I'm don't think anyone can accuse Humphrys as being right wing yet he has significant criticisms of the BBC on its political bias and he is just one of many ex insiders to do this.

The following is a paste of an article.

John Humphrys, the veteran British Broadcasting Corporation (BBC) journalist who helmed its flagship Today programme for 33 years, exposed the publicly-funded broadcaster “institutional liberal bias” within days of his retirement.

Mr Humphrys expressed his relief at being free from “the BBC Thought Police” which he claims has “tried to mould the nation into its own liberal-Left image”, despite the broadcaster’s notional legals requirement to remain balanced and impartial, in memoirs which are being serialised by the Daily Mail.

The 76-year-old Welshman revealed the BBC’s “[great] fear of the politically correct brigade and the most fashionable pressure groups — usually from the liberal Left, the spiritual home of most bosses and staff”, and how the “disaster” of the British people’s vote to Leave the European Union in 2016 — against the advice of the left-neoliberal establishment — sent them reeling:

“The morning of the EU Referendum was different. Leave had won — and this was not what the BBC had expected. Nor what it wanted.

No nods and smiles when the big bosses appeared. No attempt to pretend that this was anything other than a disaster.

Their expressions were as grim as the look on the face of a football supporter when his team’s star player misses the penalty that would have won them the cup.”

Humphrys, though he voted to Remain in the European Union himself, said the result “exposed a fundamental flaw in the culture of the BBC”, and that “Its bosses, almost to a man and woman, could simply not grasp how anyone could have put a cross in the Leave box on the referendum ballot paper.”

He suggested that the public broadcasters was similarly out of touch on issues such as mass migration, and how the efforts of Robin Aitken, a senior BBC journalist, to put together a dossier highlighting the way the corporation had fallen into a “Left-wing agenda [which] was ‘wholeheartedly and unashamedly pro-EU’” were met first with silence and then with an instruction to “f**k off”.

“There is, I believe, a groupthink mentality, an implicit BBC attitude to what makes news,” Humphrys opined, suggesting its “institutional liberal bias” was not so much a product of conspiracy as of its tendency to recruit middle-class liberal arts graduates–” a disproportionately large proportion of whom had been to private schools” — trained by left-wing academics.

“This may explain why the BBC sometimes fails so badly to spot a change in the nation’s mood — in hugely important areas,” he added.

“Immigration was one of them.”

Humphrys is not the first BBC veteran to highlight the corporation’s bias — although for his part Humphrys believes it is still a “force for good” overall — with Peter Sissons, who presented the BBC Nine O’Clock News and the BBC Ten O’Clock News for a decade, having alleged that a left-wing “mindset” was “At the core of the BBC, in its very DNA” in 2011.

“By far the most popular and widely read newspapers at the BBC are The Guardian and The Independent,” he revealed, referring to two major left-wing, europhile outlets.

“Producers refer to them routinely for the line to take on ­running stories, and for inspiration on which items to cover,” he said.

“In the later stages of my career, I lost count of the number of times I asked a producer for a brief on a story, only to be handed a copy of The Guardian and told ‘it’s all in there’.”

Edited by Stirlingsays (22 Sep 2019 7.52pm)

'Who are you and how did you get in here? I'm a locksmith. And, I'm a locksmith.' (Leslie Nielsen)

Whether or not there is "group-think" in the BBC, because of it's recruitment policy or anything else, which results in more of their staff being personally on the left than the right is simply a hypothesis.

However, for the sake of argument, let's assume it's true.

It doesn't actually make any difference.

As John Humphrys says himself, and complains about bitterly, all the journalists there have to strictly abide by a code which ensures that their personal opinions remain unknown when conducting BBC business.

The BBC journalists do their jobs. They abide by the charter. It's controlled and monitored.

As Humphyrs also says the BBC is a force for good. He just found it frustrating at times. I suspect many do, whatever their personal opinions might be.

If both the left and the right think the BBC are biased in the opposite direction, which they both do, I think it's probable they are sticking pretty close to the line in the middle.

For the avoidance of doubt any comments in response to a previous post are directed to its ideas and not at any, or all, posters personally.

With 7 billion people on the planet the BBC make this a top story.
BBC News - Chanel Miller: Stanford sexual assault survivor tells her story
[Link]

So every 'person of colour' at the BBC and their bosses think it's OK to make prejudical comments about Donald Trump. Even Lenny Henry got stuck in.

Welcome to the Britain of tomorrow where your colour(not white)will allow you to do what you like, especially if you work for the BBC.

[Link]

The quicker the BBC is only funded by those that support it the fairer.....it has been unethically taking money from social conservatves yet pretending they don't exist, outside of villains, for decades now.

The Guardian online and onscreen needs to operate more honestly.

'Who are you and how did you get in here? I'm a locksmith. And, I'm a locksmith.' (Leslie Nielsen)

Indeed, I wouldn't deny their freedom of speech but not at my expense.

And they are still w***ers.

But where is the socially conservative Soros?

Once again, the 'impartial' BBC with a journalist finding a method to push far left concepts and talking points.

If this was balanced out it wouldn't register but it's frigging all the time.

[Link]

Edited by Stirlingsays (28 Sep 2019 5.05pm)

'Who are you and how did you get in here? I'm a locksmith. And, I'm a locksmith.' (Leslie Nielsen)

Just looked at "the other place" for the first time in years and at their politics forum for the first time ever.

It's good to see that, at first sight anyway, there seems to be a great deal more balance in the views being expressed there. I would hate to think this forum represented the views of the typical Palace supporter.

This is a recent post about the BBC, which I doubt would appear here:-

"My problem with the BBC is that in their attempt to be impartial they are equating the truth with lies.It's not good enough to allow people to lie unchallenged just to attempt to maintain some balance.This is now disproportionately allowing leavers to spout nonsense without being challenged."

It's good to know that there are some sensible supporters among us.

For the avoidance of doubt any comments in response to a previous post are directed to its ideas and not at any, or all, posters personally.

Is it so difficult to simply ignore any post you don't agree with?

Surely only a very stupid person could not manage that?

Definition of moron in the Cambridge English dictionary:-

"very stupid person".

Is intolerance of other opinions a compulsory attribute for those with hard right political views?

For the avoidance of doubt any comments in response to a previous post are directed to its ideas and not at any, or all, posters personally.

The BBC and SKY doing their best to undermine the Tory conference with unsubstantiated accusations that just happen to have appeared right before a coming election.

Our media needs to be regulated better.