For any news organisation maintaining impartiality can be very difficult on subjects which have antagonistic viewpoints and invariably one side claims bias. On the subject of Hunting with hounds, impartiality rarely seems to be a consideration for the BBC. Almost every one of their regular reports on hunting leads with the pro-hunt viewpoint or ‘figures’ with a token quote from an “anti” for ‘balance’.
Take the following BBC News article entitled “New figures cast doubts on effectiveness of hunting ban” which promotes BBC One’s Sunday Politics programme. The feature (7th February 2012), written by Patrick Burns (BBC Political editor, Midlands) sensationally announces:
“Figures obtained by BBC One’s Sunday Politics programme in the Midlands reveal the number of prosecutions brought under the Hunting Act in our part of the country since it came into force in 2005. Just one!”
Well these are hardly ‘new’ figures as a propaganda report by the Countryside Alliance (CA) on the 26th October 2011 published almost identical details.
“Our findings are bound to cast fresh doubts on the effectiveness of a ban introduced only after an epic of public and Parliamentary angst during the early years of the Blair government.”
Mr Burns sounds like he’s writing a press release for the CA. But as the League Against Cruel Sports stated at the time of the CA report, “On the one hand you have the Countryside Alliance saying that hunts aren’t breaking the law, and on the other they say that the law’s an ass because no hunting people were convicted last season. Which is it? Are they breaking the law or aren’t they?”
The BBC article continues:
“After leaving office, the former Prime Minister wrote in his autobiography, The Journey, that the ban had been his biggest regret.”
Mr Blair never voted for the Hunting Act and did everything he could to prevent the Hunting Act becoming law including commissioning the Burns Inquiry into Hunting, so his regret is hardly surprising. The BBC article fails to mention that the Labour government listed the Hunting Act as one of its achievements.
Burns continues:
“Far from putting a stop to this traditional country pursuit, latest figures from the Countryside Alliance suggest more people are riding to hounds than before the ban on chasing down the fox came in!”
Again the BBC is taking CA ‘figures’ without any evidence to back them up. But as has been pointed out many times, the ‘figures’ would suggest trail hunting is proving more popular than ‘traditional country pursuits’; opponents of bloodsports have always advocated trail hunting. If trail hunting is proving so popular why would you repeal the Act and risk jobs?
The ‘balance’ in the BBC article is provided by just two sentences in which a League Against Cruel Sports poll reveals that only 18% of the public support the repeal of the Hunting Act. Perhaps the League Against Cruel Sports should commission a poll of BBC news editors and reporters.
No BBC report on hunting would be complete without a picturesque photo or two. Luckily we are not disappointed. We have a photo of a huntsman blowing his horn to a beautiful sunset and the obligatory photo of the hounds with the huntsman, yes those very same hounds that the BBC reported, on many occasions, would be killed if the Hunting Act became law. Why no photos of the reality of hunting?
It’s testimony to the media influence of the bloodsport fraternity that attempts to undermine the Hunting Act find there way into the media on such a regular basis. Yet reports showing the reality of hunting rarely elicit even a mention.
Believe it or not but the BBC’s Charter and its Producers Guidelines states, “Due impartiality lies at the heart of the BBC. All programs and services should be open minded, fair and show a respect for truth… [BBC reports should] contain comprehensive, authoritative and impartial coverage of news and current affairs in the United Kingdom and throughout the world…” Maybe one day…
