. The ability to comment on our stories is a privilege, not a right, however, and that privilege may be withdrawn if it is abused or misused.
Please report any comments that break our rules.
Read the rules hereLast Updated:
Report this comment Cancel