What a load of crap BBC News is. Whether it’s the TV or the online version, they’ve got it all wrong. All the news services are just as bad as each other; the BBC is only one example of the many I could have used.
In a relatively recent shift, the BBC has taken to using emotion to convey stories. While the appeal is obvious, it’s just plain wrong. The news should always be as impartial as possible. A news reporter should not prejudice the delivery of the news with intonation that conveys opinion, be it the BBC’s or the reporter’s. Frankly, I’m surprised they’re allowed to do it, since it is obviously going to make a huge impact on how people perceive the story. The watchers should be allowed to make up their own minds about an event from the facts conveyed, not have a ready-made opinion baby-fed to them by a news report phrased like a soap opera.
Who is a mere news reporter to tell the audience what it should be afraid, happy, unhappy or concerned about? To some extent, the news services cannot avoid this – the very act of choosing which stories to put onto the programme inherently brings with it an amount of bias. But it should be avoided as much as possible, as was the case decades ago when newsreaders used a neutral voice when delivering news articles.
This is a symptom, no doubt, of the perception that people don’t want to think for themselves – and perhaps in this perception they’re right. But that does not give the BBC the right to do what in effect is dumbing down. Enough of that goes on as it is.
Anyway, the BBC should not chase ratings. After all, not needing a big viewership is the only edge it has against the competitors. So why should it judge itself by these criteria?
Another thing that bothers me is what I call the “missing ‘is’ syndrome.” Here’s an example from the BBC News Web site[9]:
“This from the White House transcript:”
(makes no sense at all in standard English) when it should be:
“This is from the White House transcript:”
The former is not a sentence, and just sounds stupid. The latter is proper English, and it’s also less confusing. One of the Iraq reporters started using it, and now everyone across BBC News is in on the act. Presumably they think it sounds cool, professional, authoritative and attractive to audiences. But as it doesn’t add anything meaningful to the story or the delivery, there’s no valid point to it at all.
The online version of BBC News is even worse. For a start, grammar mistakes are rife. This sounds trivial, but a small grammar mistake could change the entire context of the story to far worse an extent than conveying an emotion could. Let’s take a real example:
A Guinness World Records team will decide if the record has been broken.[1]
In other words, if the record is not broken, then the Guinness World Records team will not decide[2]. The correct sentence would be, “…whether the record has been broken.”
This is a more minor example, but imagine its impact on a more important story. And another thing is the misleading titles it uses. Of course, I understand that titles have to be concise so that they are easily digestible and fit on the page neatly. But conciseness is one thing; being misleading is another. Consider this head-turner
Cardiff ‘UK’s Most Costly Place’[3]
says the headline. The story, in actual fact, does not say that Cardiff is the UK’s most costly place. They can’t even be forgiven for using the title’s single quotes, because it is still wrong. Instead, the story states that, according to a survey, people have less money to spend in Cardiff than the rest of the UK. This is due to low wages relative to the cost of living in Cardiff, not high prices relative to the UK. If a Londoner went to Cardiff, he might even find it quite cheap by comparison. Surely the following:
"Cost of Living in Cardiff ‘Highest in UK’"
would be more accurate, and it’s still a short headline.
This is a good example of one of the many blatant attempts to get people to open a Web page, so that they can get more page views – which is no better than the methods employed by spam e-mail, mail shots and other underhand adverts. It’s just the BBC trying to prove that it’s popular by increasing the readership statistics. But popularity should not be a goal. Quality should. People do not naturally pursue quality – that is why the Sun is the UK’s best-selling daily newspaper (if we’re to believe Wikipedia[4]). So this is a bad way of trying to measure success, even if quality is their genuine goal. There it goes again, trying to pursue indicators and statistics to things that don’t really matter.
And to make things worse, and speaking, as I was, of being “easily digestible,” the BBC also has a tradition of using long, complicated sentences. For example:
“The boy, reported to be from Penrith in Cumbria, but thought to have run away from a care home in Birkenhead, Merseyside, was heading to Lisbon.”[5]
Why not just say the same thing like as follows?
“The boy is reportedly from Penrith in Cumbria. However, he is thought to have run away from a care home in Birkenhead, Merseyside. He was heading to Lisbon.”
The gripes are endless. The following is a list of the many other common goofs on the BBC Web site recently, although many of them will likely be corrected by the time you visit the site. I’m sure this list will grow over time:
- Net reviewing body renews US links
In July 2006, an official from the US Department of Commerce said it was still "committed" to turning Icann into a private organisation. Some suspected this might have happened on 30 September 2006 when Icann's current contract to run the net's addressing systems expired.[6]
Do the BBC run a Time Service, whereby the future BBC relays messages to the past?
- Blair faces wave of resignations
Tony Blair lashes out as seven junior government members quit over his refusal to name an exit date.[7]
Does the BBC honestly think that "lashes out" constitutes fair, unbiased, factual news, rather than the outspoken hyperbole we expect from the gutter press? And while we're on the subject:
- Hardy's cottage to be rented out.[8]
This is a blatant lie. As the news article itself points out, this is only "one of the options" that the National Trust (which runs the property) is proposing, and nothing has yet been decided.
- The most powerful vice-president ever?
The rapport between interviewer and interviewee suggests that they knew very well what they were talking about.[9]
If something is suggested, then it is irrelevant to say "knew very well". He might not have known "very well", as the report admits by using the word "suggests." There is no reason to use such emotive language except to give an unfair bias in one direction, which is not what a news report should be giving.
- Sir Elton Berates Australian PM
Mr Howard denied the move was not homophobic.[10]
Another libellous world-beater from BBC News.
- Guinness good for you - official
The old advertising slogan "Guinness is Good for You" may be true after all, according to researchers[11]
If something is official, there is no "may be" about it.
The BBC, as with other news services, has a duty to tell the news like it is and nothing more, and to tell it in a measured, unbiased and professional manner. From what I’ve seen, it is grossly abusing its position of authority and trust in order to tell things the BBC Way. And that is both dangerous and unforgivable
[1] BBC News. (17.08.06) “Fireworks Record ‘Looks Broken’”, http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/devon/4800575.stm
[2] Strictly this is impossible, because the Guinness World Records team would need to decide that the record is not broken in order to decide not to decide whether the record is broken, and would also need to decide that the record is broken in order to decide to decide whether the record is broken. I hope this provides some clarification on the subject.
[3] BBC News Online. (16.08.06) “Cardiff ‘UK’s Most Costly Place’”, http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/wales/4796075.stm
[4] Wikipedia, “Newspaper”, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Daily_newspaper#Circulation_and_readership and Wikipedia, “The Sun”, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Sun_%28newspaper%29
[5] BBC News Online. (16.08.06) “Boy boards plane without tickets”, http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/4796199.stm
[6] BBC News Online. (16.08.06) “Net Ruling Body Renews US Links”, http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/technology/4799137.stm
[7] BBC News Online. (06.09.06) Front-page Headline. http://news.bbc.co.uk
[8] BBC News Online. (26.09.06) “Hardy's cottage to be rented out”, http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/dorset/5380464.stm
[9] BBC News Online. (30.10.06) “The most powerful vice-president ever?”, http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/americas/6096042.stm
[10] BBC News Online. (01.12.06) “Sir Elton Berates Australian PM”, http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/entertainment/6194584.stm
[11] BBC News Online. (19.12.07) “Guinness good for you - official”, http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/health/3266819.stm
No comments:
Post a Comment