BBC found to be the broadcast wing of the UK Government in bias row

The BBC is biased towards right-wing politics, with much of its output manipulated by government sources, researchers have found.

The findings, revealed last year by academics from Cardiff University found that other broadcasters, such as ITV and Channel 4, drew on academic and scientific sources, while the BBC relied more heavily on official lines from Westminster and contributions from business sources.

A row has broken out over the BBC Trust's lack of response to the findings. The BBC Trust is led by former Tory MP Chris Patten, and is charged with overseeing the work of the state broadcaster and responding to viewers' complaints.

Professor Justin Lewis of Cardiff University has expressed disappointment at the playing down of the findings by the Trust and will continue to pursue a written report on the matter.

The BBC has repeatedly attracted criticism of its right-wing output on social media since the election of the right-wing coalition government in the UK in 2010, which lies in contrast to its past reputation (correctly or incorrectly) of bias in the opposite direction.

The findings will be unsurprising to those who watch current affairs programming on the BBC. Previous BBC Director General, Mark Thompson, and Sunday morning stalwart Andrew Marr had both previously complained about times they felt BBC output sat too close to the left.

Many viewers of BBC News are also aware of Political Editor Nick Robinson's past as Chair of the Young Conservatives. Andrew Neil, the BBC's most omnipresent of figures in the corporation's political programming, is a major figure of the economic right.

Bias of BBC output is thought to be only partially related to the political persuasions of their main protagonists though. An article on this issue published today at The Independent explains how dependency on the government to secure a sizeable share of the licence fee for funding represents a major threat to impartiality.

In short, the BBC is a "Public Service Broadcaster" in name only - the need to appease the government effectively renders the BBC a state broadcaster.

A summary of Professor Lewis's view and some statistical comparisons with ITV and Channel 4 can be found in this article by Ian Burrell of The Independent.

Cutting the BBC to the bone?

I will admit my agenda straight away. I do not have much affection for the BBC at this moment in time. I support the licence fee and believe the BBC to be, historically speaking, a great institution for this country. I also strongly enjoy the BBC output. The trouble is, as a BBC viewer, I rather feel as though it has become the political wing of the Tory-led government - far from being independent, and far from being the left-wing biased organisation it often finds itself accused of.

Whether it is Jeremy Clarkson and friends sharing their very centre-right world view with viewers, or the BBC appointing a past Tory chairman - Chris Patten - as chairman of the BBC Trust, or inviting David Cameron on to the popular teatime tribute to touchy-feeliness The One Show, there are times when I feel the BBC has its colours nailed to the mast in a way we are supposed to believe they do not.

With that in mind, I will not be sorry to see the BBC pared down a little. Not that it would fill me with pleasure, nor would I not want to see the BBC cut to the bone, but it certainly has some fat to lose.

The BBC director general, Mark Thompson has outlined some cuts which could be made. Here are a few I would like to see:-

1. There is a lot of waste in channel use. Are BBC3 and BBC4 vanity projects or are they really needed? Regarding BBC3, I can live well enough without Snog Marry Avoid? (Produced by Endemol - who else?). In fact most people of most ages could live without the cheap and tacky rubbish that fills BBC3. If they cannot, then there is always ITV2. BBC4 has more depth, but I have noticed a few repeats on the channel. It did give me a chance to watch Electric Dreams - fantastic viewing. BBC3 and BBC4 could be merged though, and renamed. Alternatively, they could be abolished altogether and their programming used to fill gaps on BBC1 and BBC2.

2. For earlier in the day, I do not believe the BBC need to spend on two children's TV channels, even if they are pitched to different age groups. I was lucky if I got to see two hours of children's TV after school.

3. Abolish all the lifestyle shows in the daytime on BBC1 (which usually involve an auction room or rebuilding a property) and replace them with the testcard. I have missed that blackboard and chalk.

4. Local radio should be peak only and give us Radio Five Live at other times on FM.

5. Stop sending George Alagiah on holiday to disaster zones when the news can be presented from the studio.

6. Bring more BBC World news to our British screens. We would love it.

I am sure I could think of many other savings the BBC could make. However, the BBC must remember the inclusive principles that guide it. That means protecting the Asian Network. It also means continued support for 6 Music, which is one of the few refuges from the R n' B and pop which saturates mainstream radio elsewhere. The BBC is at its best when it caters for everyone, regardless of interest. It must be kept that way.