SURELY THE time has arrived for the millions of British people who believe the BBC to have an in-built liberal bias, to voluntarily break the law and refuse to pay the licence tax. I am not fixated by the BBC, but I truly resent having to pay £145 per annum in order for the proliferation of liberal views on such issues as membership of the EU, multiculturalism and immigration only to be presented as impartial. All three of these issues will shape and change our nation forever; and none of them have been put to the electorate for consideration - I call them the triumphret: these three great issues of the day which surpasses our nation's deficit in importance.
There is a sinister purpose within the BBC to help complete and continue thereafter the liberalisation of the UK by applying Soviet-like practices to the art of broadcasting. No wonder George Orwell found his inspiration for 1984 from within the corridors of the BBC. There is an overwhelming belief in liberalism at the BBC that is comparable to a religious faith; and like a religious faith they act to protect it – and if any threat appears on the horizon to the inner faith, like Jeremy Clarkson, they will bide their time; as they have done with Clarkson.
A million petitioners' protested against Clarkson's departure to no avail. He put himself where the BBC wanted him. He overreached himself. His none PC status within the BBC made him a liberal heretic. The corporation waited its moment until he overstepped the mark; which was sooner or later bound to happen with Jeremy Clarkson.
So another enemy of the BBC culture was done away with at a multi-million pound cost to the BBC tax payers. In liberal terms Clarkson was seen as being an almost satanic presence within the BBC. But he was a popular presence earning the corporation millions in revenues not taken from the ordinary BBC tax payer.
BUT CLARKSON represents only an example. The whole BBC culture is wired to a liberal ethos and as far as the London metropolitan elite are concerned, what the BBC provides is targeted to them. While those who pay the yearly tax demanded of them by the BBC from without the London boundaries, can either be fined or imprisoned if they refuse to pay the BBC tax. The BBC has been given the power of the law to collect their income.
It is an irony that such a liberal institution has to resort to criminal law to keep itself solvent as an 'enterprise'. While in the private sector no such means exists. Sky, the great liberal Satan of broadcasting, cannot make the same kind of government backed demands upon their clientele that the BBC are given free rein to do.
The liberal bias of the BBC is unchallengeable. Even the BBC itself fails to respond to such claims because they know they are true; and to be fair to the BBC why should they if dopes like us continue to pay this wretched tax that the government gave them the ability to collect. The irony of such a liberal institution sending people to prison on such a minor basis is hypocrisy without border.
THE BBC is, and has always been, biased; which goes against its broadcasting remit. The supposed neutrality and impartiality of the BBC that was part of its original charter, has never existed even from its foundation in 1922 when it was first given its Royal charter. Its founder Lord Reith was no Lefty; he represented the establishment at the time which was wholly conservative; and until the 1960s the conservative hegemony ruled the culture of the BBC.
From the 1960s onwards the liberals prepared their takeover. In the 1960s the liberal left seized control and have consolidated it ever since. Thus we still have a bias at the BBC but no longer under the control of conservatism. Today the liberal hegemony has replaced the conservative one. And so the seesaw will continue until the BBC has been released from the grip of the state and released to survive or flounder within the market place – in any event it must be cut loose from dependence upon public taxation.
The BBC must break free of the tax payer and become part of the media market place, as any other ambitious media player has to. The BBC has been propped up for far too long by the taxpayer. It is time it travelled alone into the media market place and attempt to win over, through voluntary subscription, a new audience for its programming.
The British Broadcasting Corporation has always boasted its international superiority over other of its competitors. But such a boast has always been based upon a guaranteed income by the British tax payer of currently nearly £5 billion a year to do with whatever the BBC liked, regardless of failure.
No other broadcaster who has to compete in the media marketplace enjoys such a remit as parliament has given the BBC. If the BBC truly believes in their professional superiority over the commercial channels, then let the BBC prove it in the market from which it has been protected for so long by taxation.
IT IS NOW TIME for those millions who have a none-liberal but right of centre political views, who despise the liberal bias of the BBC to stand up and refuse to continue to pay the licence tax. It is no good complaining without acting. I do not watch the BBC, although I still, through direct debit, pay the tax demanded from me by them on penalty of a fine or imprisonment. I do this because I feel I am alone; and only by marshalling to my cause what I believe are the many hundreds of thousands (or even millions) of others who are being forced to pay this tax by the BBC, can this institution find its own way in the world by being liberated from the (welfare?) state.
The BBC is a welfare scrounger par-excellence, afraid to compete in the market place and dependent on state handouts for its continued existence. It is an institution whose funding arrangements belong to another time. The Reithian ethos of impartiality has never been applied. Reith himself was a Tory and monarchist and he moulded the BBC accordingly.
If the BBC believes in public broadcasting then let them do what the public broadcasters do in the USA – let the BBC appeal directly to the public for funds given on a voluntary basis by people who believe in its public ethos whatever the inbuilt nature of its bias.
Every year, as well as bi-annually the BBC sets about on a night of fundraising for charities. At Christmas we have Pudsey; while every other year we have Red Nose Day whereby celebrities offer their services to raise money for all sorts of charitable causes. These worthwhile events must have raised billions since they first became fashionable. The BBC has proved itself first rate raisers of charitable funds; so why can they not do the same for themselves as public broadcasting does in America?