Big Media, Murdoch and the BBC

The current Murdoch BSkyB story is an illustration of what Engdahl refers to as Big Media. It has frequently been stated that the world’s media is effectively in the hands of a few media moguls. The repercussions of this are evident:

When media companies dominate their markets, it undercuts our democracy. Justice Hugo Black, in a landmark media-ownership case in 1945, wrote: ‘The First Amendment rests on the assumption that the widest possible dissemination of information from diverse and antagonistic sources is essential to the welfare of the public. These big companies are not antagonistic; they do billions of dollars in business with each other. They don’t compete; they cooperate to inhibit competition. 

http://wilsonsalmanac.blogspot.com/2005/10/ted-turner-on-dangers-of-big-media.html 

http://www.washingtonmonthly.com/features/2004/0407.turner.html

You may be thinking that the good old Beeb is free from any of these issues. However, this appears to be far from the truth. What we now have on BBC news is a limited selection of stories taken from a particular angle and rarely showing an alternative viewpoint. The BBC has adopted a practice of  interviewing their own reporters who give us their opinion of things. Worse still they deal in predictions. Such comments as “If this trend continues we could see…” mean very little. Its supposed to be news not predictions. There is an important difference. 

The content has been dumbed down to contain many human interest stories which have sometimes completely dominated the news to the exclusion of other important stories. This appears to be a growing trend. 

News will always be biased but if you want to see the stories you don’t get on mainstream then try Russia Today  or Al Jazeera for a change, where you will frequently find US, British and European politicians in discussion on matters or angles that will receive no coverage on British mainstream. Are you thinking I must be some sort of dissident? Well, the definition of that is: disagreeing, someone who disagrees, so that would be correct. I disagree with the biased reporting on selected subjects to the exclusion of other important subjects that now seems to form the basis of mainstream news presentation, this applies to the BBC in particular, which I see as little better than brainwashing and propaganda. I’m not saying that Russia Today www.rt.com or Aljazeera  www.aljazeera.com are unbiased. My point is that by using a variety of sources this can help to provide more balance than is the case if we listen exclusively to dumbed-down one-sided reporting. 

 ITN reporter, Peter Sissons became very aware of  the BBC  ‘mindset’. He reports that certain subjects were considered intrinsically good  and were always to be given positive coverage whereas other subjects were not touched upon or not in a positive manner.

 At the core of the BBC, in its very DNA, is a way of thinking that is firmly of the Left……

All Governments work hard on influencing the news agenda, but what I found uncomfortable during my years presenting the Nine O’clock and Ten O’clock News was how blatant those attempts to pressurise the BBC became, particularly at General Election time.

Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1349506/Left-wing-bias-Its-written-BBCs-DNA-says-Peter-Sissons.html 

If you prefer media shaken and stirred the BBC is probably not what you are looking for.

Advertisements

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s