Where Do You Stand On The Bbc's Coverage Of Baroness Thatcher's Death

[sp1814]

Seems like the BBC has managed to tick off just about everyone!

http://themediablog.typepad.com/

[Hopkirk]

They can't win on anything really can they?

[sir.prize]

Maggie Snatcher - a load of old humbug.

[Hopkirk]

I hated the warm milk we were forced to drink - at least she stopped that idiocy.

[youngmafbog]

Well, as you know I hate the BBD and I like Thatcher.

My opinion is that there have been articles portraying all sides of the story. For once I think the BBC has been pretty impartial. Yes, they have pointed out Thatchers good points (but then there must have been a few to be elected 3 times!) but also clearly put the view of the other sides.

I can't really say they have been pro any side on this one.

[DangerUXD]

The coverage was on the whole very well done and balanced.

[tiggerblue10]

Sadly I missed out on the bit where she stopped the milk and was forced to drink it. Yuk!

[tiggerblue10]

Well it looks pretty well balanced to me.

[LazyGun]

Thats actually quite funny, in its own way - virtually equal measures of the coverage being "too extensive", or "too pro-thatcher" or "too anti-thatcher" :)

[sp1814]

Feel it's a bit 'damned if you do, damned if you don't.

Another example of how seriously split the country is over Thatcher.

[joggerjayne]

I think it's been quite well balanced ... for such a bunch of rampant lefties.

[LazyGun]

This from JJ "I think it's been quite well balanced ... for such a bunch of rampant lefties." Gets my vote for best answer :)

[jno]

that's a pretty well balanced pie graph. The other thing to be measured is 766 complaints v X who didn't complain; I imagine the latter to be well into the millions. So I doubt they'll be thinking they did anything much wrong.

Interesting link there to the way the Mail has been twisting the facts to "prove" the BBC's bias

http://www.mediauk.com/newspapers/discussions/print-chatter/daily-mail-deliberately-misleading-readers

[emmie]

rubbish, but what is new about that.

[emmie]

i have been following this on ITV to be honestly, after listening to some of the wafflers on BBC.

[LazyGun]

@ jno interesting link, thanks. DM just love to whip up outrage and indignation...

[Svejk]

I'm gonna sit in me armchair like I do for other programmes.

[FredPuli43]

Oh good. The BBC must have been doing something right to be condemned from both sides. If anyone looked at, and accepted, the coverage in the American media, they would definitely think that she was the equivalent of a saint, a revered figure without serious fault. American journalists have been a bit puzzled by any criticism of her here, largely because their own presidents are granted the respect of office and they can't quite see that any prime minister is, to us, just a politician but one who happens to lead a party in government. The office itself does not command respect.

[AB Editor]

"damned if you do, damned if you don't."

That's the BBC's motto isn't it?

[jim360]

I still got given free school milk (at least I think it was free) in the 90's. Not quite sure that "Milk snatcher" is entirely fair. Anyway I looked forward to that milk.

As to the BBC, well, no surprise that once again they get criticised. Still worth having the Beeb though.

[emmie]

though its somewhat off the topic, their coverage of the Queens Diamond Jubilee pageant was appalling. I think their reporting is very biased, and has become more so in recent years. Not sure about the MT coverage now, seeing as i couldn't bear any more dour comments, and looks from Huw Edwards. Surprised they didn't ask Matt Baker his opinions, or did they, cripes.