Browse > Home / AV referendum, BBC / BBC ban on term “electoral reform” even more preposterous

| Subcribe via RSS

BBC ban on term “electoral reform” even more preposterous

February 20th, 2011 Posted in AV referendum, BBC by

As recently noted, the BBC powers-that-be have decided to ban the term “electoral reform” being used by its correspondents because the word “reform” sounds too positive (see previous post on why this in itself is preposterous).

But now it looks even more absurd!

The Prime Minister – who is standing with the NO campaign is still using that self-same term.  In his speech on Friday (and i will say this again!), arguing against AV, David Cameron himself uses the term “electoral reform” again and actually defines AV as a type of reform …quoted on the BBC website…

“(David Cameron) said he believed the Alternative Vote was “completely the wrong reform” and would be “bad for our democracy” – leading to unfair results and an unaccountable political system” (source bbc website)

If AV is -according to the PM – the “wrong sort of reform” ..then definition-ally it is “reform”. Any reason why we can ALL agree that this vote is about ELECTORAL REFORM – except the BBC? 

Surely there is something very odd going on…The Prime Minister of this country can make a speech against electoral reform in which he uses – once again –  the term “electoral reform” … and in that speech define  AV as a type of reform (if the wrong one). That the BBC can report that speech, quoting the PM using the term “electoral reform” and showing the highlights of the speech in its website. BUT the BBC journalists are banned from using the term themselves? 

The dictat looks more preposterous and untenable with every day that passes. 

On a related issue – any reason why the main BBC News political story on AV runs with the title “Votes referendum: Cameron rejects Clegg AV call” . Is that really fair? to headline the story with reference to Cameron’s view (what’s wrong with “Clegg and Cameron go head to head over…..”) …. is it really impartial to list the PMs objections extensively at the top of the article and drop in Nick ‘s arguments much further down the piece?  Maybe it doesn’t matter – but for a BBC that appears obsessive about impartiality this seems a tad..oh how can I say this…biased?

2 Responses to “BBC ban on term “electoral reform” even more preposterous”

  1. Psi Says:

    Definitely evidence of cock up rather than conspiracy as no one could concoct such a ridiculous situation by design.

    Of course now they have started the BBC will refuse to put the shovel down, perfect evidence for the need for competition to return some sanity to news coverage.

    On another BBC bashing note did anyone else notice that David Dimbleby missed that Yvette Cooper (the Labour Shadow Home Secretary) doesn’t understand how the British legal system works claiming that the Government could ignore the UK Supreme court? I imagine that she had confused it with the ECHR, but a shocking lack of understanding.

  2. CN Says:

    Here’s a good story for all those LibDemCON Coalition BOGUS REFERENDUM compliance clones at the BBC:


    1.UK Electoral Law – NOT ‘fit for purpose’.
    2.UK Electoral Registers – NOT ‘fit for purpose’.
    3.UK CERO cross constituency scrutiny powers – NOT ‘fit for purpose’.cross constituency scrutiny powers – NOT ‘fit for purpose’.

    A GUARANTEED ‘One Person-One Vote’ AV v FPTP Referendum in May 2011 is simply NOT POSSIBLE.