The BBC is the subject of Nick Clegg’s regular Standard column this week. He argues strongly against the sort of intervention outlined in the Government’s White Paper and lists the ways in which the Tories have picked fight with the institutions we hold dear.
In the absence of a clear plan, and unchallenged by any meaningful opposition, they have indulged their own prejudices: picking fights with the BBC, junior doctors, headteachers, refugees, low-paid workers, housing association tenants and each other on Europe. No wonder they bounce from one ill-judged initiative to the next. As each announcement disintegrates on contact with political daylight, they are forced into a series of humiliating U-turns, from enforced academisation of schools to disability benefit cuts. So nursing their own bias against the BBC is a symptom, rather than a cause, of the underlying problem: unchallenged power without a sense of purpose.
The BBC isn’t perfect, he argues, but it’s still one of this country’s proudest achievements:
Some argue that the Tories are simply echoing the views of their backers in the Murdoch press and the Daily Mail. Others say many Conservatives seem to view the BBC as a political enemy, run by a cabal of Guardian-reading academics and latte-sipping metropolitan Lefties with an axe to grind.
I have no idea whether these allegations are true — though the idea that the BBC is biased against the Conservatives is patently ludicrous. In fact, if unwittingly, the BBC provided a huge boost to the Conservatives last year by obsessing about the prospect of a Labour-minority Government, so amplifying the Conservatives’ central campaign message. Given that every political party at some point seems to think the BBC is against them — from red-faced SNP supporters during the Scottish independence referendum to the revolting sexist bilge directed at political editor Laura Kuenssberg by angry Corbynistas last week — it suggests that it is probably in the right place. God knows I have had my own grumbles about Lib-Dem representation, or lack of it, on BBC programmes in the past
Nick lived through the reluctance of the Tories to act post Leveson, so he finds the direct Government interference proposed a bit strange:
Yet they have floated proposals affecting the scheduling of the BBC’s most popular shows, reducing the scope of its online operation and, most worryingly, giving ministers the power to hand-pick half of its board. The latter, which it appears they do intend to pursue, would give ministers indirect power to interfere with editorial policy — a more aggressive form of political interference in the media than the system of self-regulation advocated by the Leveson Inquiry, which the self-declared “champions of the free press” on the Tory benches condemned with such fury.
Their method of governing could be their undoing, concludes Nick:
The greatest threat to the Government is not that the public think they are ruthless or heartless — even some Conservative voters think they are a little of both — but that they are incompetent. The Conservative Party’s greatest weapon has always been a reputation for competence. Harsh, unfeeling, even brutal competence at times — but competence nonetheless. Lose that and they will lose the country.
You can read his whole article here.
* Newshound: bringing you the best Lib Dem commentary in print, on air or online.
Follow @LibDemVoice on Twitter
Like us on Facebook
Subscribe to our feed
Sign-up for our daily email digest
Dundee Chess Congress 2024 #dundeewestend
GUEST POST No sign of an end to defections in local government
Monday night is Parish Council night...
Latest voting intention and leadership ratings opinion polls
Welsh Labour hospitality row
Nonconformistradical
Jenny Barnes
Mick Taylor
Mark Frankel
SteveTrevethan
12 Comments
Clegg:
Then he jolly well should have said so at the time. Our failure to assert an independent identity in the coalition was the biggest of the large catalogue of errors under his leadership that led to our electoral disaster last year.
The problem with all this talk about total independence from the government is what is stopping the BBC running off to the far left or the right. There needs to be some accountability – it can’t just do whatever it likes.
I don’t think the BBC is biased to the left or the right – it is biased towards short term viewing figures and I think it’s becoming more downmarket as a service and this needs to be resisted if it is to maintain long term support at its current level.
The BBC was never under serious threat. It’s far too useful to any sitting government. Personally. I’m very disappointed that they extended its ability to badger and threaten folk with legal action for another eleven years.
If you look at the history of the BBC it was set up by as a state approved business cartel to control what Joe Blogs had access to and to flog radios. When the latter failed to generate sufficient sales because too many people were making their own receivers it was given permission to charge a license fee and became a monopoly mouth piece for successive British Governments. I have no idea why anyone thinks its a good thing to force people who don’t want the service or can’t afford it to contribute to Chris Evens or Graham Norton’s vastly inflated wages.
I would counter the claim that the BBC has had a a bias towards latte drinking guardianistas , and that it is ant-tory, anti EU and anti business, by checking the research and used that as part of my argument to resist change.
For some reason by ability to provide a link is is not working , so I would suggest that if one wishes to take an evidence based approach to underpin one’s argument, one can find the results of a study on the internet,
The Conversation – ‘Hard evidence: How biased is the BBC?’
I haven’t found any evidence that supercedes this, but would be interested if any trudy has reached different conclusions.
The only thing that I can say is that it could have been worse, but John Whittingdale seems to me to have lost his nerve somewhat.
I would also like to question how, when the government has had to make so many U turns, one can argue that there is no meaningful opposition.
Most of the climbdowns have been to head off Tory back bench revolts and avoid the embarrassment of defeat in the Commons
@Jayne Mansfield “I would also like to question how, when the government has had to make so many U turns, one can argue that there is no meaningful opposition.”
@Allan Brame “Most of the climbdowns have been to head off Tory back bench revolts and avoid the embarrassment of defeat in the Commons”
This does make me wonder (with the benefit of hindsight) whether it was necessary for the Lib Dems to go into Coalition in order to moderate the behaviour of a minority Tory government which to all intents and purposes then seemed able to act as majority Tory government more effectively than the current one.
Glenn:
“I have no idea why anyone thinks its a good thing to force people who don’t want the service or can’t afford it to contribute to Chris Evens or Graham Norton’s vastly inflated wages.”
Nobody is “forced” to pay anything. The license fee is not compulsory.
I think the current BBC-funded-by-licence-fee situation is one of those we often end up with in this country, i.e. you wouldn’t do it like that if you were starting from scratch now, no one can agree on a better alternative, and it mostly works (a bit like the House of Lords).
I travel to the USA fairly often and have tried watching their TV. While they produce some superb drama and comedy series, there is a huge amount of dross (yes, much more than we have). And if you think the BBC is biased (and I don’t) then try watching Fox news.
I’m not suggesting the BBC is perfect (far from it), but leave it alone until we can agree on an alternative that will maintain quality while remaining fair and affordable.
The current Tory strategy of chipping away at the current structure is probably the worst way moving forward.
Stuart’
The license fee is compulsory if you want to watch any “live” broadcast, in other words any program broadcast at the time of broadcast on any television channel, plus they’ve just closed down the I-player loophole. Also if it’s not compulsory why do they send out so much threatening mail, take people to court, demand right of access and bother folk on the phone?
Sure if you are going to be a pedant and say no one is forced to watch or own a TV then it is not compulsory. But really it is in practice.
The licence fee is the alternative to the dross of mind numbing advertisements every 12 minutes in the middle of programmes that are trying to sell us things that we pay even more for because of the cost of the advertising.
The BBC also sells programmes worldwide.