So when (if) the Conservative Party fail to win an absolute majority at the forthcoming general election and a new party (parties) form the government what effect will that have on BBC productions and editorial policy? How will I detect these government controlled shifts in output? Will all the (current) government planned and controlled content be immediately shelved and the new government will only show repeats / reruns until new propaganda is produced?
It’ll be more subtle than that. As current members of the BBC board leave their replacements will be appointed under “recommendation” of the new secretary of state. Hardly an a political way of doing things.
Still, at least we just do it for one media organisation. Doing it for something like judges could be really really dangerous.
In the interests of checks and balances it’s worth noting that the Secretary of State should only recommend from a list of people provided by the Privy Council.
And yes, in my opinion too, politically appointing judges is absolute insanity for a number of reasons.
In the interests of checks and balances it’s worth noting that the Secretary of State should only recommend from a list of people provided by the Privy Council.
Ah that’s OK then, its not like the privy council is “mainly senior politicians who are current or former members of either the House of Commons or the House of Lords”.
Correct. Mostly senior politicians of ALL major parties ( so that could theoretically be a mix of tories, labour, snp, lib-dem, dup, sinn fein, plaid, green, sdp (if anyone is still alive), independent etc.) across the floor of either House of Parliament; plus some religious leaders, some British and also non-British judges and a few other people. Bit of a mixed bag because if all your advisors agree on everything you probably need new advisors.
So we keep the Tory bias until they no longer make up majority of both the commons and the lords. Because if you have a pool of people to pull from and most of them are Tories you’re likely to end up with a Tory.
No. It’s just that at the birth of British political parties the Whigs (liberals) were the opposition to the Tories. A liberal institution having a Tory bias would be as likely as a vegetarian society having a meat eating bias. The sentence op posted is an oxymoron.
It’s pretty clear what they meant. Righties claim the BBC is a left-biased institution when the evidence is that it gives right wing opinions more airtime than left. It’s just not as mad as the Daily Mail, so the readers of that esteemed periodical think the BBC for pinkos.
Lol BBC liberal media. They have a massive Tory bias.
Tories have great funding from corporate, thus BBC have better funding from the Tories, capitalism baby
It’s not just that. As government they have influence over who runs the BBC. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/BBC_Board
So when (if) the Conservative Party fail to win an absolute majority at the forthcoming general election and a new party (parties) form the government what effect will that have on BBC productions and editorial policy? How will I detect these government controlled shifts in output? Will all the (current) government planned and controlled content be immediately shelved and the new government will only show repeats / reruns until new propaganda is produced?
It’ll be more subtle than that. As current members of the BBC board leave their replacements will be appointed under “recommendation” of the new secretary of state. Hardly an a political way of doing things.
Still, at least we just do it for one media organisation. Doing it for something like judges could be really really dangerous.
In the interests of checks and balances it’s worth noting that the Secretary of State should only recommend from a list of people provided by the Privy Council. And yes, in my opinion too, politically appointing judges is absolute insanity for a number of reasons.
Ah that’s OK then, its not like the privy council is “mainly senior politicians who are current or former members of either the House of Commons or the House of Lords”.
Correct. Mostly senior politicians of ALL major parties ( so that could theoretically be a mix of tories, labour, snp, lib-dem, dup, sinn fein, plaid, green, sdp (if anyone is still alive), independent etc.) across the floor of either House of Parliament; plus some religious leaders, some British and also non-British judges and a few other people. Bit of a mixed bag because if all your advisors agree on everything you probably need new advisors.
So we keep the Tory bias until they no longer make up majority of both the commons and the lords. Because if you have a pool of people to pull from and most of them are Tories you’re likely to end up with a Tory.
The liberal BBC with a Tory bias? That’s really funny… but sadly I’m pretty sure some people won’t get the joke.
Are you saying they hang to the right?
No. It’s just that at the birth of British political parties the Whigs (liberals) were the opposition to the Tories. A liberal institution having a Tory bias would be as likely as a vegetarian society having a meat eating bias. The sentence op posted is an oxymoron.
It’s pretty clear what they meant. Righties claim the BBC is a left-biased institution when the evidence is that it gives right wing opinions more airtime than left. It’s just not as mad as the Daily Mail, so the readers of that esteemed periodical think the BBC for pinkos.