20-02-2024, 04:06 PM
(20-02-2024, 12:10 PM)Stockland Hillman Wrote: As usual as interesting viewpoint Adsales, but it misunderstands the longtime understanding that broadcasters have on issues of balance in news.
We shall see
Quote:Let's get one thing out the way. Line by line rebuttals of politicians sentences has never been done, as it's Impractical. The Sunak claim Labour "don't have a plan" [on immigration] can't and shouldn't be rebutted by a simple "they do" in the way Suzanna Reed did on GMB, as that's just repeating another political statement as fact without context and analysis if it.
No one has asked for line by line rebuttals. They were never required and are not required. I don't agree with Reid's outburst.
Quote:So you can see if every contentious statement on TV or Radio had to have a officially approved type of balancing challange, it would be unworkable.
That's not required and I'm surprised you even mention that. The rules are crystal-clear and I don't think I need to explain them again.
Quote:Broadcasters are legally entitled to choose the editorial topics they cover, in this case GBN chose the battleground seats of 'red wall' voters so the challenging balance on matters of public controversy IS the public. The fact they usually have very different priorities to those of political journalists and activists is irrelevant - it's still balance.
It isn't balance. Due impartiality cannot exist unless a "wide range of significant views" are provided. The entire country is fed up with the state of the NHS, Sunak claiming everything is fine is not balanced unless that claim is followed up by a rebuttal from another member of the public or indeed a politician who holds a different view (or, atypical for UK media, a fact check).
Quote:It's not a GBN defence from me, because party leadership debates would also be impacted. Both SNP and Welsh Labour have changed leaders/first ministers and have hours of airtime which effectively is an unchallenged advert for the party with a narrow gap between the parties candidates. The views of rival parties isn't featured, despite the wide public audience. Why? Because the broadcaster is entitled to choose the topic and frame of the discussion and cover it in the most appropriate way.
If its protected speech for Leadership debates then its protected for every other sub topic including the GBN redwall discussion, outside of an legally defined national election period - where the law is clearly set out in primary legislation.
Leadership debates are not comparable as different candidates naturally hold different views and therefore due impartiality is preserved.
Quote:All regulatory rules must be clear, consistent and applicable in all situations. Ofcom are in danger of breaking the good work they've done over 20 years
They are clear. Ofcom has had any easy ride up until around 2015. They then miserably failed on numerous occasions and are slowly showing some teeth.