Medi@W@tch

Help Fight anti-Independence bias in the media

British Broadcasting Corporation (BBC) coverage of the 1997 Scottish Parliament Referendum appeared to be far from impartial. As well as unbalanced reporting, there were complaints that the World Service had been particularly 'London metropolitan', often taking a severely negative stance over the issue of Scottish Home Rule. The BBC in London time and again demonstrated themselves unworthy of the trust (and licence fees) of the people of Scotland and illustrate why it is essential for a Scottish Parliament to have responsibility over Broadcasting legislation in Scotland.

It is a glaring anomaly of the Scotland Bill that Gaelic Broadcasting is within the remit of a Scottish Parliament, yet English (sic) Broadcasting which covers some 95% of airtime is not. Clearly the former is seen as cultural (and therefore uncontroversial) while the latter is political (and hence very controversial). In this age of electronic mass media who would deny that TV and Radio in whatever language have a massive influence on reflecting and shaping our cultural aspirations? Is it right that London should retain extreme control over this major part of our lives?

As Ruth Wishart pointed out in The Herald (2 March 1998), to watch BBC news programmes you would be forgiven for thinking that Scotland did not exist. If the BBC existed solely to serve the "national region" of England then this could be excused - but it is not. The BBC has a remit to reflect and serve the cultural diversity of the UK, yet this is being used as an argument AGAINST devolving broadcasting to a Scottish parliament. Beat that for twisted logic !! To have Scottish news tagged on as a 2-minute addenda to the London news is an insult.

Scotland has a 30 minute 'regional' news programme but it's output is decidedly parochial. What do we expect when its budget and remit are defined by bounds set it by London? It is time for BBC Scotland and the viewers representative body (The Broadcasting Council for Scotland) to take a pro-active aggressive stand against their London bureaucracy. Why not give BBC Scotland responsibility for Irish and Scandinavian input to the World Service? Give it an international dimension, and help it out of its parochial mindset.

BBC Scotland is currently constrained whichever way it turns. In scheduling it has to seek opt-out permission from London. In financing, it has to go cap in hand to its London masters, and incidentally, just over 50% of the licence money raised in Scotland is actually spent in Scotland !! Within the very tight constraints set by London, BBC Scotland does an admirable job, but it is not enough, particularly with the new political landscape in Scotland.

Recent events also bring into question the supposed "independent" nature of Scotland's media. If you want to help promote fairness in the media then  read on, and use all the information and addresses below to your advantage.

On these pages you can find useful contact numbers AND email your complaints direct.

Let me know how you get on. Why not save this page, and refer to it again when you are off-line ?

The British Broadcasting Corporation (BBC)

BBC TV reporting of party Conferences is shamelessly biased, both in hours of TV coverage and in the tone of 'reporting'. Listed below was the TV coverage (for each party) transmitted in Scotland during the Annual Conference week and during the budget week (Nov 28th 1995). (The same proportions also existed in following years)

         Party       Support    TV Time in Scotland

        -------      -------    ------------------

                               Conf 1995/ Budget 1995 / Spring Conf 1996

   Liberal Democrats   ~10%     16+ hrs    3x10min      5hrs10min

   Labour Party        ~52%     20+ hrs    3x10min      4hrs50min

   Conservatives       ~13%     22 hrs     3x10min      5hrs15min

   SNP                 ~25%      4hrs      3x5min       ZERO-NIL-ZIP

Perhaps someone from the BBC could explain how this is serving democracy ? Why should our licence fees be used to distort the democratic process ? .