Question Time

[Antlion]

What does getting the most seats in the European elections have to do with UKIP being represented on the Daily Politics, This Week and Question Time disproportionately? As far as I'm aware, representation on these shows is not and never has been based on how many seats a party has won in the European Parliament.

For that matter, the current negotiations over a "deal" for the UK and the ensuing referendum are the concern of the UK parliament. How many representatives do UKIP have there, please? Now how many times have the BBC featured them on their flagship weekly and daily political shows?

[BerwickMad]

What does getting the most seats in the European elections have to do with UKIP being represented on the Daily Politics, This Week and Question Time disproportionately? As far as I'm aware, representation on these shows is not and never has been based on how many seats a party has won in the European Parliament.

For that matter, the current negotiations over a "deal" for the UK and the ensuing referendum are the concern of the UK parliament. How many representatives do UKIP have there, please? Now how many times have the BBC featured them on their flagship weekly and daily political shows?

Representation in the UK parliament has never been the be all and end all for representation on BBC political shows. They clearly take a number of factors into account. If you think 4million votes and being the largest party in the European Parliament doesn't mean anything then I find it a bit strange.

The utter paranoia about the BBC from the left and the right is embarrassing.

[Antlion]

Representation in the UK parliament has never been the be all and end all for representation on BBC political shows. They clearly take a number of factors into account. If you think 4million votes and being the largest party in the European Parliament doesn't mean anything then I find it a bit strange.

The utter paranoia about the BBC from the left and the right is embarrassing.

I don't think the BBC is biased towards anything at present other than UKIP. It seems to have a fear of being labelled "too left wing" and therefore thinks to appease the right by featuring UKIP representatives (some not even elected, but chair people and the like) on every political show it has, several times each week. What other minor party has that level of representation?

I would be interested, for example, in hearing the BBC's justification for having Nigel Farage on the Daily Politics to discuss Saudi Arabia. I'd also like to know why not one single UKIP representative has even had Neil or Coburn mention the recent issues with the party's Scottish chairman. I can't think any other party which has newspaper-worthy incidents not even mentioned to their plethora of representatives on the several political shows that they appear (and I include both left and right wing parties).

UKIP is majorly over-represented on the BBC relative to its influence and contribution to British politics. Your obsession with their 4 million (wasted) votes is entirely irrelevant, unless you think it is the state broadcaster's job to rectify problems with the state's electoral system. UKIP are simply not *the* voice of Euroscepticism.

Edited February 5, 2016 by Antlion

[BerwickMad]

Rectify the electoral system?! Bizarre comment. There's nothing to say they need to take into account the make up of the House of Commons. Number of voters is probably a far fairer way of representing views of the nation. Nothing to do with rectifying anything.

[Antlion]

Rectify the electoral system?! Bizarre comment. There's nothing to say they need to take into account the make up of the House of Commons. Number of voters is probably a far fairer way of representing views of the nation. Nothing to do with rectifying anything.

And UKIP represent a minority of the views of the nation, as far as we know (given their lack of success and the fact that their party political views are more than "leaving the EU"). And yet their representives are invited to trumpet those views several times each week on the state broadcaster despite that, their electoral failure nationally, and their electoral failure at regional and local levels.

Has any other party that has achieved so little ever been given so much airtime by the BBC?

[BerwickMad]

And UKIP represent a minority of the views of the nation, as far as we know (given their lack of success and the fact that their party political views are more than "leaving the EU"). And yet their representives are invited to trumpet those views several times each week on the state broadcaster despite that, their electoral failure nationally, and their electoral failure at regional and local levels.

Has any other party that has achieved so little ever been given so much airtime by the BBC?

Every party represents a minority view apart from maybe the SNP in Scotland. UKIP picked up the third most votes at the General Election.

[Antlion]

Every party represents a minority view apart from maybe the SNP in Scotland. UKIP picked up the third most votes at the General Election.

Which amounted to them losing a seat (of their record total of two). As far as I'm aware, the BBC nowhere claims that it books political figures based on how many votes they picked up in one General Election (or how many seats in the European Elections, for that matter).

So I'll ask again, has any party ever achieved as little electorally as UKIP but had similar weekly (sometimes daily, sometimes multiple representatives on in one day) coverage on the BBC premier political programmes?

[BerwickMad]

Does it claim to book political figures based on number of seats won at general elections? I doubt it. They seem to take a number of different factors into account, and whether you like it or not, 3rd most votes in a general election and the most votes in a European Parliament election are pretty good reasons to see them represented quite often on political shows.

[Antlion]

Does it claim to book political figures based on number of seats won at general elections? I doubt it. They seem to take a number of different factors into account, and whether you like it or not, 3rd most votes in a general election and the most votes in a European Parliament election are pretty good reasons to see them represented quite often on political shows.

And so have any other parties ever met with such little electoral success in the UK's national, regional and local elections yet been given the amount of coverage by the state broadcaster as the BBC gives UKIP?

[Ad Lib]

And so have any other parties ever met with such little electoral success in the UK's national, regional and local elections yet been given the amount of coverage by the state broadcaster as the BBC gives UKIP?

Of the two Parliaments in which the whole of the UK has elected representatives they are the largest party in one of them. I'm not sure that really counts as "such little electoral success".

[BerwickMad]

And so have any other parties ever met with such little electoral success in the UK's national, regional and local elections yet been given the amount of coverage by the state broadcaster as the BBC gives UKIP?

Getting 4million votes and only 1 seat is probably unprecedented. The old Liberals used to get quite a few votes for few seats.

Again, I would consider number of votes more worthy to measure representation than seats in a parliament. I absolutely despise UKIP, but they deserve their political say considering the support they have.

[Antlion]

Of the two Parliaments in which the whole of the UK has elected representatives they are the largest party in one of them. I'm not sure that really counts as "such little electoral success".

Prior to UKIP receiving the largest number of seats, who dominated the UK benches in Brussels, do you know offhand?

I'm curious as to when the BBC started paying such rapt attention to MEPs. Surely if there was such an interest, they would feature (and have so prominently featured in the past) the MEPs of other parties. As it is, there seems to be a conveyor belt of UKIP MEPs and rarely those from other parties (instead, the BBC tends to feature and, from memory, always favoured MPs). Of course, I believe Julian Carswell, UKIP's single MP, has twice this year been a full-hour guest on the Daily Politics (and Nigel Farage has been on multiple times, discussing everything from the EU to middle eastern relations). I can think of no other MP or MEP granted that "honour".

Edited February 5, 2016 by Antlion

[Ad Lib]

Prior to UKIP receiving the largest number of seats, who dominated the UK benches in Brussels, do you know offhand?

I'm curious as to when the BBC started paying such rapt attention to MEPs. Surely if there was such an interest, they would feature (and have so prominently featured in the past) the MEPs of other parties. As it is, there seems to be a conveyor belt of UKIP MEPs and rarely those from other parties (instead, the BBC tends to feature and, from memory, always favoured MPs). Of course, I believe Julian Carswell, UKIP's single MP, has twice this year been a full-hour guest on the Daily Politics (and Nigel Farage has been on multiple times, discussing everything from the EU to middle eastern relations). I can think of no other MP or MEP granted that "honour".

Yes, I do know off-hand. The Conservatives won the 2009 European Elections. I think they won something like 25 seats and about double what each of the other three UK-wide parties got in terms of share of the vote.

UKIP's only MP is called "Douglas" Carswell, not Julian. The reason that MEPs don't often appear on Question Time is because for most other parties, their more able and willing politicians are those they've got elected to Westminster, and in any case Labour and the Tories have always had at least 10 to as much as 20 times as many MPs as they've had MEPs.

The appearance of politicians on the news is overwhelmingly based on who the parties offer when a show asks if they would like to invite someone to comment on the particular subjects their editorial staff have decided to address. Shows like The Daily Politics, This Week and Question Time, almost always include, by default, a Tory and a Labour representative, but who they get depends on who is offered by the party. Liberal Democrats often used to complain that we weren't guaranteed a slot on shows like QT even when we were in government or despite having (at that time) over 1/5 of the vote. If you look at the frequency with which UKIP have representatives on similar shows you will probably find it is no higher than Lib Dem presence was from 2005-2015.

It isn't exactly that remarkable that a party like UKIP does not have a large number of high calibre politicians or spokespeople they are happy to allow to speak for them on national television. You do see people like Diane James and Suzanne Evans frequently appear on BBC shows, and sometimes Paul Nuttall, but asides that the only people UKIP would want speaking for them are Nigel Farage and Douglas Carswell.

By a similar token, even when the Lib Dems had 50-60 Parliamentarians the media overwhelmingly would turn to 9 or 10 of them if they wanted opinion. Typically they'd draw from (then) Cabinet Ministers, Tim Farron and former leaders like Paddy Ashdown, Charles Kennedy or Ming Campbell.

The reason Farage appears more often on TV than other individual MPs or MEPs from other parties is simple: other parties have a bigger pool of people to draw from. This is not the same thing as UKIP not being politically prominent.

[bob the tank]

Daily Politics for the last month since it began its run again has been a ukipfest, not just Nige but various other ranting buffoons

[Antlion]

And so we can confirm that UKIP have a smaller pool of talent, a smaller pool of representatives, a smaller pool of elected officials, and a smaller pool of people willing to go on television - even smaller in all of these areas than the disgraced Lib Dems.

And yet the BBC are willing to cycle through this small number of people on a weekly, often daily, sometimes twice daily basis in order to ensure that a party which is relatively barren of public figures is promoted as much as parties which have more MPs, more councils and more talent. The BBC are even happy to put forward UKIP's MEPs to an extent they have never featured any other party's MEPs, simply because UKIP failed in every other election, but must, by Beeb reckoning, still be given daily coverage.

[Ad Lib]

And so we can confirm that UKIP have a smaller pool of talent, a smaller pool of representatives, a smaller pool of elected officials, and a smaller pool of people willing to go on television - even smaller in all of these areas than the disgraced Lib Dems.

The size of their pool of talent is not the same as their level of popular support.

And yet the BBC are willing to cycle through this small number of people on a weekly, often daily, sometimes twice daily basis in order to ensure that a party which is relatively barren of public figures is promoted as much as parties which have more MPs, more councils and more talent. The BBC are even happy to put forward UKIP's MEPs to an extent they have never featured any other party's MEPs, simply because UKIP failed in every other election, but must, by Beeb reckoning, still be given daily coverage.

They do not get "as much" exposure as the two larger parties. They get less.

Other parties' MEPs do appear on television. Just less often. If UKIP's Parliamentary presence were evenly spread between the Parliaments, the preponderance of MEPs versus MPs would be much closer to that of other parties.

[Antlion]

The size of their pool of talent is not the same as their level of popular support.

They do not get "as much" exposure as the two larger parties. They get less.

Other parties' MEPs do appear on television. Just less often. If UKIP's Parliamentary presence were evenly spread between the Parliaments, the preponderance of MEPs versus MPs would be much closer to that of other parties.

It isn't. And it is not the job of the BBC to make up for that fact by providing their MEPs with coverage and a media outlet disprortionate to the MEPs of other parties now and historically.

[strichener]

The size of their pool of talent is not the same as their level of popular support.

They do not get "as much" exposure as the two larger parties. They get less.

Other parties' MEPs do appear on television. Just less often. If UKIP's Parliamentary presence were evenly spread between the Parliaments, the preponderance of MEPs versus MPs would be much closer to that of other parties.

There is a reason that they are not evenly spread. They are seen as a one issue party. They have without doubt been over represented in the media.

[Ad Lib]

It isn't. And it is not the job of the BBC to make up for that fact by providing their MEPs with coverage and a media outlet disprortionate to the MEPs of other parties now and historically.

The BBC's balance and impartiality guidelines require fairness as between parties, not fairness as between individual elected representatives, in terms of overall air time.

[Antlion]

The BBC's balance and impartiality guidelines require fairness as between parties, not fairness as between individual elected representatives, in terms of overall air time.

And they're doing a terrible job of it.