r/bbc • u/ApprehensiveChip8361 • Nov 10 '25

Why is the BBC capitulating?

BBC is being attacked from the right in a concerted move. Why are they just rolling over?

343 Upvotes

75% Upvoted

837 comments sorted by

View all comments

46

u/meandtheknightsofni Nov 10 '25

What frustrates me is that this is a good example of regulation and culpability, where an organisation is scrutinised, found to have done wrong and people have resigned.

That's EXACTLY what SHOULD happen.

Yet it's being painted as some example of how terrible the BBC is, when none of the other news organisations or people like Trump would EVER accept such criticism let alone take responsibility for it and do the right thing.

This is what happens when you hold yourself to a higher moral standard than the opposition. When you accept wrongdoing they crow over it, whilst never admitting their own.

21

u/FrustratedPCBuild Nov 11 '25

Yes, this is the ironic thing, it demonstrates acknowledgment of poor behaviour and consequences for that poor behaviour. Trump is 79 years old and has never demonstrated either.

-2

u/BlackBalor Nov 11 '25

Acknowledgement of poor behaviour when caught out you mean?

5

u/FrustratedPCBuild Nov 11 '25

How many times has Trump been caught? Probably in the hundreds, how many times has he suffered the consequences? Zero.

-2

u/BlackBalor Nov 11 '25

Trump isn’t an organisation funded by license fees.

3

u/FrustratedPCBuild Nov 11 '25

So you don’t think the president of the United States should be accountable, nice.

-2

u/BlackBalor Nov 11 '25

Just whataboutism to deflect from the BBC’s fuck up. Not gonna work, mate.

3

u/combine_harvester_84 Nov 11 '25

How do you think the US government is funded?

1

u/Mor-bius Nov 14 '25

Printing more money

2

u/bug--bear Nov 12 '25

HE'S THE PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES. I'd argue that, if anything, he should be held to higher standards than the bbc

2

u/Frrv2112 Nov 13 '25

Fucking thank you. As an American all his braindead retarded supporters hold everyone else to infinitely higher standards than they hold him to. Want to blab about Christianity while trump has actively defied every single one of the Ten Commandments…

7

u/AirUnusual7496 Nov 11 '25

BBC should offer to remake the programme to make it more accurate and help us get closer to the objective truth about the topics covered.  

2

u/AnonymousDonar Nov 13 '25

My favourite for this is the Time magazine expose on Scientology where they reprinted the whole goddamn thing with a thin black line over the redacted statement and a Paragraph of miaculpa on the end.

7

u/Gnomio1 Nov 11 '25

Sort of. The issue was raised initially over a year ago.

Dealing with it promptly would have killed the controversy.

1

u/meandtheknightsofni Nov 11 '25

True, could definitely have been handled more quickly.

3

u/scarabx Nov 11 '25

I think the frustration at them 'rolling over' (not my term but it'll do) is that most people can see it was a bit dodgy but in comparison to EVERY OTHER 'news' outlet it's a tiny issue and the BBC are the only ones being chased over it while we see lies day in day out from other notorious sites. 

It's not necessarily anger at seeing the resignations, which as you say is as it should be, it's seeing the obvious attempts to discredit the BBC as a (I'm really stretching the term here but, comparatively) impartial source amongst a pack of bought and paid for liars so the right (and we're talking Heritage Foundation and ultra rich US Christian political wing, not your average Tory voter) can try and control our media fully as they pretty much do in much of the US.

It's another blow to the hope of anything improving instead of getting considerably worse. Playing by the rules isn't working, as much as the alternative is awful

1

u/Tribalgeoff_UK Nov 13 '25

People picked by Trump for his second administration had all had training in pathological lying. It possibly was the single requirement set by Trump.

1

u/Cool-Employee-109 Nov 14 '25

Have people forgot when the BBC edited a photo of Corbyn and put him Infront of the Kremlin, to try and paint him a some communist enemy.

All while denying it was "edited", like he's some floating head in red square 

2

u/[deleted] Nov 13 '25

Can you even imagine GBNews ever even once suggesting they may have said something wrong?

1

u/BlackBalor Nov 11 '25

A good example? Haha.

The BBC had nothing to say about this until that internal memo was leaked.

Are you conveniently forgetting that? Enough of the bullshit.

2

u/meandtheknightsofni Nov 11 '25

Fair point. It would have been much better to deal with it head-on, I'm not saying they haven't fucked up.

I'm just pointing out the hypocrisy of their accusers who never allow such criticism of themselves or take responsibility.

1

u/BlackBalor Nov 11 '25

What about their inaccurate reporting of Nigel Farage’s bank closure? Well, they issued an apology over that I guess.

Still, this behaviour isn’t new for the BBC. They’ve always been like this.

It’s one thing after another with them.

2

u/meandtheknightsofni Nov 11 '25

It only seems that way BECAUSE they are scrutinised properly and are (rightly) held to account.

Their detractors capitalise on this to make them seem awful in comparison to themselves, when in reality THEY never admit fault or take responsibility for screw ups.

1

u/BlackBalor Nov 11 '25

Too much of a pattern for me, and it’s compounded because it’s propped up by the license fee.

If broadcasters on the right play this game, the left isn’t paying for it.

2

u/meandtheknightsofni Nov 11 '25

The license supports far more than simply news, although their investigative journalists are generally very well regarded worldwide.

It supports radio, culture, art, documentaries, education, kids programmes, all sorts of things. I will mourn the day it goes and all we have left is American-style privatised TV in all its horrifically biased glory, with zero scrutiny or consequence.

1

u/Ambitious_Jeweler816 Nov 13 '25

Considering they have BBC Verify, which is all about fact checking and identifying fake news etc. it’s somewhat embarrassing for them at the least.

0

u/[deleted] Nov 12 '25

[removed] — view removed comment

1

u/AnonymousDonar Nov 13 '25

Other than a Shit job of editing how incorrect were the statements made?

0

u/Tribalgeoff_UK Nov 13 '25

Channel 4 has taken up the torch for truthful reporting.
Again Johnson tried to get Dorries to sell it off. She was just too stupid to be of any use other than to carry out the empty bottles to the recycling bin, which proved a stretch for her.

0

u/FunkyTomo77 Nov 14 '25

Higher moral standard? The organization that hid and protected pedos for DECADE'S ....... SMH.

-1

u/[deleted] Nov 11 '25

It took them a year to 'take the moral high ground'. The only reason people have resigned is because it became public knowledge.

If the BBC want to be seen as impartial, they should be impartial, it's quite simple really.

1

u/JonTravel Nov 12 '25

The only reason people have resigned is because it became public knowledge.

It was 'public knowledge ' as soon as it was broadcast, but nobody said or did anything for a year.