The bbc, again.

[Wisbech Eagle]

You seem to know a lot about GB News, you must be an avid viewer. Unfortunately you must watch with anti- right wing blinkers on. They give more of a platform to left leaning guests than other outlets give to right leaning guests. Oh don’t give me your usual “ they just bully the left wingers” because that is absolute bullshit. Try watching the debates as a neutral

I don’t watch it regularly. Nor do I read the Mail. Or watch right wing podcasts. They are judgements made on experience.

I watch when I need to understand how any subject that interests me is being covered. That’s enough to inform me of their approach, the bias and the prejudice. It’s generally entirely predictable.

 

[Spiderman]

But it does subtract £2 m of licence fee payers' money.

Teddy, it’s irrelevant because it is our National treasure. The bastion of impartiality 🤔

 

[Spiderman]

I don’t watch it regularly. Nor do I read the Mail. Or watch right wing podcasts. They are judgements made on experience.

I watch when I need to understand how any subject that interests me is being covered. That’s enough to inform me of their approach, the bias and the prejudice. It’s generally entirely predictable.

If it’s so predictable why watch it then? You presumably know how they will cover the subject. Stick to the BBC mate, they tell you how it really is 😂

 

[ASCPFC]

Are you seriously trying to compare the sensitivities of a pop star to the need to analyse the behaviour of the most powerful man on earth? Someone who represents the biggest threat to our survival I have seen during my 81 years.

Telling the truth about Trump without fear is a duty placed on those with the ability to tell it.

You lived through the Cold War and Trump is the biggest threat to our survival? You do also realise that Trump isn't going to allow a settlement on the quiet don't you? What are you going to say then? I'll ask when it happens. I'm not value judging Trump, I'm judging the several "errors" by the BBC. It may be fine with you as it suits your prejudices. Which really only proves how bias they are.

 

[Wisbech Eagle]

You lived through the Cold War and Trump is the biggest threat to our survival? You do also realise that Trump isn't going to allow a settlement on the quiet don't you? What are you going to say then? I'll ask when it happens. I'm not value judging Trump, I'm judging the several "errors" by the BBC. It may be fine with you as it suits your prejudices. Which really only proves how bias they are.

I never felt threatened by the Cold War because I had confidence that the leaders on both sides understood the concept of mutual annihilation. I don’t have that in Trump or, to a lesser extent, in Putin. The BBC, being the major broadcaster that it is and holding the very high standards it does will always be subject to greater scrutiny. I am just more understanding that when people are involved things can go wrong. The BBC itself isn’t biased. Nor am I. I just dislike hard right politics.

 

[Wisbech Eagle]

If it’s so predictable why watch it then? You presumably know how they will cover the subject. Stick to the BBC mate, they tell you how it really is 😂

Generally means there are exceptions. Exceptions are what’s interesting.

 

[Wisbech Eagle]

Teddy, it’s irrelevant because it is our National treasure. The bastion of impartiality 🤔

As Simon Jordan so wisely advised us all, be careful what you wish for!

You lot would only realise how valuable the BBC is if you no longer had it!

 

[Teddy Eagle]

As Simon Jordan so wisely advised us all, be careful what you wish for!

You lot would only realise how valuable the BBC is if you no longer had it!

Sure. They're great.

Trustpilot Ratings for UK Broadcast News (As of early 2026):

• BBC News (www.bbc.com/www.bbc.co.uk): Generally rated very low (1–2 stars). Common complaints involve accusations of bias, dissatisfaction with the TV license fee, and negative experiences with the website or service.
• GB News (www.gbnews.uk): Rated low (approx. 2.3 stars). Reviews are often polarized, with some praising specific presenters while others criticize the channel's, content and, marketing.

 

[PalazioVecchio]

this is a bit confusing ? is it censorship ? who is it trying to protect ? we all know that while Savile was alive, nobody could have a go at him - for fear of sanction at the very least.
Is a newfound desire to protect his victims ? newfound ?

Jimmy Savile chants at football games spark calls for new hate crime law

Both travelling and home fans have allegedly sung songs referencing the disgraced former BBC presenter

www.gbnews.com

 

[Spiderman]

As Simon Jordan so wisely advised us all, be careful what you wish for!

You lot would only realise how valuable the BBC is if you no longer had it!

Valuable to who? What do you mean by “ you lot”. Taking lessons from Dan? You lot, scumbags, TDS really taking its toll on your language

 

[ASCPFC]

As Simon Jordan so wisely advised us all, be careful what you wish for!

You lot would only realise how valuable the BBC is if you no longer had it!

They're doing it to themselves - there's not some imaginary "us" forcing them to make "mistakes". If anything it's their own idealogue staff or contractors that are quite likely to destroy them from within. As investigations, charges, fines and lawsuits mount up

 

[Wisbech Eagle]

Sure. They're great.

Trustpilot Ratings for UK Broadcast News (As of early 2026):

• BBC News (www.bbc.com/www.bbc.co.uk): Generally rated very low (1–2 stars). Common complaints involve accusations of bias, dissatisfaction with the TV license fee, and negative experiences with the website or service.
• GB News (www.gbnews.uk): Rated low (approx. 2.3 stars). Reviews are often polarized, with some praising specific presenters while others criticize the channel's, content and, marketing.

Trustpilot depends entirely on who is motivated to complete a review. It’s not an opinion poll, a sample of us all.

Ofcom have produced a report you may find interesting:-

https://www.ofcom.org.uk/siteassets/resources/documents/research-and-data/online-research/adult-and-teen-news-consumption-survey/news-consumption-in-the-uk-2025-research-findings.pdf?v=400636

So has the government:-

Value of BBC News

www.gov.uk

For an actual opinion poll this is the most recent I can find:-

Which media outlets do Britons trust in 2023?

The BBC and FT top the list, depending on how you measure it

yougov.com

All tell a very different story to yours.

 

[Wisbech Eagle]

They're doing it to themselves - there's not some imaginary "us" forcing them to make "mistakes". If anything it's their own idealogue staff or contractors that are quite likely to destroy them from within. As investigations, charges, fines and lawsuits mount up

It is entirely imaginary. It’s always been like ths. The change is the level of attention it now receives because of social media.

Read my previous comment for the actual, rather than imaginary, facts.

 

[Teddy Eagle]

Trustpilot depends entirely on who is motivated to complete a review. It’s not an opinion poll, a sample of us all.

Ofcom have produced a report you may find interesting:-

https://www.ofcom.org.uk/siteassets/resources/documents/research-and-data/online-research/adult-and-teen-news-consumption-survey/news-consumption-in-the-uk-2025-research-findings.pdf?v=400636

So has the government:-

Value of BBC News

www.gov.uk

For an actual opinion poll this is the most recent I can find:-

Which media outlets do Britons trust in 2023?

The BBC and FT top the list, depending on how you measure it

yougov.com

All tell a very different story to yours.

How many people are involved in a Yougov survey? 2000? Of whom over 20% regard the BBC as either untrustworthy or very untrustworthy. Hardly a ringing endorsement.

 

[ASCPFC]

It is entirely imaginary. It’s always been like ths. The change is the level of attention it now receives because of social media.

Read my previous comment for the actual, rather than imaginary, facts.

The facts are that the BBC is paying millions in settlements for incorrect and biased coverage. Decided in a court of law. Or are courts part of the actual, real conspiracy against the BBC?
I will also forecast it paying several millions more in fines and settlements. It's not a hard guess.
You can't see the mistakes that were made ever so accidentally? It really didn't take that much scrutiny. All it required was the BBC to listen to their own standards committee and have oversight over their own output and content. If they did indeed have proper editing, ethics and oversight, then perhaps these mistakes could be considered deliberate?

At best, incompetent, at worst, deliberately pushing an agenda. The only in between I can think of is staff pushing whatever agenda they wanted to push, which is frankly unacceptable. I suspect this is the case in the Glastonbury coverage and in the Persian translation of US defence secretary, in fairness. However, the responsibility lies with the organisation. Despite any increasingly tenuous arguments.