Why isn't what is actually being said by members of the Labour Party, both MPs and members, accurate, OS?
As far as I can make out, the BBC were simply reporting what has been happening (after all, they give lots of time to what 'one MP' says on the Parliamentary channel, not to mention events like the Budget!!)
Which is, of course, why the Chancellor ignored the opinion of the vast proportion of the British public and ditched the welfare reforms he had been trailing for so long.
And why should this make any difference. We could end up with just as balanced a leadership and reportage as we currently do. Remember that many reports from independent groups place the BBC slighly left of centre.
All of this can be answered by being aware of the hyperbole and clichéd nature of the reporting. Does this as Robinson on the Today programme really mark how people will view the party in four and a half years time. Didn't Robinson also say that about the Little Red Book incident.
The whole point is is that in BBC reporting they are working from a narrative that the opinion of one or two labour MP's trumps the opinion of the membership. That is establishmentism writ large. That is how the BBC conducts itself superimposed by the bbc as a model for how the country should work.
The BBC gets the difference between the membership and one or two MP's arse about face because in the BBC there is a powerful elite.
That of course should be scrapped. Osborne U Turned really because people who voted for him who he thought he could do anything to made noises that that wasn't the case.
The BBC is paid for by the licence fee and yet it's future is being decided between people who are paid from that and the government. If the government want the level of management they are exercising they should put it to referendum or bring the payment of it into taxation.
The BBC therefore operates on the elite great man principle. That is wrong. The BBC should not be the bastard offspring of celebrity and the public school system but should be representative of the licence payers.
That way there may be more care of it by the public and less political interference.