Post

This is absolute rookie stuff. There is just absolutely no way that a headline like this should ever make the BBC News website. It being the weekend is no excuse, either: political news *always* drops on Saturday night, for the Sunday papers.

Will Jennings📉🗳️@drjennings.bsky.social

Would it now?

177 reposts920 likes

I remember filling in the same application form as my brother-in-law, for a job at BBC News*. I was quite surprised at their priorities on several news stories...but thought about it and found their "policy" to be sound. Now it's just shite. *I did it out of interest, in 1993

It's not "rookie" stuff. It's sophisticated political manipulation by a corporation led entirely by Right Wing people. The people working on the website are doing what the bosses want. Where is the useless Nandy?

To be fair to Reform, they are not the only party to imagine that more welfare cuts will do anything other than multiply the cost to the state of not doing basic stuff to prevent needs from escalating. They are simply the most wishful of the thinkers. But agree 💯 no journalist should indulge it.

I'm not sure why everyone is pretending that BBC News is independent. They've been Farage cheerleaders since the start and he wouldn't have a career without them.

This would be a bad headline even with the "£50bn in savings" referred to as a claim and "overhaul welfare" in quotes – because no one credible thinks there's even close to that in savings to be found. But stating it as plain fact is just dire.

The BBC has a very tough job as the national broadcaster and lots of what it does involves difficult balancing acts. But this isn't one of those situations. This is just amateur hour.

Difficult balancing acts? 🤨 Tell any MPs from Lib Dems or the Green Party about that… BBC News is finished. It cannot conduct “balancing acts” if the senior positions mainly represent right wing elements.

It’s not a mistake it’s intentional. They are biased in favour of Reform. It used to be the Tories but they have swapped horses. The BBC have not been honest for ages.

Just means that Reform supporters don't believe that the money they receive from the government themselves, i.e. their pension, is the welfare budget...

How many people in Clacton receive PIP? If only we had some medium to communicate this kind of stuff. I mean, imagine if there were some national broadcaster serving the public interest, impartial, with a mission to inform... I know, pipe dream, but, just a thought.

There are wars in Ukraine, Sudan & Iran/Gaza/ Hormuz Climate change, wildfires in urban areas in UK, USA is doing what USA does in Trump-World & there is a UK government doing actual governing in UK Still, a made up number from Reform, without any foundation or evidence, is “front page” for the BBC

People need to see their policies front and centre. These headlines are essential for voters to recognise them as the neo-Thatcherite-on-steroids that they are

It’s almost humorous that the BBC has this - considering one of the first things to be flushed down the pan by Re-form will be the BBC

Thirty eight times, the same number as Michael Heseltine whose political career is roughly three times longer. Meanwhile Zia Yusuf has been on seven times since his first appearance just two years ago. Richard Tice nine times.

They would lose support if the #bbc bothered its arse to explain to the public just how many people would be plunged into poverty under these reforms. It’s just another public schoolboy jape to them.

Obviously I'm part of this industry. But I don't run the BBC. And I call it out while working in it. What else should I be doing?

I dunno, every time I see your stuff being shared its the most pathetic milquetoast centrist drivel- i assume you have bills to pay like the rest of us, but do you at least feel some shame about this whole pathetic sham? Are you allowed to say? Blink twice for yes

Want to point me to one of those stories? Because I get this accusation a lot and usually people don't follow up with specifics. Where's the recent story that fits that?

I mean, for example, you are making a big deal about what amateurs posted this pro Reform propaganda on the BBC like you honestly believe its an accident, a fluke, a flaw, but you know its not- when do you call it out?