Was the BBC Ever Intended To Be A 'Mouthpiece' of Atheism?

[ProfessorDavey]

The next time you see an analysis on the BBC news of the nature I've described and perhaps take a bit more notice than you have in the past, I don't mean that as is sounds, I'm not trying to give you an order. 

I don't like their, the BBC's tendency editorial or otherwise.

ippy

Yes I know what you are on about. I actually think that many news organisations are struggling with their editorial approach these days, specifically because we can, by and large, go direct to the horse's mouth on many issues, via the web. Previously that wasn't possible as all news (pretty well) was channeled via one or other news outlet, whether newspapers, tv or radio.

We used to be much more accepting of our news provided through an editorial filter (as that's all there was) than now when we can get the original view.

I'm very aware of this as an issue, and whenever I can, I always on this MB try to link to the original sources, such as reports, scientific papers etc, rather than to secondary reporting of them if possible.

[ippy]

Yes I know what you are on about. I actually think that many news organisations are struggling with their editorial approach these days, specifically because we can, by and large, go direct to the horse's mouth on many issues, via the web. Previously that wasn't possible as all news (pretty well) was channeled via one or other news outlet, whether newspapers, tv or radio.

We used to be much more accepting of our news provided through an editorial filter (as that's all there was) than now when we can get the original view.

I'm very aware of this as an issue, and whenever I can, I always on this MB try to link to the original sources, such as reports, scientific papers etc, rather than to secondary reporting of them if possible.

There's a lot of material the BBC sends out that I'm not quite senile enough, yet, to see and take their word as wrote.

ippy

[ProfessorDavey]

There's a lot of material the BBC sends out that I'm not quite senile enough, yet, to see and take their word as wrote.

ippy

I think you are perhaps a touch more cynical that I am in general about the BBC. I see it, in the main, as balanced and a source I trust. There are a few notable exceptions (as discussed on this thread and others) but that doesn't affect my general view.

The BBC is worst at reporting on ... the ... BBC. It doesn't know how to deal with news stories about itself, which aren't that uncommon. It swings between sweeping things under the carpet and undue self-flagellation, neither of which are right.

[ippy]

I think you are perhaps a touch more cynical that I am in general about the BBC. I see it, in the main, as balanced and a source I trust. There are a few notable exceptions (as discussed on this thread and others) but that doesn't affect my general view.

The BBC is worst at reporting on ... the ... BBC. It doesn't know how to deal with news stories about itself, which aren't that uncommon. It swings between sweeping things under the carpet and undue self-flagellation, neither of which are right.

Try to get their explaination about why T4TD only has religion based speakers, if you can get your head around that one, you might see why my view of the BBC is a bit jaded.

Try to avoid banging your head on a hard surfaces in your efforts to make sense of their explaination of why the non-religious are banned fromT4TD, you'll understand me and what I'm saying once you have read this standard responce they have ready and waiting for those that ask.

ippy

[ProfessorDavey]

Try to get their explaination about why T4TD only has religion based speakers, if you can get your head around that one, you might see why my view of the BBC is a bit jaded.

Try to avoid banging your head on a hard surfaces in your efforts to make sense of their explaination of why the non-religious are banned fromT4TD, you'll understand me and what I'm saying once you have read this standard responce they have ready and waiting for those that ask.

ippy

As I have clearly stated earlier religion in general, and T4TD are areas where I do think the BBC isn't getting it right, being editorially too 'pro' religion rather than neutral.

There is of course no justification for banning ethical 'thoughts' from non religious people, expect through the BBC's view that it is part of their 'religious' output - which begs the question as to why they have specifically 'religious' output in the first place, given their requirement for balance. And further why it is appropriate for unchallenged voices, only from one small part of the spectrum of ethical opinion, to be allowed several minutes smack in the middle of (and indistinguishable from) the radio 4's flagship news programme.