Bishop Hill The voice of ex-corporate man
Nov 8, 2013 BBC Climate: other 
The former head of TV at the BBC, Roger Mosey, has hit out at groupthink at the BBC:
"The BBC Trust speaks the language of diversity but in its edicts it promotes conformity, whether its about an agreed approach to the science of climate change, 'correct' terminology in the Middle East or the way a documentary about benefits should be constructed," he said.
He added: "On the BBC's own admission, in recent years it did not, with the virtue of hindsight, give enough space to anti-immigration views or EU-withdrawalists; and, though, he may have exaggerated, the former director general Mark Thompson spoke of a 'massive bias to the left' in the BBC he joined more than 30 years ago.
"I share Mark's view that there was more internal political diversity in recent times, but that isn't enough unless it's evident in a wider range of editorial views on air."
This is all well and good, but why is it that these people will only speak out when they are done with their corporate positions? Why can't they put these noble sentiments into action when they are in a position to actually make a difference?
Why is corporate man so cowardly?
Reader Comments (50)
Because he'll get sacked?
Being a paedophile does not get you sacked from the BBC, so what does? This, presumably.
Why is corporate man so cowardly?
Follow the money.
Nothing changes at the beeb. Today's headline is "Nissan boss warns UK over possible EU exit", implicitly saying we must stay in the EU or we'll lose jobs. Yet there has been no mention of the massive fraud in the EU revealed the other day with the auditors of the EU being unable to sign off the accounts for the 19th year on the trot.
The beeb's pro-EU bias is incredibly blatant.
And haven't Nissan's comments been hardened up by the BBC? I though the Nissan man said leaving the EEC 'might' or 'may' cause Nissan to re-think. Rather different from the implication in the headline 'You vote for withdrawal and we (and by implication) and a load more like us, are out of here'.
At least it's not as bad a the EU where one's pension rights are conditional on not acting "against the interests" of the EU.
Guess how many speak out when they retire; go on, guess.
I'm not so sure its a case of corporate man being so cowardly. People who are confident that they really are really really right about everything tend to pay little heed to Cromwell's challenge, "think it possible in the very bowels of Christ, ye might be wrong!' Corporate culture, group think, all that stuff. The BBC simply reflects an Establishment disdain for the Poujadiste mentality, of contempt for government and all its (usually crap) works. From time to time this disdain shines through more brightly than at others: Mrs T, grocer's daugher & representative of Essex men everywhere, got the sneer treatment from the BBC as well as other Establishment types; on stuff like Europe, immigration, climate change, their patronising and wrong-headed view is that all we ghastly garagistes must be half-educated halfwits too, incapable of grasping the bigger picture, lost in our loathsome self-interest.
Nothing changes at the BBC and will continue this way until they lose their guaranteed £3.5 billion income.
Simple test - after all the money spent on investigating why the Newsnight Saville programme got pulled.
Result - no one knows why it was pulled and no one got sacked!
The idea of a gradual reduction in the licence fee is attractive. Unfortunately this will only result in a reduction of original programmes and an increase in managers to manage the fall in income.
The alternative is a large reduction and subscription.
O'Sullivans First Law: Organisations that are not inherently right wing will over time become left wing.
Left wingers are intolerant of other's views. They will not hire, promote or respect those who dissent. Whereas your average capitalist/libertarian/right wingers tend to be far less strident. As a result those who espouse right wing views are at a large disadvantage and cannot prosper inside large non-commercial organisations.
RobL on Nov 8, 2013 at 3:26 PM
In other words, keep meeting a Left Winger half way and you will be the only one that moves!
1 ... 1/2 ... 3/4 ... 7/8 ... 15/16 .... to the Left!
J4R
looking back one might be excused for thinking that it was a prerequisite to getting a job
...Why is corporate man so cowardly?...
Because if you aren't, you stop being a corporate man.
Suddenly.
For all we know, there were lots of internal BBC staff who stood up to the onslaught from the Left. Get hold of a list of resignations, sackings and sideways moves into equipment support jobs, and you'll probably find that these staff are (were) solidly right-wing...
It's time the government got rid of the BBC licence fee once and for all by selling off the BBC to an independent media group (suitable of course). OK we would have commercial breaks but at least we would rid TV of bias and leftist interest as the new station would have to mediate the views of a wider audience otherwise advert revenue would suffer. Maybe it's time and we will just have to put up with more adverts as said, but it's a price worth paying for the end of an institution that's rotten to the core?
Thanks bill (Nov 8, 2013 at 3:03 PM) for the kind of social analysis which doesn’t get enough of a hearing at sceptic blogs.
BH readers, and climate sceptics in general, are willing to admit that the climate is complex, and that criticising the science thereof requires intelligence and hard work.
They’re often much less willing to admit that social structures like politicial and intellectual movements are complex phenomena too - even something as familiar as the workings of a big corporation. Just shouting “lefties” or “follow the money” at them won’t get us anywhere.
Has the Beeb/Govt considered that Nissan might leave the UK if energy costs keep going up. It needs quite a bit to build a car, even a Leaf...
Bill/Geoff
Possibly only those who have maintained an old and obsolete system know for sure they get things wrong.
My boss "is it fixed?"
Me "it might be"
My boss "is it working?"
Me "it is at the moment"
My boss "can't you be more definitive?"
Me "it'll break again in the future"
That soon becomes a way of thinking about everything you do. It looks ok at the moment but I could have got it wrong
Geoff: You probably don't need me to say this but agreed.
Why is corporate man so cowardly?
People, like organisations, are consistent.
They did not get to where they got to by having a tendency to point out the shortcomings of their organisation. Once they have reached their final position, with a few more performance evaluations and salary increases before retirement, they are not suddenly going to go public about what they have had at the back of their mind for the last 40 years.
The BBC has a double whammy of left wingishness. First, it’s full of luvvies who are automatically left wing due to the time they spent unemployed, derided by more useful citizens and even when they made it big, all their old friends were still ‘down trodden’. Apparently it’s these traumas that make them feel entitled to avoid tax when they do earn decent money. The second boost of leftyness is down to being a publicly funded concern. Unlike real businesses they don’t have to show any particular skill to draw their lucrative pay cheques and when money becomes tight they feel no drive to cut wages and perks because instead they can cut output. They never see an end to the magic money machine so why should they change?
Like most closed communities the attributes become amplified, so the staff at the BBC can’t see any hint of left wing bias because within their group they range from left to very left (or Jeremy Hardys) and they try to make sure both sides are represented. BBC Balance.
While inside that atmosphere, it must be hard to give weight to any other political view point but once on the outside they probably see how isolated the BBC is becoming. The most leftwing members of the public are those who are least likely to watch and/or pay the license fee. Apart from the small Guardian readership clique there’s no left wing market for what the BBC prides itself on and sooner or later the BBC will irrevocably insult its rightwing, older audience into revolt.
When I heard the man from Nissan on this morning's Today (Toady?) programme, I thought I heard him say that Sunderland, a very efficient plant, was safe, but leaving the EU might make them rethink their future investment plans.
That, I think, is rather different than the line being put out by the BBC.
It would be helpful to readers of this website if transcripts of these progammes could be posted so that we could all see exactly what had been said.
"In any great organization it is far, far safer to be wrong with the majority than to be right alone." - John Kenneth Galbraith
A very comprehensive list of relevant links, including many copies of formal written complaints and BBC responses on allegations of BBC bias are given here, including some from UKIP:
http://www.globalbritain.org/BBC.asp
This analysis also applies to the ABC and SBS in Australia, and from what my Canadian friends tell me, to the publicly funded CBC.
The ABC seems to regard it as its mission to "enlighten" the redneck populace with an unending stream of politically correct current affairs, drama and "comedy" programs. Recently, one of their "edgy" comedy shows featured a journalist who had criticised them photoshopped in an image of him buggering a dog. Funded compulsorily by taxpayers.
The CEO supported this when asked about it afterwards.
They live in a bubble, paid for by us, and cannibalise the market for media organisations that have to pay their own way.
Justice4Rinka
Being a paedophile does not get you sacked from the BBC, so what does? This, presumably.
Using the word 'golliwog' in a private conversation
I think there is a left wing bias across all public sector activity, not just the BBC, for these simple reasons: there is a presumption that work done by the State is a Good Thing, and the employees have not been exposed to the harsh realities of global competition. Most of them appear neither to know nor care how the money can be earned to pay for their activities.
a couple of points re Nissan, since others have raised it.
on energy - they've got a sh*t load of second hand wind turbines on their site, Since the site is low-lying, they don't seem to be turning very often (the load factor will be published somewhere)
on Europe - it's not that long since Nissan were saying that it was very important that Britain join the Euro, or jobs would be at risk. And what a disaster keeping the pound turned out to be .............. not that you'll be reminded of this by the BBC!
Maggie privatised just about everything. Except the BBC...
In the same way as "nothing exists unless there is sufficient reason" nothing happens unless there is sufficient reason.
The BBC will not change unless there is sufficient reason. Therein lies the rub.
- Respect to BBC people playing a straight bat like Andrew Neil's team
and extra respect to the many that were banned for doing so like Philip Stott, Quentin Cooper etc.
- Claim your licence refund that Richard Bacon offered
@pesadia some ideas to motivate change
some BBC depts seem to have been SECRETLY PRIVATISED already & sold to Greenpeace/Grantham corpn
so there is a major climate deception every 2 days (Alex's Cull's list
- It's THEIR BBC but YOU pay for it...and they can do what they want ..and you can't PUNISH them ?
........Well, you don't reward trolls by giving them what they want.
..so when they waste your time here .. pay them back by burning up some CO2
So when the BBC TROLL you breaking their own rules by
- airing the Greenpeace scientist without mentioning his Greenpeace connections,
- airing GreenHedgeFund connectected pollys without mentioning that conflict
- air a hatchet job prog defaming skeptics : like Joanna Haigh, or the 3 Feedback travesties
- air Attenborough's fake polar bears
...THEN firstly go & burn up some CO2
But how to punish them more
I had the idea that you take a TV free day at the end of you licence,
New idea , cancel your TV licence direct debit and tell them when your licence expires you'll be going on holiday and then when you come back home you'll buy another licence. That way you'll be cutting the BBC income by 2 weeks per year.
- Now they say "well we a re doing BBC News and Current Affairs consultation so things might change",
and you say "no you improve first then I'll end my licence holidays"
The BBC use the Guardian for their recruitment. People with right wing views have no chance of even joining the Corporation since those inside recruit outsiders who will fit in with the existing culture.
The liberal lefties are therefore living inside a bubble which they regard as normal, middle of the road and neutral. This provides the reference point against which they judge impartiality. Set against this standard, apolitical views are right wing and anything right of that is beyond the pale and regarded as a disgrace by the average BBC clone.
The corporation's view of climate change seems to be defined by WWF, Greenpeace and Friends of the Earth. If this represents the neutral position, then the real fanatics are to one side and the lukewarmers to the other. This is evident when the BBC screens "balanced" interviews containing warmists with differing degrees of extremism.
The consequence of this is that the BBC really does strive towards impartiality, well most of the time. However it also fails miserably almost all of the time, because it is incapable of judging a reference point that that is anywhere near neutral and it is incapable of recognising that its perceived neutrality is left wing, Warmist and Europhile.
The BBC cannot change without changing 50% of those who influence policy. That is unlikely to happen. This is a great pity.
The BBC also wastes taxpayers' money on a massive scale, simply because they have lost touch with the value of the stuff. It just appears every year and they get rid of it. Sometimes they make good entertainment with it, but increasingly they waste it.
At one time I would have put up with the waste of money, provided they had convincing plans to reduce it. I actually regarded the BBC as a great British asset. Not any more. The BBC is more biased today than ever before. Can you imagine the BBC being impartial in the run up to an EU Referendum?
It is intolerable that taxpayers are forced by law to pay for an organisation that broadcasts left wing, Europhile and Warmist propaganda and has no realistic possibility of reform.
That is why, with regret, I want to see the destruction of the BBC.
Re: Nissan, The BBC failed to point out that the UK could be a member of the single market without being part of the EU. They did not make clear whether Nissan appreciated this distinction.
Since this is probably the crux of the matter, why do you think the BBC didn't mention it?
Today's BBC deception Autocar explained in 2004 Nissan got extra cash from gov for threatening to leave cos UK doesn't use the Euro so it's the same blackmail game
- Remember Nissan is half French owned company it's Renault/Nissan/Lada now
.... Well the BBC can Foxtrot Oscar to Europe since most them to have homes their already
- @Schrodinger's Cat : I see Pharos GlobalBritain Idea is an alternative to the UKIP Little-Britain-alone meme
AngusPangus @ 6:09 PM
Nissan has ten 90m tall 660kW turbines. The rolling average capacity factor is a pathetically stunning 17.3%. They won't be very profitable (if at all), even counting the massive subsidy they get from the electricity consumer.
See http://www.ref.org.uk/roc-generators/search.php?mode=client&rid=&GeneratorName=nissan&CtryCode=&kwaction=equals&InstalledkW=&TechGroup=&TechCode=&dateaction=equals&AccreditationDate=&Location=&CHP=&turbineaction=equals&NumTurbines=&TurbineModel=&HubHeight=&BladeDiam=&Developer=&Operator=&SiteOwner=&Postcode=&save=Search
stewgreen:
Most international product and trade regulation these days, and especially for big export/import products like cars, are decided and agreed at a global level, mainly by UN agencies. The EU is one voice at the table. The UK has no voice except as a tiny fraction of the EU, and provided our opinion agrees with that of the majority of our EU colleagues, which is often not the case. Norway represents herself at these trade meetings.
Thanks Philip; I had a feeling Nissan's turbines were <20%; it's years since I last looked. Greenwash, then.
This is all well and good, but why is it that these people will only speak out when they are done with their corporate positions?
I believe it has something to do with snouts and troughs.
Oh Delingpole's chronicle of the BBC's decline is relevant here (2012) ..28gate etc.
BBCEnviro just dirty PR ClimateScarePorm
- Report suggests slowdown in CO2 emissions rise
By Matt McGrath 31 October 2013
- Concentrations of warming gases break record
By Matt McGrath 6 November 2013
Seeker of truth prints 2 contradictory headlines within 1 week ?
- so is Matt McGrath's job anything other than to keep CO2 hype alive , and brainwash again with steam photoshopped to look black ?
"but why is it that these people will only speak out when they are done with their corporate positions?"
gold plated pensions maybe ? once they have that they can heave a sigh of relief & finally spill the beans.
if you loved most of the BBC output years ago (which I did, BBC1 & 2, I could tolerate the crap bits as somebody else probably thought it was great, it's now a sad over bloated juggernaut pulled/dragged by people that are immune to real life problems. anybody having to earn a real wage must be getting pissed of with the lack of effort & the expense/salaries involved .
won't rant to much but -
BBC 6 PM news = 2 top stories then the time, recap top stories, BBC survey/investigation/Exclusive finds... full story tonight on BBC etc ...
hand you over to Tom/Dick & Mary - but finish with the full name to make sure the up coming book has a chance of selling.
ps. what's happened to the weather bit at the end, take it they dropped the wierd graphics & everything is now warning triangles (never had them when i was younger, just got up & looked out the window & decided what to wear)
Just a guess, mind - something to do with keeping their jobs and careers with that legally privileged organisation?
Nov 8, 2013 at 6:54 PM | Registered Commenterstewgreen
No, change your name each year and take two months' TV licence holiday !
BBC? The balance has gone, there are still some good people there but they are drowned out or silenced, back in the fifties the goons were the comedians, now, they run the whole show.
Those shadowy white men and women, the corporate suits - who take umbrage on behalf of the chatterati, those shadowy white men and women who are the martinets, now marionettes of political correctness. It is difficult to know who is in charge of the runaway train that the BBC has become, the express hurtles down the line and the drivers seat is empty but the locos remain on track and the destination is set.
I think, well I'm pretty sure I saw a figure, a percentage - 47% of Britons still 'rely' on the BBC for their daily input of the news, a revealing figure and which induces a nauseous shudder in me. Plus, from News24, to Newsnight, Today, QT - all of it is liberally daubed by the crimson red spray paint of left wing slant.
That's a fact.
Apologists and PR men and women of the EU - the BBC.
Champions of the green agenda - the BBC.
Adoring idolators prostrate, at the feet of the most dangerous and biased left wing president ever, Obama - the BBC.
UN, OWG, IPCC, EU and the BBC.
You watch with astonishment, as toadies like Andrew Marr marvel at the nutty but financially illiterate left wing ideas of Miliband - and never is any serious thought given to question the views and collectivist dogmas espoused by the Labour party.
I gave up with it years ago, but I still go back to it - I am afraid to say, it's like a drug. I go back, to wonder at the infantilized goon show it has become, I can take it with a very large pinch of salt and my eyes glaze over but - I've seen this coming for many a year. Dumbed down and 'strictly', Doctor Who and political correct Aliens - that's the BBC.
But it influences many, the masses and they [BBC] know it, like giving sweets to kids - 47% believe it - yeah really.
That's the problem.
Coming up, charity gigs galore, fund raising and vomitous sepia toned nostalgia, honeysuckled, stifling and all done for the kids, thank God that, the old radio 1 crew won't be there this time round.
'why is it that these people will only speak out when they are done with their corporate positions? '
Because they wish to keep those position , besides which the 'circle ' they move in is one made of mirrors were the only image then see is one that looks and thinks like them . So how can that way of thinking be wrong if everyone else hold the same outlook.
There is a reason why the media is know as the fourth estate because like the Guardian the BBC is very much apart of the 'establishment' they 'kick' against.
Rocking the boat is the best way to be thrown overboard and that is why they do not speak out.
When presented with a challenge such as the climate they are drawn towards those they see as the experts, never considering for a moment that what started as a theory became an agenda and is now a way of life for hitherto underpaid and largely ignored scientists. The mantra appealed to politicians as they could be seen to be standing up for something noble; Having allowed themselves to be brainwashed they and the journalists who preach from the same pulpit have no idea that they could be wrong. That they will not debate the subject breaks their charter and is doubly insulting when one considers that they would happily interview an Osama bin Laden but not give the time of day to Prof Philip Stott.
The presenter of "Feedback" will no longer allow discussion on the climate and like so many other BBC types is likely to spout "Oh come on..." when faced with those that wish to confront the official line.
They simply don't know the truth because they only look in one place for the answer.
Selection process
Those who apply to be Trustees are shortlisted and interviewed. The interview panel is chaired by a senior civil servant from DCMS and also includes an independent assessor and the BBC Chairman. Their recommendation goes to the Secretary of State for Culture, Media and Sport, then to the Prime Minister, and finally to the Queen.
I cant see any problem here with such an open and rigorous process. No way they could be selecting people who would stick to the party line pocket the money and not ask too many awkward questions about broadcasting policy, golden handshakes and the cover up of institutional paedophilia. So lets leave this ridiculous proposition accept the BBC is in safe hands and get back to the science.
Trago 12 . When I see the BBC stop actively seeking people from the metropolitan - arts-media-legal -politics background and instead, say perhaps foremen from the construction industry with a back ground in rugby league living in Lancashire or Yorkshire with experience of serving in the infantry( Iraq and Afghanistan preferred), I will believe you.
I was disappointed to see that another member of the "4th estate", Private Eye, toes the party line on Global Warming.
The magazine's whole theme is the exposure of corruption, and yet with GW there's a massive blind spot.
Quido has taken the crown and now he is the king of British political satire.
Hislop has been reduced to the jester for the Establishment.
Our Ian and his family live in the beautiful picturesque Kent Village of Marden
Such a shame to keep him awake at night and spoil his view of
Garden County of Kent with Deben / Yeo 300 foot high on shore Wind Turbines.
Hislop decided to stand with Murdock , The Sun the Daily Mail and The Spy Leaking Guarniad
Tabloid ,Broad Sheet press and fight Press Regulation .Finally might have grown some principles.
Think he can grow a few more.
Why is corporate man so cowardly? Because at one time we used to have the concept of unfair dismissal, which now only applies to protected "diversity" staff. Thanks to the power of the computer, it is not a problem to reorganise your company to the extent that a particular job is made redundant. Having got rid of the troublesome cove, it is a matter of a few days' work to reorganise back again. Who ever bothers to check to see if their old job gets replaced after redundancy?
Whilst not as bad as the USA, where I worked for 4 years, and where if you lose your job with their "at-will" policies (which don't seem to apply to "diversity" types) you lose your medical insurance, shortly followed by your savings and your house if you get ill, highly paid execs are not going to risk a fat salary rocking the boat and a subsequent "reorg" that renders them redundant.
This fear is the basis of all groupthink. Ironically, the American authors of MBA textbooks are aware of the phenomenon but not its cause. Only the self-employed in the USA (including MBA textbook writers) appear to enjoy freedom of speech (and not even that if they are worried about a Facebook boycott of the fruits of their labours).