BBC Faces Backlash Over Alleged Bias in Coverage of White Farmer Killings in South Africa

[proton]

 

 

 

19 minutes ago, stevenl said:

BBC has stayed center, where it has mostly been. But society has moved further right, under influence of extreme rightwing opinions.

 

Extreme right wing opinions - such as illegal immigrants should be deported, murdering white farmers in S.A is wrong and being against Islamisation and Islamic terror? Sign me up.

[JonnyF]

2 minutes ago, daveAustin said:

But, yes, they are no longer down the middle. Still churn out cracking docos and period drama. 

 

So do Netflix.

 

Maybe there should be a mandatory licence for that in the UK as well?

 

The licencing model has been obsolete for at least 2 decades. Time to defind the BBC and let them compete in the open market. If their content is that good it should be no problem for them.

 

[JonnyF]

24 minutes ago, stevenl said:

BBC has stayed center, where it has mostly been. But society has moved further right, under influence of extreme rightwing opinions.

 

I assume that is satire?

[proton]

How many south Africans have we got on here? this is the opinion of a native of the country

 

 

[Magictoad]

2 hours ago, JackGats said:

BBC = British Bullshyting Corporation. Hornet's nest of feminist, woke, third-worldist, misandric, climate-change alarmist agitprop.

 

This is a pity because it used to be good. In what seems so long ago I used to spend endless hours listening to Radio 4 on long waves (and to the World Service on short waves).

Alas Radio 4 has long gone and has become unbearable these days. It's appalling.

[Screaming]

No one takes the left wing globalist BBC seriously. The BBC is a mouthpiece of the Soros founded alt left movement dedicated to turning the UK into a homeless camp for all of Africa and the Middle East. 

[JakeC]

BBC biased? So what about this article from the very same paper that published this Hersov article? https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2025/05/22/donald-trump-genocide-claims-south-africa-real-danger/

 

Seems to go along with what has been published by the BBC. But if the BBC publishes it, the extremists fly into a faux frenzy.

[Chomper Higgot]

1 hour ago, mikeymike100 said:

Maybe 25 years ago you would be correct, now they are not broadcasting news, but opinions.

They have broken the Royal Charter so many times, because they are not impartial, but biased. Not just on the ongoing conflict in Gaza, but Brexit, Climate Change, Syria, etc

No precise count exists, but thousands of complaints annually allege bias, with notable peaks (e.g., over 11,000 for the 2009 Gaza appeal decision, 2,000 for a 2023 Conservative bias claim, and 1,500+ alleged guideline breaches in 2023-2024 Israel-Hamas coverage)

Yes all those things are examples of attempts to undermine the BBC fir reporting stuff some don’t want to be presented to the public.

 

Attempts to discredit the BBC are not uncommon, here’s an example, there are others:

 

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2021/mar/04/chinas-communist-party-ran-campaign-to-discredit-bbc-thinktank-finds#:~:text=It describes a “coordinated effort,deepen and expand existing divisions.

[Dionigi]

2 hours ago, mikeymike100 said:

Yes, however many folks are now not paying the fee, as they are not watching live TV, or using iplayer. Its perfectly legal.

Thing is in 2025 why is the BBC living in the 20th century?

The license is required for the following:

Why you need a TV Licence:

• Other streaming services:

  While you don't need a licence to watch on-demand content on services like Netflix or Amazon Prime Video, you do if you watch live TV on them

• Watching Live TV:

  This includes watching or recording any TV channel, pay TV service, or streaming service (like Netflix, Amazon Prime Video, or Sky Go) as they are broadcast.
• Using BBC iPlayer:

  Even if you only watch on-demand content on BBC iPlayer, you need a TV Licence.

   

  and I think it is illegal to use one of those tv boxes that gets copyright material for free. 

  so are these people not using a tv at all or is there some other thing to watch.

[proton]

9 minutes ago, Chomper Higgot said:

Yes all those things are examples of attempts to undermine the BBC fir reporting stuff some don’t want to be presented to the public.

 

Attempts to discredit the BBC are not uncommon, here’s an example, there are others:

 

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2021/mar/04/chinas-communist-party-ran-campaign-to-discredit-bbc-thinktank-finds#:~:text=It describes a “coordinated effort,deepen and expand existing divisions.

 

The Guardian, really? 😊

[Hanaguma]

2 hours ago, WDSmart said:

I agree that any violence against White farmers in South Africa is despicable, but, like most of the problems in the world today, history plays a big role. In this case, how do you think this land was taken from the native. Black South Africans by White immigrants in the first place? 🥺

That is a good question. Considering that the first of the Boers arrived more than 350 years ago, how do you propose finding out exactly who took what land from whom? The farmers on the land today were not the ones who took it, nor are the angry blacks the ones who lost it. We are talking 10 plus generations in the past in many cases. I would love to hear how to fairly adjudicate this situation. 

[Bkk Brian]

23 minutes ago, Chomper Higgot said:

Yes all those things are examples of attempts to undermine the BBC fir reporting stuff some don’t want to be presented to the public.

 

Attempts to discredit the BBC are not uncommon, here’s an example, there are others:

 

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2021/mar/04/chinas-communist-party-ran-campaign-to-discredit-bbc-thinktank-finds#:~:text=It describes a “coordinated effort,deepen and expand existing divisions.

Actually no, not attempts to discredit, many of those things referred to the post you responded to are factual as evidenced by the BBC themselves having to pull programmes and apologize when exposed, let alone break their own guidelines over 1000 times.

[Chomper Higgot]

13 minutes ago, proton said:

 

The Guardian, really? 😊

Feel free to offer your suggestion for alternative news sources.

[Bkk Brian]

16 minutes ago, Chomper Higgot said:

Feel free to offer your suggestion for alternative news sources.

Why. To further your off topic deflections?

[proton]

22 minutes ago, Chomper Higgot said:

Feel free to offer your suggestion for alternative news sources.

 

For you- Yahoo, Huff post and Moscow News 😆

[josephbloggs]

42 minutes ago, proton said:

 

For you- Yahoo, Huff post and Moscow News 😆

For you GB "News", Fox, and Sean Hannity.

[WDSmart]

2 hours ago, Hanaguma said:

5 hours ago, WDSmart said:

I agree that any violence against White farmers in South Africa is despicable, but, like most of the problems in the world today, history plays a big role. In this case, how do you think this land was taken from the native. Black South Africans by White immigrants in the first place? 🥺

That is a good question. Considering that the first of the Boers arrived more than 350 years ago, how do you propose finding out exactly who took what land from whom? The farmers on the land today were not the ones who took it, nor are the angry blacks the ones who lost it. We are talking 10 plus generations in the past in many cases. I would love to hear how to fairly adjudicate this situation. 

That's a good question, and could be asked of my home country, the USA, as pertains to the American Indians and the European immigrants, or, I imagine, almost every country. 

 

I don't have a good answer, but IMO there should be some acknowledgment of how the land changed hands, and if possible, some attempt at restitution, even if it is to descendants hundreds of years later. 

[mikeymike100]

2 hours ago, Chomper Higgot said:

Yes all those things are examples of attempts to undermine the BBC fir reporting stuff some don’t want to be presented to the public.

 

Attempts to discredit the BBC are not uncommon, here’s an example, there are others:

 

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2021/mar/04/chinas-communist-party-ran-campaign-to-discredit-bbc-thinktank-finds#:~:text=It describes a “coordinated effort,deepen and expand existing divisions.

No the BBC by being biased are breaking the rules of the Royal Charter.

You can easily find the charter , it explicitly mandates non-biased output as a legal and operational requirement.

 

 

[Anthony mellows]

The BBC is far from perfect but do you get any better in other countries?