Question Time

[Ad Lib]

And they're doing a terrible job of it.

UKIP do not get as much coverage and representation as the Tories or Labour. They get significantly less.

Relative to whom exactly are they getting too much coverage? The Lib Dems, who got about half the popular vote UKIP did in the General Election and one quarter of the vote in the Euros? The SNP, who had less than 2/5 of the UKIP vote in the General Election and less than one tenth their vote in the EU election?

I dislike UKIP just as much as you do, but the examples you are giving are not what we can confidently call evidence supporting the view that they are over represented on either the BBC or television.

[Antlion]

UKIP do not get as much coverage and representation as the Tories or Labour. They get significantly less.

Relative to whom exactly are they getting too much coverage? The Lib Dems, who got about half the popular vote UKIP did in the General Election and one quarter of the vote in the Euros? The SNP, who had less than 2/5 of the UKIP vote in the General Election and less than one tenth their vote in the EU election?

I dislike UKIP just as much as you do, but the examples you are giving are not what we can confidently call evidence supporting the view that they are over represented on either the BBC or television.

Who exactly has said they did? Be very specific.

[Ad Lib]

Who exactly has said they did? Be very specific.

I didn't say anyone said they did

[Antlion]

I didn't say anyone said they did

So it was an entirely pointless straw man? You ask which parties UKIP gets more coverage relative to. But there is no reason why their overrepresentation must be relative to any rival party. The fact that they have only one MP, no MSPs, no members of the Welsh Assembly, and no councils (I believe the one council they controlled was lost when their Councillors defected) is enough to indicate to me that their having representatives on every major BBC politics programme with such regularity (sometimes more than once daily) is tantamount to overrepresentation.

I don't know who exactly the BBC are trying to please by giving considerable airtime to a party which represents a minority of voters (in every sense), but for my money it is nothing but a sop.

If I was anti-EU I'd be equally annoyed, as one would be forgiven for thinking that UKIP's MEPs are the face of Euroscepticism.

Edited February 6, 2016 by Antlion

[wotad]

You can be anti UKIp but being as blind as Antlion is hilarious you act like all UKIP gets is positive coverage most times UKIP are brought onto BBC shows they always bring up some irrelevant bad UKIP story.

So it was an entirely pointless straw man? You ask which parties UKIP gets more coverage relative to. But there is no reason why their overrepresentation must be relative to any rival party. The fact that they have only one MP, no MSPs, no members of the Welsh Assembly, and no councils (I believe the one council they controlled was lost when their Councillors defected) is enough to indicate to me that their having representatives on every major BBC politics programme with such regularity (sometimes more than once daily) is tantamount to overrepresentation.

I don't know who exactly the BBC are trying to please by giving considerable airtime to a party which represents a minority of voters (in every sense), but for my money it is nothing but a sop.

If I was anti-EU I'd be equally annoyed, as one would be forgiven for thinking that UKIP's MEPs are the face of Euroscepticism.

MPs are irrelevant in deciding how many times UKIP appear BBC decide its based on Votes as well as topics. In the EU debate UKIP are the main party and should be on as many times as possible as they are the only party who are actually united on this topic.

People used the UKIP ticked to get elected then defected and no members of the welsh Assembly for now.

UKIP are polling 18% thats not really a minority when its more then Greens,LD,Plaid,SNP put together..

And they're doing a terrible job of it.

the fact you think they are being biased in UKIPs favor is hilarious there was a BBCQT in Clacton and the audience was all against UKIP...

Edited February 6, 2016 by wotad

[Antlion]

Oh look, the forum's Little Briton is here.

Like Neil and Coburn quizzing the succession of UKIP representatives on the breaking news about the party's Scottish chairperson's dubious phone activities? Oh wait, they didn't breathe a word of the story to any of them.

[Ad Lib]

So it was an entirely pointless straw man? You ask which parties UKIP gets more coverage relative to. But there is no reason why their overrepresentation must be relative to any rival party. The fact that they have only one MP, no MSPs, no members of the Welsh Assembly, and no councils (I believe the one council they controlled was lost when their Councillors defected) is enough to indicate to me that their having representatives on every major BBC politics programme with such regularity (sometimes more than once daily) is tantamount to overrepresentation.

I don't know who exactly the BBC are trying to please by giving considerable airtime to a party which represents a minority of voters (in every sense), but for my money it is nothing but a sop.

If I was anti-EU I'd be equally annoyed, as one would be forgiven for thinking that UKIP's MEPs are the face of Euroscepticism.

Overrepresentation has to be relative to at least someone else. That's what representation means.

[bob the tank]

You can be anti UKIp but being as blind as Antlion is hilarious you act like all UKIP gets is positive coverage most times UKIP are brought onto BBC shows they always bring up some irrelevant bad UKIP story.

MPs are irrelevant in deciding how many times UKIP appear BBC decide its based on Votes as well as topics. In the EU debate UKIP are the main party and should be on as many times as possible as they are the only party who are actually united on this topic.

People used the UKIP ticked to get elected then defected and no members of the welsh Assembly for now.

UKIP are polling 18% thats not really a minority when its more then Greens,LD,Plaid,SNP put together..

the fact you think they are being biased in UKIPs favor is hilarious there was a BBCQT in Clacton and the audience was all against UKIP...

BBC are biased in favour of ukip, just because the audience thought their representative was a walloper shows the lack of media balance. SNP are the third party but are rarely seen on political programmes, even in Scotland

[Antlion]

Overrepresentation has to be relative to at least someone else. That's what representation means.

Correction - that's what political representation means. UKIP are arguably underrepresented politically, under the electoral system and in the chamber we have. It is not up to the BBC to remedy that.

Representation simply means the act of speaking for someone or something. UKIP has representatives speaking for their party far more often than is required for minority group. If Green Party figures were on the BBC as much as UKIP (and for as many years), they would be overrepresented. I consider the Liberal Democrats also to be slightly overrepresented given where they are now (although to be fair people like Miranda Green being on This Week after Sal Brinton is fair given the latter doesn't feature as a Lib Dem representative).

There is (as far as I'm aware) no great calculator the BBC use to work out fair prominence to any political party based on any particular measure of success. If someone knows of one, by all means, provide evidence of its workings.

[wotad]

BBC are biased in favour of ukip, just because the audience thought their representative was a walloper shows the lack of media balance. SNP are the third party but are rarely seen on political programmes, even in Scotland

having people on the panel = being biased in UKIPs favor ...

Oh look, the forum's Little Briton is here.

Like Neil and Coburn quizzing the succession of UKIP representatives on the breaking news about the party's Scottish chairperson's dubious phone activities? Oh wait, they didn't breathe a word of the story to any of them.

oh look a little scotlander a minority in the UK trying to act relevant to UK politics..

Edited February 6, 2016 by wotad

[Ad Lib]

Correction - that's what political representation means. UKIP are arguably underrepresented politically, under the electoral system and in the chamber we have. It is not up to the BBC to remedy that.

Representation simply means the act of speaking for someone or something. UKIP has representatives speaking for their party far more often than is required for minority group. If Green Party figures were on the BBC as much as UKIP (and for as many years), they would be overrepresented. I consider the Liberal Democrats also to be slightly overrepresented given where they are now (although to be fair people like Miranda Green being on This Week after Sal Brinton is fair given the latter doesn't feature as a Lib Dem representative).

There is (as far as I'm aware) no great calculator the BBC use to work out fair prominence to any political party based on any particular measure of success. If someone knows of one, by all means, provide evidence of its workings.

The guidelines by which the BBC are bound, either in its Charter or its associated documents, do not require them to base "representation" on their shows on the number of seats won in any given handful of local, provincial or national elections.

What you are doing is trying to say that that should be their criteria, even though it doesn't need to be, and that they shouldn't correct for something they're not required to abide by. This is just daft.

If you are maintaining that UKIP get too much exposure on the BBC you have, broadly speaking, three possible responses:

1. Cut programming across the board, which doesn't solve the fact that they're proportionately over represented if that is part of your objection

2. Increase programming and allocate it to everyone but UKIP, or to specific others than UKIP. In which case, to whom would you allocate it?

3. Re-allocate some exposure from UKIP to other parties, in which case tell us which parties you'd reallocate, how much you would reallocate, and why?

[Antlion]

Ad Lib and wotad, brothers in arms. D'awww!

What are their "criteria"? Do we actually know, and know how they calculate the level of exposure they'll give parties each day and week?

By the way you've missed out the possibility of allocating exposure according to the number of seats held in the state's parliament (unless that comes under the umbrella of "3"). I doubt there would be much change for your party in that case though. This would broadly reflect the makeup of the parliament, and if people don't like it, it might just encourage them to push for a change in the electoral process.

I know the BBC is historically poor at allocating equal and impartial attention to both sides in referenda, but I would also encourage the institution that it need not have UKIP MEPs as the default option for discussion of the EU. I will be voting "in" in the referendum, but I can appreciate that it's wrong to portray "out" as though UKIP are its face. They're not even the ones providing the vote.

Edited February 6, 2016 by Antlion

[Carl Cort's Hamstring]

BBC are biased in favour of ukip, just because the audience thought their representative was a walloper shows the lack of media balance. SNP are the third party but are rarely seen on political programmes, even in Scotland

In 2014-15 UKIP were on QT 14 times and the SNP 11. I don't see that as evidence of huge bias in either direction.

[wotad]

Ad Lib and wotad, brothers in arms. D'awww!

What are their "criteria"? Do we actually know, and know how they calculate the level of exposure they'll give parties each day and week?

By the way you've missed out the possibility of allocating exposure according to the number of seats held in the state's parliament (unless that comes under the umbrella of "3"). I doubt there would be much change for your party in that case though. This would broadly reflect the makeup of the parliament, and if people don't like it, it might just encourage them to push for a change in the electoral process.

I know the BBC is historically poor at allocating equal and impartial attention to both sides in referenda, but I would also encourage the institution that it need not have UKIP MEPs as the default option for discussion of the EU. I will be voting "in" in the referendum, but I can appreciate that it's wrong to portray "out" as though UKIP are its face. They're not even the ones providing the vote.

Its to do with ofcom also not just BBC UKIp are not the only ones portraying the OUT side do you even follow anything? on literally every show its UKIP + either labour or Conservative

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-31906154

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/politics/ukip/11474667/Ukip-given-two-party-election-broadcasts-but-Greens-miss-out-again.html

there was a story recently about Ofcom and BBC but im unable to find it

[wotad]

In 2014-15 UKIP were on QT 14 times and the SNP 11. I don't see that as evidence of huge bias in either direction.

then you add labour i wonder the difference

[Ad Lib]

There were 36 episodes of Question Time in 2014. One was an Independence Debate special with no party representatives.

Appearance by Political Party:

Conservative 35 (97%)

Labour 35 (97%)

Lib Dem 23 (64%)

UKIP 12 (33%)

SNP 4 (11%)

Plaid 3 (8%)

Green 2 (6%)

George Galloway 1 (3%)

There were 17 episodes of Question Time before the UK General Election in 2015:

Conservative 17 (100%)

Labour 17 (100%)

Lib Dem 13 (76%)

UKIP 7 (41%)

SNP 3 (18%)

Plaid 2 (12%)

Green 3 (18%)

George Galloway 1 (6%)

There were 24 episodes of Question Time after the UK General Election in 2015:

Conservative 24 (100%)

Labour 24 (100%) - though one was someone who neither holds nor has sought elected office nor is a peer (Alistair Campbell)

Lib Dem 6 (25%)

UKIP 9 (38%)

SNP 10 (42%)

Plaid 1 (4%)

Green 2 (8%)

Sandy Toksvig/Women's Equality Party 1 (4%)

From this it seems pretty clear that:

1. UKIP's presence on Question Time rose slightly after they, you know, won the European Elections, but that it was not significantly larger than the general bounce for small parties before a General Election in terms of the BBC trying to achieve broad exposure.

2. Lib Dem presence collapsed when they lost heavily in the General Election

3. UKIP's presence slightly dropped when they didn't gain seats in the General Election as their vote share might have otherwise implied

4. SNP presence has increased significantly in the aftermath of the General Election

5. The also rans elsewhere get very little exposure.

At best, therefore, the argument can be that UKIP gets exposure to the expense of, what, Plaid Fucking Cymru?

[Antlion]

Thanks for that, Ad Lib - now we can all see UKIP appearing on Question Time consistently in the 30-40% region whilst holding less than one percent of parliamentary seats and gaining c12% of the popular vote in the last General Election. The BBC certainly do seem to want to ensure Nigel's party gets more more "broad exposure" than its meagre electoral results would indicate it deserves.

Now if only we could factor in the Daily and Sunday Politics' inclusion of UKIPers ...

As for who should get exposure in lieu of UKIP, that would depend on where the show was coming from and what issues are likely to be tackled - remembering that there are "Eurosceptics" who are not UKIP MEPs.

[wotad]

Thanks for that, Ad Lib - now we can all see UKIP appearing on Question Time consistently in the 30-40% region whilst holding less than one percent of parliamentary seats and gaining c12% of the popular vote in the last General Election. The BBC certainly do seem to want to ensure Nigel's party gets more more "broad exposure" than its meagre electoral results would indicate it deserves.

Now if only we could factor in the Daily and Sunday Politics' inclusion of UKIPers ...

As for who should get exposure in lieu of UKIP, that would depend on where the show was coming from and what issues are likely to be tackled - remembering that there are "Eurosceptics" who are not UKIP MEPs.

you dont seem to be getting it BBC/Ofcom take into % of the polls etc.. over MPs , and if you have been watching the EU debate its never just UKIP .The fact SNP are even close when they hold like 3% in UK polls is a joke

Edited February 6, 2016 by wotad

[Ad Lib]

Thanks for that, Ad Lib - now we can all see UKIP appearing on Question Time consistently in the 30-40% region whilst holding less than one percent of parliamentary seats and gaining c12% of the popular vote in the last General Election. The BBC certainly do seem to want to ensure Nigel's party gets more more "broad exposure" than its meagre electoral results would indicate it deserves.

Now if only we could factor in the Daily and Sunday Politics' inclusion of UKIPers ...

As for who should get exposure in lieu of UKIP, that would depend on where the show was coming from and what issues are likely to be tackled - remembering that there are "Eurosceptics" who are not UKIP MEPs.

Simple question:

Why shouldn't the BBC take into account the fact that UKIP are Britain's largest party in the European Parliament when deciding how much exposure they can reasonably expect from BBC programmes?

[pandarilla]

Simple question:

Why shouldn't the BBC take into account the fact that UKIP are Britain's largest party in the European Parliament when deciding how much exposure they can reasonably expect from BBC programmes?

There are clearly many different factors to take into account with party's representation. But I think the bbc's defensiveness in relation to tabloid accusations that is making a difference.

The daily mail keep repeating the left wing bias tag so the BBC responds by bigging up ukip.

The balance just isn't right.