This tweet, posted yesterday, is entirely fair:
Staggeringly, the BBC failed to include the SNP's list in its summary of who the leaders of the UK's major political parties are.
It was the third-largest party in Westminster in the last parliament.
Why was that? Incompetence? Or deliberate refusal to recognise the right to independence that the SNP asks for?
Thanks for reading this post.
You can share this post on social media of your choice by clicking these icons:
You can subscribe to this blog's daily email here.
And if you would like to support this blog you can, here:
It’s not an accident or unfortunate oversight! I will share words from the Wee Ginger Dug blog “The BBC is not what it purports to be, a neutral and unbiased observer and reporter on Scotland’s constitutional debate, an organisation which is funded by the public, the BBC is an active and enthusiastic participant in Scottish constitutional politics, one of the most important actors on the anti-independence side.”
The BBC’s propaganda efforts have been going on for many years. Research confirms the bias. Refer to John Robertson’s blog “Talking Up Scotland”.
When I first saw the headline my immediate reaction was that its because the SNP is a Scottish rather than a UK oriented Party. Then I saw Plaid Cymru and thought, eh?
The BBC appears to be biased in favour of right-wing candidates, to such an extent that their neutrality must be questioned.
Regarding BBC Question Time:
“Ukip representatives have appeared on the programme more frequently than the Greens despite the fact that Ukip never succeeded in getting any of their candidates elected to Westminster while the Greens have consistently returned an MP in every general election since 2010 with Caroline Lucas increasing her majority each time.” [..]
“An analysis carried out by Huff Post UK of the 258 regular Question Time shows between May 6 2010 and February 16 2018 showed that the hard right anti-immigration and anti-EU party had a representative on 24% of the programmes.”
Source: https://www.thenational.scot/politics/24356827.question-time-yet-aides-right-wing-british-politics/
The BBC has also omitted the Green Party. And no mention of them on the national news, although the SNP has achieved a few mentions.
If there’s a Green candidate in my constituency, I shall vote for him/her. If not, I shall spoil my ballot paper by inserting Telyn Mayasdottir of the Dyfi Gweilch y Pysgod Gymraeg Parti!
Yesterday they included the leaders of the SNP and Green Party in their list.
Late then
why?
Deffo the latter. The idea of Scottish independence appears to terrify the Establishment more than Corbyn does. On that basis alone, I’m all for it.
Here’s why any mention of Scottish independence starts tremors around Westminster.
https://open.substack.com/pub/dearscotland/p/what-the-failing-uk-doesnt-want-scots?utm_campaign=post&utm_medium=web
No one but no one in any editorial or journalistic capacity could have missed out the SNP on this list. It is deliberate. Maybe not surprising given how the theBBC have acted in recent years but in an election campaign it verges on criminal. In Scotland we are obliged to pay for the licence for this service!!
Agreed. Also, where were the Green Party co-leaders?
Reform was there, though, bang up to date
For at least 25 years that I know about, yes. They are the state broadcaster, the state in question is Britain. We independinistas have no expectation of equality of opportunity or access. I have not listened to a BBC news broadcast since 2014. I am happy to pay my licence fee for ‘In our Time’, and what is left of Radio 3.
Depending on your settings, the BBC customise the content to your location, region and preferences if you’re in one of the home countries of the UK.
I had no trouble where I’m from. (India)
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/c9ww70k9r1vo
It did not come up in Scotland then….
And it should make no difference
Absolutely the BBC is ignoring the SNP, unless it’s an SNP bad story, in that case BBC Scotland will be all over it like a rash for days and sometimes weeks on end even if there is nothing new to report.
BBC Scotland is terrified. There’s a visceral hatred of the SNP, and independence supporters in general, from many of the presenters which is quite something to behold.
It’s not often I would subject myself to BBC Scotland – and I no longer pay for the TV licence – but there are various commenters here who do watch it on our behalf (poor souls!) and they provide clips, etc., of BBC Scotland’s bias in action. Hardly anyone watches their current affairs programmes because they are so obviously despise half the population for daring to dream of being an independent country once more.
Such a crime to want to be like other normal countries!
The optics of this look bad but I do note the “upload” dates of the various profiles form some kind of sequence with Sunak and Starmer on day 1 followed by successive uploads of others in the folowing days. Why SNP was behind “lesser” candidates is unclear. It could be that the individual(s) compiling these are few/slow/fact-checking or all three. However, it would surely have been more sensible to upload all of them once completed?
Of course it would have done
I contacted two English (Norfolk & Leicestershire) friends to get a prospective on the BBC. It seems, based on my small sample research, no one really likes the BBC.
One friend who is a small “c” conservative claims the BBC is very left leaning. The other friend who is a small “p” progressive (US definition of progressive) claims the BBC is far right leaning. I really wonder if they are watching the same BBC channel.
Regarding the BBC, two things both of my friends (Norfolk & Leicestershire) agree on is that the BBC spends way too much valuable airtime covering the British Royal Family and Doctor Who/Poldark/Sherlock/your favorite show (even reruns) should NEVER be preempted.
🙂
Academic research confirms a profound right wing bias on news
Just the BBC or all news originating in England?
Bbc was the subject of the studies
The BBC is biased. I have been saying it often enough. I must follow up with Ofcom* (my last line of appeal after three stages of complaint, where the BBC is judge and jury). The issue was the David Henderson (BBC Scotland reporter) report covered the Gove appearance at theCovid Inquiry; and included Gove’s weak, unsubstantiated attack on the SNP for politicising its Covid efforts, by innuendo but without offering evidence; but ignored the Inquiry Counsel response; he presented a Cabinet Paper providing clear evidence of the Conservative government politicising its Covid policy in Scotland. BBC Radio Scotland ignored it all.
Here is the argument I made at Stage 3:
The issue is the coverage of David Henderson on Reporting Scotland when Jean Freeman MSP and Michael Gove MP gave evidence to the Covid Inquiry in Edinburgh (January, 2024). This was the day before Nicola Sturgeon gave her evidence to the Inquiry. It was an important day in Scottish news and politics; and it was in an election year. Great care to ensure impartiality was therefore required of the BBC. The BBC failed in its obligation to impartiality.
I watched the Inquiry proceedings, at length. Henderson’s very short summary of Gove’s evidence was misleading. It selectively edited Gove’s testimony to provide a very misleading summary of both Gove’s testimony, and the Inquiry Advocate’s cross-examination. For someone who had watched the full evidence given, it was a travesty. The report left the prime impression with a viewer that Gove had criticised the Scottish Government directly and precisely, of politicising the pandemic.
Gove criticised the Scottish Government, but in fact he conceded that Scottish Ministers had not been political in dealings with him; under questioning Gove said the Scottish Ministers were under a “temptation” to politicise. He offered no specific evidence of politicisation by the Scottish Government. He offered an opinion of a temptation to politicise. Indeed Gove was generally quite careful in his wording, while being eager to emphasise the plausibility of the temptation. Indeed he was more careful that Henerson, or the Editors. Henderson was being highly selective to craft the testimony to provide the sharp impression of politicisation attributed to Gove in the report.
This was made worse by the sin of omission. The only specific, hard evidence of politicisation advanced through the whole of Gove’s evidence, was advanced by the Inquiry Advocate, not by Gove; and evidence that directly implicated Gove. The Advocate presented as evidence a British government Cabinet Paper, written by Gove for a Cabinet Meeting called just before Boris Johnson was due to visit Scotland. The Cabinet Paper provided research evidence that Johnson and the British Government Covid response were not well regarded in Scotland, and the Scottish government response was more highly regarded. The Paper proceeded to recommend a political strategy to promote both the British government and the advantages of Union in Scotland. The purpose was clear and the politicisation unambiguous. Henderson simply omitted it. That was bad judgement. It was not impartial.
What made the omission worse; the Covid Inquiry clearly took the Cabinet Paper very seriously, not only in the Edinburgh sittings. The matter had already been raised by the Inquiry Barrister, in the London leg of the Inquiry, when examining senior Cabinet Minsters late last year; which I had also seen. Thus British government politicisation of Covid was important enough to be raised twice by the Inquiry. It was not, however sufficient to persuade Henderson, or the Editors of Reporting Scotland of the Cabinet Paper’s importance; especially in the wider context of the Covid Inquiry, the politics of Scotland, or the upcoming election.
These, I submit are serious breaches of impartiality; and cannot – taking the whole context together – be covered by the weak generalised appeal to coverage across the service; limply resorted to by the BBC. It was simply a failure to provide a balanced review of the day’s testimony.
The BBC is continuing with biased reported. It has not challenged, but repeated the Conservative line on the Aberdeenshire North and Moray East seat. David Duguid MP. The seat is new, after boundary changes; but Duguid was the expected candidate, supported locally. Duguid has been in hospital with a spinal problem, and has now not been selected at the very last minute. The Scottish Conservatives have claimed that this was done in Duguid’s health interests; but duguid has already Tweeted that he wants to stand, and has been rejected. His repalcement? The Scottish conservative leader, Douglas Ross MSP MP. Ross also lost his seat to boundary changes; but had already insisted he was giving up Westminster to concentrate on Holyrrod, and his work as an MSP. He has literally parachuted himself into the safest seat he kin find (there are few for Conservatives in Scotland). I trust the good sense of the Aberdeen and Moray constituents ensures they reject this self-serving carpetbagger.
Channel 4 News interviewed Ross and challenged him with elbowing out the sitting MP, David Duguid. In the interview Ross’s right eye looked suspiciously like a black eye which TV make-up couldn’t quite hide. I do hope it was administered by Mr Duguid!
Is the BBC deliberately slighting the SNP ?
It would seem so. I’d say “yes’. Fairly consistently.
Richard, I have just setup the Website ScotsWhaHae.Online. It names you and contains links to the blog and the Taxing Wealth report. I apologise, I should have checked with you first.
No requirement…
Beyond the BBC, even Sky News screws Scotland up. A Scotland correspondent claims income tax is a devolved matter. The facts? Income tax is only partially devolved, but it is a typical, deliberate Westminster political scam. All that matters is the way it can be used by politicians and media to undermine any attmept by the SNP to do anything in taxation.
Tax rates were devolved, because the Unionists Parties know tax rates cause all parties serious headaches when they move; all of them hate to change them, either way. They prefer almost anything else, and they have lots to choose from (like NI, and that proves difficult, but not as bad in the public consciousness as headline income tax rates); so devolve them, and very little else – so the SNP have no choice, if they want to do anything to help people, and need to raise money. So devolve it. Only the SNP can lose. Westminster did not devolve the most crucial element, especially for a) most people, b) the lower paid, most seriously affected. Westminster did not devolve the absolutely crucial tax thresholds. This was deliberate, to prevent the SNP having any flexibility, and forcing them to push up tax rates, that would provide very bad headlines; and keep them coming. It all came to pass. It is utterly cynical, completely destructive for Scotland and intended solely to undermine devolution. It means that the actual interests of the Scottish people demonstrably come very, very low in the Unionist pecking order. save the Union. Sacrifice Scotland, but save the Union, by any means.