BBC groupthink

Just a quick observation… When one happens across a BBC employee on Twitter you often see the same old disclaimer applied in their description.  But all too often we don’t stop to consider what this actually tells us.  Here is a typical example of a disclaimer from Nick Sutton:

Editor of @BBCRadio4’s The World at One, The World This Weekend and What The Papers Say. Not many views expressed, but any that are are mine and not the BBC’s.

Then there’s this from Gary Duffy:

UK Editor, BBC News website, and former BBC correspondent in Brazil and Ireland. The views expressed here are mine and not those of the BBC.

And also this offering from Anita Anand:

TV and Radio presenter- wife and mum – not scared of twitter just single magpies now. These views are not the bbc’s they are mine all mine…mwha ha haha..

There are many more besides.  Of course, what none of these people point out is that unless they held the views they did they wouldn’t be employed by the BBC in the first place.

The disclaimer some BBC employees include is supposed to shield the BBC from accusations of bias when these people sound mock or criticise people who do not subscribe to the narrow ‘progressive’ worldview held by Beeb employees around the world, but when taken as a whole it demonstrates there is a defined groupthink that exists at the BBC that is all pervasive.

It would be perfectly fine – as long as we were not compelled by law to fund these people under pain of fine or imprisonment. But we are and that is why it remains insulting and unacceptable.

5 Responses to “BBC groupthink”


  1. 1 Martin Brumby 11/06/2011 at 3:58 pm

    At one time all ‘situations vacant’ were advertised in the Grauniad.

    Anyone know if that is still the case?

    Not that the other rags are a great deal better.

    Mind you, if anyone that comes on here managed to land a job with the Beeb, you would be like Billy No-Mates.

  2. 2 EFTA NOT EU 11/06/2011 at 6:29 pm

    Former BBC employee Robin Aitken talks about the bias of the BBC

  3. 3 Restoring Britain 11/06/2011 at 7:15 pm

    The whole “disclaimer” thing is quite fascinating and it is as you say a false presentation of disengagement of their opinions from their BBC role. For example if they wish to comment freely on issues with their own viewpoints, why the need to cite their BBC credentials. But of course without their BBC credentials they are just another Twitter account who stand on the worth of their own opinions as do the rest of us bloggers.

    So, for me they need their BBC credentials as a form of social proof to gather more followers. They therefore choose to speak as the BBC and not as independents as their “disclaimer” tries to make them out to be. If they wish to speak freely, stand alone. If they wish to speak as the BBC then they should learn to bit their lip on their own prejudices and opinions.

    The combining of their BBC credentials in order to generate followers on Twitter and their opinions without censure from the BBC is a tacit approval by the BBC of the inherent bias within its staff and by extension itself.

  4. 4 Brian H 11/06/2011 at 8:05 pm

    In the interview, Robin Aitken is at pains several times to make the disclaimer that he isn’t accusing the BBC or its employees of being malevolent, just “wrong-headed”, whatever that means.

    But that’s wrong. Once, e.g., it is pointed out that concealing the purely Islamic nature of terrorist activities is enabling and exacerbating its reach and harmfulness, then a decision to continue hiding that is indeed destructive. Only if you’re unaware of the consequences of your actions can you get a partial “pass” for fudging.

  5. 5 ADie Dee 12/06/2011 at 11:35 am

    As the BBC receives advertising revenue from it’s online and “Cable” networks it is breaking it’s charter and therefore no longer legally able to force us to pay for a t.v. licence.


Comments are currently closed.



Enter your email address below

The Harrogate Agenda Explained

Email AM

Bloggers for an Independent UK

AM on Twitter

Error: Twitter did not respond. Please wait a few minutes and refresh this page.

STOR Scandal

Autonomous Mind Archive