Kamagra Oral Jelly For Sale Uk Search Viagra Viagra Find Generic Buy Crestor 5 Mg Pret Claritin Reditabs Directions Use Clomid Bodybuilding Buy

BBC implies there wasn’t interest in NHS bill


12:39 pm - July 13th 2012

by Newswire    


      Share on Tumblr

The BBC Complaints department has responded to a viewer’s claim that the news team did not cover the NHS bill adequately, by implying there wasn’t enough interest.

The response does not bother trying to justify or explain the BBC’s startling lack of coverage over the NHS Bill passing, and what it meant for people.

Blogger SKwalker1964 wrote to them a few weeks ago saying:

The government’s Health & Social Care Act is dismantling the NHS piece by piece so that no one sees the full effects in time to prevent it.

Duncan-Smith & co are demonising the disabled, unemployed & those on benefits.

Last week a whole day was devoted to the resignation of a single banker, and much more to the banking debacle on an ongoing basis. ‘fluff’ items about the Queen found space, as did many other items of minor interest.

Today he received a response that said:

We understand you feel there has been insufficient coverage of the Health & Social Care Act and the effect it’s have on the NHS.

BBC News Editors have a difficult choice in deciding which story to report, the place it should take in the running order and the length of time afforded to it. A number of factors are taken into consideration when putting together the content for each news bulletin. These include the importance and magnitude of a story, the level of public interest, the kind of audience watching or listening, and also how engaging a story is.

But the response doesn’t actually address the complaint directly at all.

As blogger SKwalker1964 says:

I find this response to be utterly inadequate – can anyone really say that the dismantling of the NHS, one of the greatest treasures and achievements of our country, is not a matter of importance, magnitude, public interest and engagement of the highest order?

    Share on Tumblr   submit to reddit  


About the author

· Other posts by


Story Filed Under: News

Sorry, the comment form is closed at this time.


Reader comments


In other words the BBC has sold out and will no longer act as a public broadcaster. Never appease the right wing. They will never thank you for it. As Clegg is finding out.

I don’t like the NHS reforms either, but let’s not get to hyperbolic. The NHS remains free at the point of need – that’s the most important thing, and that’s not being ‘dismantled’. It was never entirely state-run – just look at the GPs.

I’d rather less private involvement and internal markets and so on, agreed, but the claims it is being dismantled just damage your case (i.e. patients and the public will not notice anything being dismantled).

I think the reforms were unnecessary, incompetently planned and communicated, and a diversion from the real problem in healthcare (dealing with an ageing population and long-term conditions in a system where the default care setting is an acute hospital), but the (most controversial) private sector elements of the Act are only an extension of what’s been happening for decades, and definitely not revolutionary.

The BBC is an arrogant media monster, self satisfied and contemptous of crticism.
What is presented as news is government propaganda and regurgitated press releases.
Their newscasters (if you can call them such) are rejects from the Muppet Show.
Massacres in Syria are rejected in favour of a piece on ‘are men or women better at parking cars – send us your views?’
It would be just utterly pathetic if we didn’t have to pay these witless tw#ts a fortune to produce this drivel, instead it’s head boilingly frustrating.

Adam@2
The NHS may well remain ‘free’ at the point of delivery but where in the queue will we be?
NHS Hospital Trusts were limited to receiving 47% of their income from private sources – it is Andrew Lansley’s intention to remove this cap.
Now if I was a hospital manager do I heal the richest first or make them wait while I treat the poorest?

Tens of thousands of pounds were being spent on Lansley’s reforms before the Bill had even received its first reading – democracy huh?

You might recall the ‘fuss’ over donations made to the running of Mr Lansley’s office (while in Opposition) presumably a coincidence that the money came from providers of private health care.

Or maybe the 40 odd Peers with links to private health care, presumable they absented themselves from debate?

My wife has worked over 40 years in the NHS and together with many of her colleagues believes that within ten years it will be unrecognisable.
Our Tory boys have wet dreams over the American model and the money to be made.

In Scotland there are no changes planned to the NHS, although Scottish Labour MPs did vote with the Tory/Liberal government to half privatise the English NHS, so if we ever have a Labour government, I suppose we can expect the same thing from them.

The NHS remains free at the point of need – that’s the most important thing, and that’s not being ‘dismantled’. It was never entirely state-run – just look at the GPs.

Really, Adam?
http://liberalconspiracy.org/2012/07/13/nhs-walk-in-centre-to-charge-25-for-treatment/

@barrie j

Actually barrie, with a small number of exceptions, the vast majority of trusts had private income caps well below 10%.The subsequent argument was whether the bill would have a new cap of 49%,or no cap at all.

@Sunny

Fair enough, that’s pretty bad! Not a consequence of these reforms as such, but something made more likely by them I agree – and something that needs to be stepped on very quickly.

8.

They won’t be stepped on very quickly as long as the main news provider in this country is refusing to inform the public about any of it. There would be interest from the public if the BBC told them what is happening.

Judging from experience, this is a stock reply sent to any complaints of political bias. At least they got his complaint the right way round – I complained about the pro Boris bias in the Mayoral election results programme (e.g. crowning Boris mayor even before the voting booths closed etc), and was sent an e-mail saying I had complained about anti-Boris coverage!

Ive had similar and very patronising responses to my complaints on this issue and on bias. Can supply emails if you want

I complained earlier this year and this is part of the response:

“It is not always possible or practical to reflect all the different opinions on a subject within individual programmes. Editors are charged to ensure that over a reasonable period they reflect the range of significant views, opinions and trends in their subject area. The BBC does not seek to denigrate any view, nor to promote any view. It seeks rather to identify all significant views, and to test them rigorously and fairly on behalf of the audience. Among other evidence, audience research indicates widespread confidence in the impartiality of the BBC’s reporting.”

So there you go, the BBC is “impartial”.

how could there be interest on something they didnt report properly? isnt it the news rooms job to bring news to our attention? isnt that how stories become “of interest”?

Not enough interest? have the BBC forgotten their function to inform, and merely see themselves as entertainers?
If there was any lack of interest, which I did not observe, then it is because the BBC did not exerise its duty to let people know the truth, as many have pinted out.
http://think-left.org/2012/02/11/who-pulls-the-strings-at-the-bbc/

“(i.e. patients and the public will not notice anything being dismantled). ”

You’re talking out of your backside, Adam. They will when services disappear, as they alreay are, as provate providers don’t consider them profitable enough. If you don’t know your subject well enough, refrain from commenting.

Erm… sorry but what did you expect?

If you look at who pulls the strings in the BBC there is a clear link between them and the agenda to destroy welfare, destroy the £ and the Euro, same people and families are involved!

BBC is just another tool of the elite, off course they wont inform you of what really matters.

The whole thing with Barclays was just a distraction, nothing more, if they actually did some proper reporting (something non-existing in today’s society) they would have also announced the fact many other banks were involved in the LIBOR thing including the Bank of England.

BBC = ROTHSCHILDS, wake up….

The assertion in the reply from the BBC is astounding. The editors did not condsider the destruction of the NHS a big enough story.

If this is true are they all going to be sacked for incompetence? Sir David Nicholson (who as head of the NHS should know something about these things) described it as ‘so big you can see it from space’. The NHS is regularly described as the nation’s favourite institution. There was no mandate for the changes etc. etc.

And this is not a big enough story?!@!

@17 Editing is how free speech is really suppressed these days, all media outlets do it. They get to decide what you see, hear and read on mainstream platforms, meanwhile if you object to something offensive or inflammatory that one of their employees says or writes you are “an anti-free speech Stalinist control freak”.

Lets also not forget that after the “dodgy dossier” embarrassment Blair made damn sure that the BBC was cravenly beholden to the government for continued funding.

19. Chaise Guevara

The second paragraph of that response looks copy-pasted to me. I reckon it’s a form letter. If so, they haven’t actually responded as such.

I complained about lack of coverage and got same response. its a standard reply that they send out, and it doesn’t cover individual comments – I asked why there was no coverage of the fact that so many MPs and cronies of Cam/Lansley stand to make financial gains out of the privatisation of the NHS – the BBC didn’t address this at all or even acknowledge that I had asked about it.

Nothing’s as endearing as the personal touch DC, don’t ya think? lol


Reactions: Twitter, blogs
  1. letsnotbecynical

    BBC implies there wasn’t interest in NHS bill | Liberal Conspiracy http://t.co/0yUF06E6 via @libcon

  2. heather smart

    This is unbelievable BBC implies there wasn’t interest in NHS bill | The BBC Failed the public Liberal Conspiracy http://t.co/RTSqDHYo

  3. arryn mac

    BBC implies there wasn’t interest in NHS bill | Liberal Conspiracy http://t.co/nhah4CGZ via @libcon

  4. John McNeill

    This is unbelievable BBC implies there wasn’t interest in NHS bill | The BBC Failed the public Liberal Conspiracy http://t.co/RTSqDHYo

  5. keith ferguson

    This is unbelievable BBC implies there wasn’t interest in NHS bill | The BBC Failed the public Liberal Conspiracy http://t.co/RTSqDHYo

  6. sebastian kraemer

    “@RoyLilley: BBC implies there wasn’t interest in NHS bill http://t.co/VBQi2ChT” because they only reflect public opinion? No leadership

  7. Paul McNeilly

    This is unbelievable BBC implies there wasn’t interest in NHS bill | The BBC Failed the public Liberal Conspiracy http://t.co/RTSqDHYo

  8. christina sosseh

    BBC implies there wasn’t interest in NHS bill | Liberal Conspiracy http://t.co/cYJ3gsWM via @libcon

  9. Les Tricoteuses

    BBC implies there wasn’t interest in NHS bill | Liberal Conspiracy http://t.co/1kyr5fRv

  10. Martin Shovel

    RT @RoyLilley: BBC implies there wasn’t interest in NHS bill http://t.co/sycxrj44

  11. Fiona Reynolds

    "@RoyLilley: BBC implies there wasn’t interest in NHS bill http://t.co/9Bbc4IYO" Not in public interest either? Que?

  12. Joy Boyes

    BBC implies there wasn’t interest in NHS bill http://t.co/Hg2n5HHF

  13. Eileen Cowen

    BBC implies there wasn’t interest in NHS bill http://t.co/Yfae2hY0 via @zite

  14. liane gomersall

    BBC implies there wasn’t enough interest in NHS bill to report on it http://t.co/rjUBNDUw

  15. Robert HJ Marshall

    BBC implies there wasn’t interest in NHS bill | Liberal Conspiracy http://t.co/fBsPWplo via @libcon Who is pulling the BBC`s strings???

  16. Bob Ellard

    BBC implies there wasn’t interest in NHS bill | Liberal Conspiracy http://t.co/fBsPWplo via @libcon Who is pulling the BBC`s strings???

  17. Stephen Crabtree

    BBC implies there wasn’t interest in NHS bill | Liberal Conspiracy http://t.co/vLeWO6U5 via @libcon

  18. Anneliese

    BBC implies there wasn’t interest in NHS bill | Liberal Conspiracy http://t.co/vLeWO6U5 via @libcon

  19. UnoLovelyDebi

    BBC implies there wasn’t interest in NHS bill | Liberal Conspiracy http://t.co/fBsPWplo via @libcon Who is pulling the BBC`s strings???

  20. Notenuffluv

    BBC implies there wasn't interest in NHS bill http://t.co/f6A40D2B

  21. Android Dog

    BBC implies there wasn't interest in NHS bill http://t.co/f6A40D2B

  22. Kim Blake

    OUTRAGEOUS RT @libcon: #BBC implies there wasn't interest in #NHS bill http://t.co/Rq8hhQAt

  23. Hugo Z Hackenbush

    I can't even begin to explain how rancid the BBC is, if this is their attitude towards the NHS now. http://t.co/WFH2rx8d @sunny_hundal

  24. Max

    I can't even begin to explain how rancid the BBC is, if this is their attitude towards the NHS now. http://t.co/WFH2rx8d @sunny_hundal

  25. Raymond Procter

    I can't even begin to explain how rancid the BBC is, if this is their attitude towards the NHS now. http://t.co/WFH2rx8d @sunny_hundal

  26. torytowncrapola

    I can't even begin to explain how rancid the BBC is, if this is their attitude towards the NHS now. http://t.co/WFH2rx8d @sunny_hundal

  27. Jane Samuels

    BBC implies there wasn’t interest in NHS bill | Liberal Conspiracy http://t.co/QdQ8R9OS Staggering….and so untrue

  28. Paulina Franek

    And in response to a complaint, BBC imply there wasn't enough public interest in NHS bill, so didn't cover it more http://t.co/RrcUTcFm

  29. Dorset LINk

    BBC implies there wasn't interest in NHS bill. http://t.co/AJbFKSA2

  30. Dorset LINks

    BBC implies there wasn't interest in NHS bill. http://t.co/AJbFKSA2

  31. L Denn

    BBC implies there wasn’t interest in NHS bill | Liberal Conspiracy http://t.co/QdQ8R9OS Staggering….and so untrue

  32. AJ

    RT @libcon @BBC implies there wasn't interest in #NHS bill http://t.co/FueQFnh0

  33. keith sutcliffe

    BBC says little interest in NHS reform;
    http://t.co/HLZlL5am #nhsreform

  34. Jeff

    BBC implies there wasn’t interest in NHS bill | Liberal Conspiracy http://t.co/QdQ8R9OS Staggering….and so untrue

  35. Bev Lea.

    BBC implies there wasn’t interest in NHS bill | Liberal Conspiracy http://t.co/0yUF06E6 via @libcon

  36. ROBIN MACFARLANE

    And in response to a complaint, BBC imply there wasn't enough public interest in NHS bill, so didn't cover it more http://t.co/RrcUTcFm

  37. Brian Tomkinson

    And in response to a complaint, BBC imply there wasn't enough public interest in NHS bill, so didn't cover it more http://t.co/RrcUTcFm

  38. jackie neylon

    And in response to a complaint, BBC imply there wasn't enough public interest in NHS bill, so didn't cover it more http://t.co/RrcUTcFm

  39. jbw

    And in response to a complaint, BBC imply there wasn't enough public interest in NHS bill, so didn't cover it more http://t.co/RrcUTcFm

  40. Emil Gudfinnsson

    And in response to a complaint, BBC imply there wasn't enough public interest in NHS bill, so didn't cover it more http://t.co/RrcUTcFm

  41. Feral_britain

    And in response to a complaint, BBC imply there wasn't enough public interest in NHS bill, so didn't cover it more http://t.co/RrcUTcFm

  42. Rebecca Devitt

    And in response to a complaint, BBC imply there wasn't enough public interest in NHS bill, so didn't cover it more http://t.co/RrcUTcFm

  43. Paul Trembath

    And in response to a complaint, BBC imply there wasn't enough public interest in NHS bill, so didn't cover it more http://t.co/RrcUTcFm

  44. irs_uk

    And in response to a complaint, BBC imply there wasn't enough public interest in NHS bill, so didn't cover it more http://t.co/RrcUTcFm

  45. Terri Bennett

    BBC implies there wasn’t interest in NHS bill | Liberal Conspiracy http://t.co/fd7FTR2s via @libcon

  46. Terri Bennett

    BBC implies there wasn’t interest in NHS bill | Liberal Conspiracy http://t.co/fd7FTR2s via @libcon

  47. Chris Schofield

    Destruction of #NHS not "engaging" enough for ample BBC news coverage – BBC implies there wasn’t interest in NHS bill http://t.co/zy6VaX9i

  48. Chris Schofield

    Destruction of #NHS not "engaging" enough for ample BBC news coverage – BBC implies there wasn’t interest in NHS bill http://t.co/zy6VaX9i

  49. david pemberton

    Destruction of #NHS not "engaging" enough for ample BBC news coverage – BBC implies there wasn’t interest in NHS bill http://t.co/zy6VaX9i

  50. david pemberton

    Destruction of #NHS not "engaging" enough for ample BBC news coverage – BBC implies there wasn’t interest in NHS bill http://t.co/zy6VaX9i

  51. JamieJones77

    Destruction of #NHS not "engaging" enough for ample BBC news coverage – BBC implies there wasn’t interest in NHS bill http://t.co/zy6VaX9i

  52. JamieJones77

    Destruction of #NHS not "engaging" enough for ample BBC news coverage – BBC implies there wasn’t interest in NHS bill http://t.co/zy6VaX9i

  53. Wonersh Mountain Boy

    Destruction of #NHS not "engaging" enough for ample BBC news coverage – BBC implies there wasn’t interest in NHS bill http://t.co/zy6VaX9i

  54. The Peoples Party

    BBC implies there wasn’t interest in NHS bill | Liberal Conspiracy http://t.co/rl8cBgYW Time to think about cancelling BBC's licence fee.

  55. Defend our NHS

    And in response to a complaint, BBC imply there wasn't enough public interest in NHS bill, so didn't cover it more http://t.co/RrcUTcFm

  56. Kevin Donovan

    And in response to a complaint, BBC imply there wasn't enough public interest in NHS bill, so didn't cover it more http://t.co/RrcUTcFm

  57. Andrew Crow

    @BBCNews How much did @richardbranson pay to not report the English NHS being privatised by the back door? http://t.co/hiE22rxh No interest?





Sorry, the comment form is closed at this time.