Some excellent contributions as usual, but very surprisingly, no letters on the appalling treatment of Diane Abbott by the BBC (Letters, 21/01/19). I find it hard to believe I was the only Guardian reader to be so incensed by the Question Time programme, and especially after reading about the programme`s warm-up procedure, to be persuaded to write. More perceptive viewers will have had their suspicions aroused about the nature of pre-programme events by the booing of Abbott`s name when announced, and by the loud cheering in favour of a no deal Brexit. There is no doubt the chair, Fiona Bruce, interrupted Abbott frequently, seemingly delighting in the discomfort the panellist was obviously feeling.
The bias was especially obvious when the extreme right-wing panellist, Isobel Oakeshott, mocked Abbott and Labour for wanting a general election when six points behind in the polls; instead of defending Abbott`s justifiable claim that the main parties were "level-pegging", relying on the evidence provided by numerous recent polls, Bruce immediately interjected with the words, "You`re behind, Diane", causing laughter and sniggering from many audience members, and clearly too, from the Tory panellist, Rory Stewart.
Apologies are needed, and a stern reminder given about the role of an impartial chair at such events. If the full apology is not forthcoming, Labour should raise the matter with Ofcom. The corporation, with its obvious political bias, its appalling record on tax avoidance, its disgraceful pay policy, and its recent willingness to make over-75s pay for their licences rather than curb its profligacy with public money, is ripe for reform!
Jane Martinson asks that to deal with the problems emerging from the Question Time programme, when Diane Abbott said Labour was "level-pegging in the polls", why can`t the BBC "admit an error quickly and with grace, and move on", but much more is needed (The BBC should admit its mistake and move on, 28/01/19). Martinson admits "the presenter cannot sneer, as Bruce did", when refuting Abbott`s claim, but the obvious lack of partiality all through the programme cannot be remedied by "basic fact-checking". The anti-Labour bias is all too evident, and there are generally far too many examples of false equivalence given to those speaking objective truth and those making unfounded assertions.
Quite frankly, the BBC is in need of root-and-branch reform. The programme output often compares unfavourably with its rivals, and its channel-based format looks outdated. Its pay structures still look gender-biased, as well as being over-generous to presenters and managers; why the corporation still has over one hundred managers earning over £150,000, when it is so apparently cash-strapped that it cannot continue to give free licences to the over-75s, beggars belief. Then there is the still-continuing bad publicity over its dodgy tax dealings, particularly its insistence on presenters like Fiona Bruce forming their own companies, to everyone`s advantage, apart from the Treasury`s! The Guardian reported seven years ago that a review was investigating the BBC`s tax avoidance scams (BBC told by MPs to make presenters pay fair share of tax, 05/10/12).
Martinson`s suggestion that the corporation should be "transparent rather than defensive when it makes mistakes" is not really a solution when problems go much further than a few presenter`s errors, and when so many apologies and explanations are needed for so many mistakes!
Just as there is a reason for the BBC`s reluctance to release film of the warm-up session to last week`s Question Time, there has to be a reason for it not disclosing "the full pay received by its biggest names" (Disclose stars` full salaries, MPs urge BBC, 23/01/19). As the MPs say, it is ridiculous that the pay of presenters of "programmes made by independent production companies" should be kept secret, especially "when it is all licence fee-payers` money".
The BBC clearly fears another public backlash, astounded by its continued profligacy, at a time when it is claiming its lack of funds makes it essential for over-75s to pay for their TV licences! Not only should the public be told how much these so-called "stars" are paid, but also how much taxes they pay, and that goes for everyone in receipt of public money!
Dave Puller`s experience in the audience during the recording of a Question Time programme (Letters, 22/01/19) adds impetus to the argument that a "full apology from the broadcaster", as demanded in your editorial, has to be forthcoming (Morning Star, 21/01/19). This should be accompanied by releasing footage of the warm-up; after all, if nasty suggestions about Abbott`s political career were not made, as the corporation insists, what excuse could there be? Failing that, Labour must insist Ofcom look into the matter of Diane Abbott`s treatment on the programme last week, and then add some details to its proposals for reform of the BBC in its manifesto.
BBC bias against Corbyn and his team is far from new. The Media Reform Coalition`s findings in 2016 about the unchallenged airtime given to their critics during prime-time news reports is just one of many examples, so it is time for Labour to announce some of its proposals. How about a salary-cap for all its presenters and managers set at around £150000? Why does the BBC need to employ over 100 managers all earning over that figure, when claiming to be unable to afford over-75s a free licence? Curbing the BBC`s profligacy with tax-payers` money would be a start.
Management certainly could not cope with the stand made last year by Carrie Gracie, no doubt because her moral principles proved far stronger than her greed, something which the corporation certainly would find confusing.
Another idea from the editorial about "electing its board members" sounds eminently sensible, especially as no-one at the BBC seems remotely perturbed by what is going on. Why haven`t they put a stop to the tax avoidance which is well known to have been going on for over a decade
Last year it also became clear that the BBC was at the heart of yet another scandal, with HMRC investigating about 100 current and former BBC presenters and so-called "stars". The allegations focus on the employees falsely declaring themselves as self-employed, working on personal service contracts, and using limited companies to enable lower rates of tax needing to be paid. The greed of these people, including highly paid Jeremy Paxman, Christa Ackroyd and, interestingly, Fiona Bruce, apparently knows no bounds, but what is emerging from the current tribunals is that the BBC offered such contracts to its presenters, and Paxman even said, according to a report in the Guardian, that "the corporation required him to set one up"!
With a general election always a possibility, Labour`s manifesto writers need to get busy!
No comments:
Post a Comment