zlacker

>>robthe+(OP)
This is how you govern from a position of unpopularity.

The government knows they’re on the wrong side of many issues, to the point they know they can’t win an open debate.

So media control, regulation by enforcement, and institutional control becomes the focus of effort.

>>spaceb+ab
There seems to be a prevalent notion within UK establishment circles, "we are being attacked from both sides, therefore we must be right/balanced/fair", which is totally not how it works. You see used for example to defend the supposed impartiality of the BBC.

>>geremi+Wc
The BBC has never been impartial to internal concerns - domestic politics in particular. Leveson Inquiry recommendations not being implemented is the tip of the iceberg in relation to the extent of client-journalism it engages in with regard to the Conservative party.

https://reutersinstitute.politics.ox.ac.uk/news/bbc-under-sc...

>>piltdo+ke
The thing is, the BBC is incredibly partial, depending on which area of the BBC we're talking about.

BBC News on the web vs BBC News the programme, vs BBC worldwide (which is a seperate org inside the BBC), then there's regional BBC and the prime time talk shows (the hard hitting Andrew Neil and co).

So, when someone says "the BBC is biased against the left" or "the BBC is biased agains the right"; ironically they can both be right, and it's not an indicator of impartiality. It depends on which section of the BBC we're talking about.

And you're totally blind to the bits of the BBC you agree with; you will think those bits are the impartial ones.