Right to reply: Why the BBC still matters across the world

fergus pickering

Well, what would one suppose you would say. Who would not defend the organisation that pays his salary? What IS that salary, by the way?

Chris lancashire

"our decision to freeze the licence fee" - Are you sure it was the BBC's decision?

Mycroft

Grumbling about the BBC is a national sport, but it is still the best broadcasting organization in the world; power to your elbow.

canonalberic

Good god - its like a message from rundfunk der GDR circa 1989; or have you recruited Craig Brown? The lack of self awareness (and irony) is almost as tragic as the tone of self-righteous corporate sycophancy.

Jock Strapped

The last paragraph really gives it all away. What total twaddle.

JohnPage

And how many teams did the BBC have at the essentially trivial Dale Farm story?

oldtimer

If I want international news via TV the BBC is no longer my first choice. I will look to Sky and AlJazeera before BBC News 24 and NHK or Bloomberg for their special subjects. In my view the BBC is a tainted organisation, working to an agenda which dictates the subjects it covers, how it covers them and who it invites to comment on them. Often the quality and knowledge of reporters does not impress; this seems especially true when they report on business and financial matters.

For a time it also ran an extremely distateful series of advertisements threatening viewers with imprisonment if they did not pay their licence fee; fortunately they have now ceased.

It is also seriously overstaffed as the numbers of staff despatched to cover events, be they sporting or political, has sometimes reached over 100. This was absurd. Maybe they are now required to be more circumspect.

adrian drummond

Jon, you may say that, 'yesterday the BBC’s Gabriel Gatehouse was the only UK broadcaster in Sirte' but Fraser was principally refering to the new dominance Al Jazeera which, he suspected, would 'be on in No.10 and the White House, and indeed television sets across Asia and India'. Try and address the central point.

Russell

Never mind 250million 'arabs' listening to bbc radio, what about the poor buggers in this country that are made to pay for the bbc, even if they like me cannot stand the left wing biassed tv service.
Overpaid biassed lefties on every news bulletin and all political shows. Scrap the licence asap and see how they can survive in the real world.

alexsandr

they still send people to stand outside closed and dark offices at 9pm to give us the 'latest' Why is that? Dont the realise they look silly?

HairyNoddy

Why doesn't the BBC show the same relentless vigour in dealing with the Daily Mirror's phone hacking allegations as they did in going after the News of the World and Murdoch?

Is it because the BBC are biased and hypocritical?

BigAl

Not interested in more BBC propaganda. The BBC has the 'right of reply' on 5 TV stations, 6 national radio stations and numerous local radio stations, normally every hour.

Lost all credibility for impartiality in my opinion. Remember when the staff went on strike earlier this year it was interesting that nobody cared and rather liked the lack of left wing hysteria and bias so associated with the BBC.

dave, surrey

t’s an ambitious plan to innovate and deliver better value for those who pay for us — something I’d have thought CoffeeHousers would support.

the point is it would be nice to have a choice, whether to pay and receive the service or not..

Lonesome Dave

Important TV news stories now really belong to Al Jazeera (and I never thought I'd read that comment written by me!)then SKY and the BBC a trailing a distant third. Channel 4 news is simply dreadful.

The BBC needs also stiff competition in the Radio4 news and current affairs field; its political bias is now beyond belief.

Jon Williams does and would say the BBC is wonderful, they (via the TV Tax) pay his wages. As for the self-pitying comment about the spending review, the BBC ought to be reviewing its spending itself. High time it was privatised!

Peter From Maidstone

I never turn to the BBC online or on air for news anymore, and I used to visit the BBC News website many times a day not so long ago. I wouldn't miss it one bit. My father has been watching Al-Jazeera for years and cannot speak too highly of it.

This is the BBC's fault, no-one else's.

Maggie

So Gabriel Gatehouse (who he?) was in Sirte yesterday was he. Well he made no impression on me. He mustn't have taken the opportunity to capitalise on this momentous occasion. He didn't come up with any memorable words or pictures. Just having someone there isn't enough if they haven't got anything interesting to say and they're accompanied by a camera crew with no eye for interesting detail.

Biggestaspidistra

Is this Daniel Korski's alter ego?

I love the way the BBC responds to criticism by saying we're right and you're wrong. 'Joined up' journalism and prizes in America, whatever next? You forgot to mention that Al Jazeera is effectively blacked out in the US.

Tom

Al-Jazeera's coverage yesterday included live extensive reports from Sirte plus excellent coverage by there presenter from Doha.They are always much better than the Beeb who lost the plot years ago & see everything just from the biased left wing view along with reports from there in house rags Guardian,Independent & Daily Mirror to add to there propaganda output, certainly not balanced in anyway.

Biggestaspidistra

Nice to see the Gill font though.

HJ

I have to say that I've always found the BBC World Service news coverage to be far superior to that of the domestic BBC.

It explains more clearly and lacks the lazy intellectual assumptions of the BBC's UK broadcasting.

Verity

I skipped the whole piece when I read the headline. Self-serving codswallop ... and panicky self-serving codswallop at that.

No one trusts the BBC, which has been marching to its own tune and forwarding its own agenda for at least 30 years now.

Did you think we hadn't noticed? Fox is a far superior service, as is AlJazeera, to the state funded (therefore the state is its master) musty, outdated BBC and its obvious communist agenda.

Let the funding-at-the-point-of-a-gun be dumped and let's see how long this vile organisation would survive as a paid-for service.

My guess ... gone in a month.

Tom Gallagher

Romanian friends of mine for whom the BBC World Service was a lifeline under Ceausescu, now regard the station as a channel for agitprop journalism, especially around issues like the environment and the Palestinian issue.
Few tears were shed in Romania when the service suddenly closed down in 2007 to finance the Department of INternational Development's ineffectual Iraq projects (Bush House had invested in powerful ransmitters in Romania and plush offices just a few years before).

If there is another war between Israel and its neighbours in the next few years, the BBC will deserve to be seen as a vital contributor. Campaigning journalists reporting from the region have provided lurid coverage of incidents such as the 2010 Gaza Flotilla and thanks to the Beeb, Britain itself has become a theatre of low-intensity struggle in this conflict.

Jon Williams is defending a station which in much of its output has moved towards the censorship and self-righteousness of pre-1991 Radio Moscow .

The curtailment of the BBC's influence around the world could only help to make the planet a safer place.

I S

This propagandist tripe reminds one that Orwell mined his experiences at the BBC when writing '1984'.
Williams conspicuously fails to address the numerous complaints about left-wing bias and the all-pervading political correctness that infects the BBC.
Also, as already pointed out, you did not seek to freeze the license fee - the government did.
Secondly, I also agree with 'Oldtimer' - your presenters and analysts are, most times, economically illiterate and have no knowledge of business.
BBC documentaries nowadays are, too often, dumbed-down piffle.
BBC 3 is the most appalling pile of cack that has been foisted on the taxpayer in the deluded hope that it will appeal to 'yoof.'
The BBC is vastly overstaffed, with ethnic minorities and 'right-on' harridans hugely over-represented, and its many layers of management grotesquely overpaid. The Chief Operating Officer could not even explain what some of the job titles under her meant.
The BBC has competed with private organisations to the detriment of the latter and should be barred from using taxpayers' funds to invade the private sphere.
As a public organisation, it should be forced to reveal the salaries of all who work there.

Bill Rees

Jon, from the comments already made you should realise that being on the spot isn't the issue.
What worries most people is the clear bias of the BBC as a news organisation, which seems to be getting more pronounced. That is why many people no longer trust you.
The BBC still has some great programmes, and interesting content, but the underlying assumptions of its news presenters are what disqualify the organisation from being described as a first class news provider.

Abigail

Fantastic, but, I do object to paying for it, have lived all over the World and have never been forced to pay for a Public Broadcaster, on threat of Legal Action. If it is so wonderful let it become fee paying. Personally, I am sick of paying for it, so much so, that I do think it causes resentment. As someone from the outside looking in, it is seriously biased.

toco

No mention of the largesse awarded to the BBC's upper echelon of newsreaders,presenters and assorted pundits.If say the top 30 receive in excess of £50 million per annum no wonder there is no money for live main line sport on a regular basis(eg.football,rugby and cricket),quality drama and original programmes for children.The spend on news and current affairs is immense when compared with such sectors of programming and this is an absolute disgrace.The BBC sees itself as the propaganda machine for the left and pays familiar faces millions every year in furtherance of this objective.An independent review of the BBC's clear political bias and programming budget is required as a matter of urgency.

Echo34

The bbc, didn't see you sending 400 plus employees out to Libya but you can all have a jolly at OUR expense down at the Hay or Glastonbury.

You're all moving to Salford and then we have to put half the organisation up in hotels for the olympics next year, Too expensive and too full of yourselves.

Do yourself a favour Jon, resign and get a job in the real world, not your cosy taxpayer-funded fantasy.

ndm

In all this brouhahaha I am reminded of an earlier Libyan case where the Thatcher government attacked the BBCs coverage of the US bombing of Libya.

The BBC responded by pointing out that it gave more prominence and words to the story than did ITN - and ended by saying that its reporter, Kate Adie, was actually in Libya. Ouch.

Of course, Fraser Nelson is merely the latest in a long line of right-wing attackers on the BBC upset that the BBC is not neutral because it does not follow thier truthism.

normanc

If the BBC is so good and is so confident in its record let it stand on it and see how many of us continue to pay for it.

Whatever anyone will say the BBC would squeal like a stuck pig if we were given the choice not to pay for it (like Sky, Lovefilm, Spotify, or any other media provider) and that is all the comment that is needed.

Baron

Abigail, normanc, the others have it spot on, if 250mn Arabs, others around the world listen to it admiringly, let them pay for it, why should we fund it, the news, analysis are blatantly biased on virtually any issue that goes, the sooner the agitprop gets de-coupled from the public purse the better.

JohnBUK

Come on guys, we're being a bit unfair, how can they have more people in Libya when 54 of them are camping at Dale Farm applauding the travellers?

'Mandy

Mr Williams. You certainly had your "Right to reply" on "Why the BBC still matters across the world" but what did you say?

A BBC person was the only UK journalist in Sirte yesterday? Not the only journalist, but the only UK journalist. Global market. Fail.

You won some media prizes? I guess the license fee may possibly have a use when it comes to lobbying then. Major fail.

Sad, I used to love and trust the Beeb.

Roy

"something I’d have thought CoffeeHousers would support."
These people don't get the message, do they? The BBC may have some fine programs, BUT, they have spoilt it all in years of misrepresentation, their grossly PC and biased footage, reporting, and hopelessly left wing and pro minority standing in the UK. The BBC should stand on its own feet, fairly competing with others, not relying on the unfairness of compulsory public provision. Fine as this would be if they had found some avenue of self-regulation. This was no problem in an era of Christian consciousness, but no such consciousness exists today. The wellbeing of foreign nationals seems always to come before British cultural ideals. The BBC has been responsible for the downgrade of British society. In-fact it has been complicit with the political governance in every aspect of the de-Anglicisation of its people. Can a more profound anti national aspect be ever more pronounced or a betrayal of its people be more significant?

Reason

BBC is my 1st choice News Laughs Entertainment - from Jakarta

Santorum

Fraser Nelson is (was?) on News International's payroll, so it's probably a condition of his contract that he posts knocking copy on the BBC at least once a month.

Sky has done well in Libya, but the BBC redeemed itself in Sirte. The resurgence of news channels such as al Jazeera, Fox and Russia Today demonstrate why the bbc's role is ever more important.

toni

Not much support here Mr. Williams, but then one wonders why you felt you should respond at all, it's only a right wing blog where the author’s here, who are sometimes referred to as the teenage scribblers, have a duty to keep their small audience of resentful (of the NHS and the BBC, our two major national and loved institutions that they want to disband and privatise) responders on the boil.

It might be a more interesting exercise if one of the complainers here could tell us how many members of the public have ever even heard of Al Jazeera let alone watch its coverage. Then they might have some real arguments to air rather than the continual whinge that the Beeb is biased with no concrete evidence to support that premise.

Kevin

As others have mentioned, the "Get one or get done" campaign (and ongoing practice) is despicable. Nothing BBC (not "the" BBC) does can justify this legalised theft.

bodo

"War is not a competition" you say? But I'm afraid that's exactly what it is. Perhaps you meant that news coverage is not a competition? Well you're wrong there too. News has always been competitive (surely you've read Scoop?), but the BBC have obviously given up competing, and that's why your coverage is so often second-best and people are going elsewhere. Or are you like one of those kids who loses 100 metres race and then try to pretend that he didn't realise that people were actually racing for real? Your constant special pleading on Twitter, especially after Sky to beat you so comprehensively in Tripoli just makes you look rather sad and desperate. Oh, and obviously far too much time on your hands.

Iain Dale's recent article about the urgency and excitement of Sky or ITN newsrooms compared to the laziness and overstaffing so evident at the BBC makes depressing reading. And just look at the hostile comments aimed at you and the BBC -- unthinkable 10 or 15 years ago. I won't even start with the cosy soft left bias that run through the organisation and everything it does, suffice to say that you, your fellow managers, and new Labour have destroyed what was once a truly great organisation. I'd hope that you'd feel some shame, but I doubt you will, and no doubt the cushy pension that awaits will buy enough fine wine to take the edge of any guilt as you relax in your French villa watching Al-jazeera for all the latest news.

Mycroft

I've wasted my time reading through these comments, and it is clear that what people really object to here is not the quality of the BCC's coverage its (undoubted) left-liberal bias; but if one doesn't care for that view of things, one can easily recognize it and make allowances. And after all, views that differ from that orthodoxy are allowed expression on the BBC, and there is plenty of free discussion on it. What these commentators want is not an unbiased broadcasting organization, but one that is biases in their direction.

Ian

I spent most of the noughties in England. The BBC is one of the best broadcast organizations in the world, bar none. The news reporting can be a bit government slanted; however at least it is mostly honest. On the entertainment side, drop all the blather and there is still a wealth of drama and fiction that no other broadcaster can touch.

JohnBUK

Mycroft, you missed one important aspect - we all (anyone with a TV or even the internet) have to bloody pay for it whether we watch it or not (or even want to watch it or not). If it's so good then it shouldn't be a problem stopping the taxation and the BBC arranging other funding options - just like every other broadcaster.

Tom Walshe

What a depressing array of entrenched, short-sighted prejudice is revealed by most of the comments here. The BBC has its failing and faults, of course, but deserves to remain the envy of the world as a news, information and entertainment medium par excellence. Britons, in particular, should be proud of it and the invaluable contribution it makes to our national identity and culture at home and reputation and influence abroad.

Gabriel Gatehouse, like all the news men and women who bring us pictures and reports from some of the most dangerous places on the planet, deserve our admiration and congratulation. Reflect on their perils of their job the next time you watch Frank Gardner reporting from his wheelchair.

canonalberic

Tom Walshe and Mycroft: pretty much the only posters moved to defend the BBC - what is striking about your posts are: (a) ad hominem attacks on the ignorance and bigotry of people who dont share your views; (b) the parroting of the corporate line about it being "the envy of the world".

What you miss is that most of the unrepresntative right wing nutters here are usually expressing despair at the near complete eclipsing of a news organisation that was once global and respected but is no longer because of incompetence, idleness, greed and arrogance.

I S

Tom Walshe - And, pray, what particular non-job are you overpaid for at the BBC? Head Arse-Licker (Data Analysis Support Division) ?

Tom Walshe

Disappointed and disbelieving though I S (I wonder why he or she, in common with most of the posters here, declines to reveal an actual name) will be, I have never worked for or been associated with the BBC. I was, in fact, employed by a rival national broadcaster for 20 years and therefore have first hand knowledge of a commercial industry that has been in serious decline for all of that time in terms of the quality of the product it is able to deliver.

I S

Tom Walshe - What difference would it make if I used my full name? Would you care to print your address and phone no also?
As regards the BBC being 'the envy of the world' - the only elements which excite envy in others are its stratospheric salaries, gold-plated pensions and featherbedded non-jobs, all paid for out of the public purse.
The BBC has dumbed itself down in pursuit of ratings to the extent that its schedules nowadays would shame Anglia TV of the '60s. Total dreck.

Jon stack

More self obsessed drivel from the BBC. Please keep your hubris to yourself.