Conference call
| 15:04 UK time, Wednesday, 3 October 2007
This morning I came in to find a few complaints claiming we'd not covered the Conservative Party Conference last night - and that we'd been fooled by Gordon Brown into leading on a statement about British troops in Iraq. Here's a smattering of the points made:
• "When the Labour Party had their conference the ´óÏó´«Ã½ chose to spend half of each news programme reporting on it, but tonight, the ´óÏó´«Ã½ didn't even mention the Conservative Party Conference, and instead focused on Gordon Brown's visit to Iraq."
• "I pay my Licence Fee to have genuine independent news but to not put the Tory Conference on at all is a disgrace."
• "I think you have been caught up in Gordon Brown's spin."
What's interesting is that we didn't receive any complaints from the Conservative Party - and trust me, they would have been straight on the phone if they believed that we had underplayed their conference yesterday. In fact concerns were raised by Gordon Brown's staff in regular calls - they were concerned that what they believed was a legitimate announcement was being made to look like spin.
Editorial choices can be hard, and it's difficult to please everyone, but I believe the Ten O'Clock News did cover the key story from the Conservative Party conference yesterday - with a chunky package and "live" from our political editor in Blackpool. The piece included stinging criticism from big-hitting Tories of the prime minister's decision to make an announcement on British troops in Iraq right in the middle of the conference, and despite the fact he'd said he'd tell Parliament first. Liam Fox, Sir John Major and David Cameron all focused on the issue. They wanted to get across their point that Gordon Brown is playing politics with our troops. Again, I underline, no one from the Conservative Party complained.
The previous night we presented the Ten O'Clock News from Blackpool. Huw Edwards presented pieces on the new inheritance tax policy, an analysis of whether it would work, and the views of delegates. Half the programme was spent on the Conservatives.
The reality is, we have done just as much on the Conservative conference as we did on Labour and more than we did on the Lib Dems.
For me, the key point about last night's story is: on occasion political parties will be more keen to be seen reacting to an event than to be articulating their own policies. When they want to do that at conference time, it is our duty to report that message to the public in a fair and balanced way. I believe we achieved that last night.
Comments
"The reality is, we have done just as much on the Conservative conference as we did on Labour and more than we did on the Lib-Dems"
I appreciate that this is to suggest that you pay equal heed to the Government and the chief opposition, but surely this also reflects a problem with why we are sliding further and further towards a two-party state, with a smattering of single/local issue 'independent' parties.
Please can the ´óÏó´«Ã½ try and redress the balance and acknowledge the existence and importance of the other parties.
Aha, so you admit to being biased against the Liberal Democrats then!
(you can't win)
You don't mention that in actual fact, the story about Brown was a numbers game. He made it out like troops were being withdrawn, when in actual fact most of those troops were being replaced or had already gone home before he'd got there.
Prior to the opening of the Tory Conference, the ´óÏó´«Ã½'s political correspondents were speculating that Team Brown would announce one or more Tory defections to coincide with the conference and embarrass Cameron and Co. Nothing seems to have come of that threat/promise.
Were your correspondents duped into helping Labour keep the Tories on tenderhooks, I wonder? Or was the sight of Gordon Brown in Iraq cynically exploiting British servicemen and women for political advantage, as he exploited Margaret Thatcher, sufficient to give the would-be defectors second thoughts?
Why would any Conservatives bother complaining to a media organization which, as we well know, uses public money for champagne-funded celebrations of Labour election victories? Asking the ´óÏó´«Ã½ not to be pro-Labour would be like asking Dracula to undertake a blood-free diet.
You've done it again. Far less coverage for Cameron's speech than Brown's (for example on Today programme at peak times) despite the fact that you've been building it up as make or break. For Brown you had comments on the radio and the website from sycophants and people who want their job back (Mandelson, Milburn etc) - where's the equivalent for the Tories? I've no particular axe to grind I'm just curious - you built the Cameron speech up as a major story then you didn't cover it properly. No wonder some people think you're biased.
The ´óÏó´«Ã½ believes in presenting factual, accurate reporting giving equal coverage to the different political party conferences. So this tradition of fair coverage has not been diluted at all. So when one hears the odd complaint one is genuinely surprised. The ´óÏó´«Ã½ can be proud of the accolades it gets as quality reporting is not at all easy. ´óÏó´«Ã½ journalists are second to none as they are determined to present the facts as they are without massaging the figures. Keep up the good work.
Post 2, makes the bizzare claim that the ´óÏó´«Ã½ receive only the odd complaint, what rubbish, the ´óÏó´«Ã½ receives thousands of complaints, if Pancha read through most sections of the Editors blogs the evidence would be in front of their rose tinted glasses.
The ´óÏó´«Ã½ has admitted that it has a left-wing bias, the ´óÏó´«Ã½ even has a website devoted to showing the bias reporting it gives to PC and left-wing views.
www.biased´óÏó´«Ã½.co.uk
I have read some of Pancha's comments and his blog, and it is pretty obvious that Pancha viewpoint is exactly that of the left-wing PC brigade.
So I think in the sake of honesty Pancha should be open about his political views before spouting on about the quality and honesty of the ´óÏó´«Ã½.
Still not posted my criticism, eh? Free speech at al-Beeb. Hah!
I dont know if your reperting of the Conservative conference was or was not biased, but I am sure that more than just me was shocked at the air time given to the MORI boss to make his views known. It amounted to nothing less than a diabolical attack on David Cameron and amounted to nothing less than a Party polical broadcast on behalf of the labour Party. Shame on YOU ´óÏó´«Ã½ I wll give my vote when the time comes to bring some of you trndies to heel.
I thought you had to give an equal footing to all parties? This is why there is essentially a 2 party system in the UK and why it will not change. How are any other parties, or even ideas able to bubble to the surface when papers and tv stations give the overwhelming majority of their time to two main parties?
And there was I thinking this was a democracy...........
I didn't time it with a stopwatch, but the reporting on News 24 just after 5pm of David Cameron's speech seemed a little perfunctory. Unlike the attention then lavished on Dresden railway station.
And to say well, the Conservatives didn't complain so it must be all right, is disingenuous. We all know that (alas) the Tory leadership these days makes a virtue of being laid-back. And from a practical point of view, if they complained to the ´óÏó´«Ã½ every time you slanted your coverage they'd never get anything else done.
PS Pancha Chandra, do you actually work for the ´óÏó´«Ã½? That's the only explanation I can find for your truly mind-boggling "surprise" at the "odd complaint".
The ´óÏó´«Ã½'s coverage of all three Party Conferences was, as usual, spot on.
The kind of paranoia displayed by the Tory voters who complained is in line with the general hostility towards the ´óÏó´«Ã½ that is felt by that end of the political spectrum.
Of course the ´óÏó´«Ã½ can't ignore such frivolous complaints (in an ideal world you could). You're probably all too aware that the Right is simply trying to knock the impartial ´óÏó´«Ã½ into parroting its own agenda.
The irony is astounding, but no less dangerous for that.
Mr Oliver......
You just don't get it do you?
Good grief. Are people really complaining that Gordon Brown has been given more airtime on the ´óÏó´«Ã½ than David Cameron? At the risk of pointing out the utterly obvious, Gordon Brown is the Prime Minister. It is only natural that more coverage is given to the people that are actually governing us than a group of people that are doing simply looking for attention.
When did the UK become,a two party state or a 3 party state ? It may have slipped of the radar of a lot of people INCLUDING the ´óÏó´«Ã½ but the Nationalists are in coalition Government in Wales and Nothern Ireland ,in Scotland the Nationalists are the Government. The UK as it was doesnt exist anymore ,its time for the ´óÏó´«Ã½ to get up to date with this new reality or become irrelevant.
More 'factual, accurate' reporting by the ´óÏó´«Ã½. The ´óÏó´«Ã½ reports "Tories 'narrowing Labour lead'" and refers to the Guardian/ICM poll that Labour are on 39, Tories 38 and Lib 16. But the Guardian has published the actual results of the poll on their website as Labour 38, Tories 38, Lib 16. Let's see how long it takes for the ´óÏó´«Ã½ to stop misleading people and correct the story. 1 hour and 15 minutes so far.
BenM: There are countless specific examples of left-wing ´óÏó´«Ã½ bias, for some of them see the website quoted above which can be - and is - updated on an almost daily basis. Your abuse is simply typical left-wing bluster.
Hostility towards the ´óÏó´«Ã½ is not "paranoia" but justified anger on the part of those who are forced by law to pay money to an organisation which regards them and their views with contempt. Far from "parroting" any "agenda", it would be a gain simply to have the existence of these views at least acknowledged, something which the ´óÏó´«Ã½ is supposed to do but as far as possible avoids.
"Of course the ´óÏó´«Ã½ can't ignore such frivolous complaints (in an ideal world you could). You're probably all too aware that the Right is simply trying to knock the impartial ´óÏó´«Ã½ into parroting its own agenda."
Don't you find it odd that more often then not it is the right that finds problems with the "impartial" ´óÏó´«Ã½. If it was as balanced as the ´óÏó´«Ã½ complains you would expect both political wings to have problems with their coverage.
The few times that someone from the left complains about the ´óÏó´«Ã½ being right-wing in HYS they usually follow it with a comment that New Labour are too right-wing.
The ´óÏó´«Ã½ falls nicely into the centre-left area of the political spectrum, which just happens to be the same space that the Labour party fills.
I suggest that, for a period of two weeks, David Cameron's name be prefixed with "gorgeous pouting" and Gordon Brown's with "dour pension-grabber" every time they are mentioned on the beeb. With this I hope that, in some small way, the ´óÏó´«Ã½ pro-Labour bias can be redressed.
'In fact concerns were raised by Gordon Brown's staff in regular calls - they were concerned that what they believed was a legitimate announcement was being made to look like spin.'
This line did make me laugh, surely the wonderful Gordon Brown and the rest of his cronies in the Labour party would never stoop so low as to use our troops as a political football. The fact that this 'legitimate announcement' came right in the middle of the Conservative conference and broke GB's promise to make all announcements to parliament first stinks, but then again after ten years of non-stop spin what else should I expect.
What's interesting is that we didn't receive any complaints from the Conservative Party -
Your arrogance is unbelievable. I complained because there was virtually no coverage on the 6pm News of the conference,and specifically, of David Davies's speech. It was Me that complained about a public service broadcaster not reporting on a major news event. The fact that the conservatives did not complain is irrelevant, but that you thought that was sufficient reason to dismiss my (and other) complaints is, I suppose, to be expected from a ´óÏó´«Ã½ News Editor under the current ´óÏó´«Ã½ management.My perception of the frequently aired complaint about the anti-conservative bias prevalent in ´óÏó´«Ã½ news content is that the complaint is not unfounded, with more evidence of such bias appearing daily on both the News and on Radio 4 PM programmes. There is some justification in ITV News claiming to be the heir of the supposed unbiased public broadcasting company that was the ´óÏó´«Ã½.