The BBC foists on us a skewed version of reality
The Telegraph -
The news media are engaged in a political argument about whether the purpose of journalism is to report the world as it is or to purvey an idealised view.
You have probably noticed that we are engaged in a fight to the death over the future of the free press in Britain. But you may be under the mistaken impression that this is a war between politicians determined to protect their own behaviour from scrutiny, and journalists who want to run riot through any area of public or private life they choose.
It may seem that this ruckus has very little to do with you, but if that is what you think, then you are missing what is really going on, and losing your opportunity to contribute to a much larger debate about the nature and purpose of news coverage – which I assume you do care about since you are reading the comment pages of a serious newspaper.
First, let’s be clear about who the antagonists are in this furore. While it is true that all three party leaders have come down in favour of the sort of statutory regulation of the press that (most, but not all) newspapers reject, this does not mean that all MPs – let alone all politicians – agree with them.
A good many dissident voices on both sides of the party divide have spoken out against such a move which, they say, would be anathema to the concept of a press free from political control that has prevailed in this country for more than 300 years.
And on the other side, not all sections of the news media are opposed to the idea of a press super-regulator under government auspices. In fact, the BBC, which is the largest and most influential provider of news in this country, has made little attempt to disguise its support for the taming of what it regards as the vulgar British newspaper trade. (At the same time, the corporation is under threat of external regulation itself: there is considerable pressure to bring it under the auspices of Ofcom like any other broadcasting organisation. Interestingly, the BBC regards the idea that its practices and views might be questioned by an outside body as outrageous.)
Read More: telegraph.co.uk
