No Norm, no need to expand. A squib was a firework not set off… Ya Hoo!
Whew, I’m glad you clarified this, Norm! I was afraid you were comparing Gabe to ‘a non-magical person born of magical parents’ (as per the Harry Potter use of “squib’”)—which some might consider worse than being compared to a wet firecracker!
(Mr. Filch and Mrs. Figg–squibs.)
Never read Harry Potter. Did he make ceramic pottery? Whatever, he obviously didn’t know what he was talking about.
Apparently the bias of the BBC - a publicly-funded thing - has been apparent for so long that BoJo might do something about it. If what he does makes for a more balanced organization - seeing as how it is funded by the public i.e. taxes - it will be a good thing.
Where to begin? That, I suspect, is what Boris must be asking himself. Fortunately, he has a small coterie of ‘smart-arse’ advisors around him who seem capable of thinking ‘outside the box’. According to the ’ media ’ this morning, high on the list is the smug, metropolitan, Left-wing BBC. Apparently, Boris & Co., have it as a priority. Goody! Now those smug, fat-arsed mandarins who have lived off my legally enforced licence fee will have to learn how to make a living out in a rough, tough and highly competitive market place. Couldn’t happen to a nicer bunch of ‘toss-pots’!
https://duffandnonsense.typepad.com/duff_nonsense/2019/12/the-sunday-rumble-151219.html
1 Like
We just need to examine a Quora discussion…to see that opinion is divided. 
For example:
It isn’t. The BBC’s culture is establishment-progressive, which directly reflects the values of the people it employs, and most of their political bosses. It actively promotes a compassionate and inclusive worldview, but that worldview is officially endorsed by all sides of the mainstream political spectrum in the UK, left and right. It’s avowedly, and successfully, apolitical from a party-political perspective, and either centrist, or maybe even a little right of centrist, in its presentation of economic affairs.
Just going by your question’s wording (BBC is left wing), I would say anything to the left of Fox News and Breitbart is probably left wing to you and that would be 80% of the networks in the world.
They are probably also left wing because they have journalistic integrity and not report on every snippet they read from some guy’s conspiracy blog as news. They report facts and truth which are probably concepts not popular on the right wing.
Truth be told, I’ve heard the same gripe from people in Britain and usually they turn out to be way to the right of Tory party.
BBC is more balanced and fair than any network in the United States as they are not owned by any ‘For Profit’ multinational corporation and well respected throughout the World except fringe ideology people .
I personally think this perception problem with the bbc is the result of effective propaganda. The BBC is run by people with a clear bias towards the conservative right, for example - Nick Robinson who was, prior to working for the bbc, president of the Oxford Conservative Association, there are others who the real left are very concerned about like news anchor - Laura Kuenssberg. There are other issues too, it has a huge establishment bias and so the kind of news tends to favour moneyed interests most of the time, since those who are actual capitalists are over represented on its platform. It is also in trouble a lot for mis-characterizing the left, and by that I mean they are known to be portraying Corbyn and his shadow Chancellor in a negative light (to the extent possible) and their political opponents (i.e. the Conservatives) in a positive light (to the extent possible). They basically operate as damage control for the right and centre right and damage amplifiers for the left and perhaps to a lesser degree the center left. I almost forgot to mention that the BBC has been in trouble for misrepresenting the effects of man-made climate change too which climate denial is typically a right of centre problem.
Or take
A study by Cardiff University academics, funded by the BBC Trust, was published in August 2013, examining the BBC’s coverage of a broad range of issues. One of the findings was the dominance of party political sources. In coverage of immigration, the EU and religion, these accounted for 49.4% of all source appearances in 2007 and 54.8% in 2012. The data also showed that the Conservative Party received significantly more airtime than the Labour Party. In 2012 Conservative leader David Cameron outnumbered Labour leader Ed Miliband in appearances by a factor of nearly four to one (53 to 15), while Conservative cabinet members and ministers outnumbered their Labour counterparts by more than four to one (67 to 15).[16]
Or
I’m sorry, I thought I answered. Can you restate what you desire answered?
What “actions” of “discrimination” do you want practiced toward transgender persons?
Well I just think that, if the public is being made to pay for it, it should reflect the public, not try to propagandize the public. That’s what the BBC and NPR have been doing, though they also have some excellent programming. Heck, even the old Gray Lady NYT, liberal rag and fish-wrapper that it has become, has some good sections to the paper.
Remember this fool? This one got me on the road to the rabid, spittle-spewing and incoherent neanderthal that I am today:
A senior editor at ThinkProgress supposedly took to Facebook several days after the election to explain that how he felt potentially at risk from a pleasant plumber who came to his apartment to fix a clogged drain.
With no solid information to base it on, the writer/editor of the prominent liberal website speculated that the tradesman was a Donald Trump voter and that speculation alone left him “rattled.”
Kurt S. :" I also wonder what these people think America is. These are the people that trash America history, cultures and traditions. The same people that do not celebrate Columbus, George Washington, Thomas Jefferson or Thanksgiving. The same people that change a universities name from 49ers to Beach because CA gold miners are ‘white supremacist’. The same people that want to remove Andrew Jackson from our currency. The very people that believe America was founded on genocide and slavery. Whatever these people mean by America, it isn’t anything I would recognize as American."
It’s a shame about ‘The Prairie Home Companion’
Bad mojo.
1 Like
Again, that’s a “subjective” opinion (AKA David). Just like I mentioned, in a previous link
I would like a proposal on methodology …on how we can tell, if something is leaning “left”, “right” or “neutral”. What experiment and/or statistical approach, should we deploy?
Now, as far as subjective opinions here go. I’ll get some independent feedback.
We don’t really need them Randy. Every BBC article you’ve posted about Trump, except 1, has been negative. So unless you haven’t been providing the positive articles, I’m gonna call Foul and drop a red flag. Like I said, that doesn’t mean they don’t do a lot of things well, but the bias is blatant and I hope it changes to fairness.
1 Like
Let’s wait and see, David. In the meantime, since they do cover the thread news here…I will continue, to share relevant stories - from the BBC. Just as you probably will, from Fox News. And I doubt that Fox News will ever say anything negative - about a Republican president.
Maybe more Internet news outlets should print stories like this.
Fox has been criticizing Trump for over a year now. Shepard Smith and Mike Wallace and Judge Napolitano are never-Trumpers, and they have been ruthless.
Sure, we’ll wait and see - what else can we do? 
Remember this story?
Now I present an updated version, for the holidays and our forum thread.
Thanks for excellent clarification! On your question, I conveyed I’m wary of gov’t ever affirming
or determining a person’s gender and whether an identity claim is correct. So I’d prefer “none.”
On examples of your desired actions for gov’t, I commented on the two where we may differ. I expressed reluctance for gov’t to control dress codes. But I agree businesses should be free to set their own dress codes. Have there been businesses who’ve been pressured by gov’t over how they handled problems with how transgender persons dressed?
I notice all your examples of what you want gov’t to control are transgendered ‘females.’ I’m curious if you equally advocate the same control of transgendered ‘males’? On gov’t enforcement in bathrooms, the example I’d raised is if consistency insists gov’t force a Chaz Bono to use women’s restrooms?
On your example of making transgender females use male restrooms, I already commented that this would make me more uncomfortable than letting them use the restrooms that fit their present anatomy and gender appearance.
My perception is that this policy appears to be safest for transgender persons (who’ve faced violence), and are least problematic for everyone else, as well as avoiding having the gov’t be the inspector of individual’s gender or genitalia.
If this approach, which is de facto how we’ve operated up until now, proved more unsafe for women, I’d reconsider it. But I’m unaware of such results, or that males who seek to hurt women try to convince them that they themselves are women.
(The times are distressingly changing. I remember even 40 years ago attending our laymen’s conference held in the dorms of Redlands University (our California American Baptist College) and being shocked standing at the urinal of their gender neutral restrooms to have college gals stroll in, and even pass by while I took a shower. Needless to say, that school had ‘progressed’ beyond what most of we Baptists assumed reflected proper truth 
)
I know what is ‘right’ here appears obvious to you. But in a day when much controversy exists about how to limit and handle individual freedom to differ from your understanding, I wonder if we’ll ultimately go to gender neutral stalls and restrooms, wherein individual privacy eliminates an endless debate.
Shepard Smith is gone (thank you Jesus) & Mike Wallace is dead although I know you meant Chris. Fox is the only MSM non liberal/leftist TV station. There are smaller ones like Newsmax & OAN though.
No! Assertions that reason and sense is on the side of one’s own opinion is the supposed clincher both sides generally assume, but that bare assertion only convinces oneself.
I only sense views of gender issues deeply differ, so that a limited gov’t should look for ways to accommodate freedom on such things, short of confirming there’s concrete harm in allowing it. Reasonably resolving such conflicting interests is an ongoing challenge of every free democracy.
So, Bob. Since you are the champion here, of Muslim dialogue. What happens when a US business’s dress code, conflicts with the Muslim dress code?
And this is what the US, says to North Korea.
And in other places on the BBC.
Of course, that assertion too is what all sides of debates declare, that reason better backs their side.
One term for this denouement is “stalemate.”