Railway Wages

[tbtc]

True, but set in context to nation as a whole (similar sample size) where there were only 1.5 Liberals to 1 Conservative, the magnitude of the BBC result was quite staggering. I wouldn't like to suggest the result was 100% accurate, which is why I suggest it's not entirely credible to believe the result, but a result like that does not suggest to me that the organisation is entirely reflecting national society.

As I said before, do you think that all news organisations entirely reflect national society? Should they? Are you suggesting that people should be hired on the basis of General Election results?

I get the impression that lots of the SNPs votes in Scottish elections are disenchanted labour/liberal voters who are voting SNP because of the generic social democratic programme they espouse rather than any feeling of wanting independance.

The problem also with that sort of liberal/conservative poll is that it is largely designed for the American system, where a liberal is basically a social democrat, whereas in the UK we can liberals who are social democrats and liberals who are almost anarcho-capitalist in there zeal about free markets.

I agree with your second point - "Liberal" in the UK means anything to the left of the Tories, which is a majority of the population, especially when you consider that there are a lot on the "left" who don't vote (the young) compared to the higher turnout in groups more likely to vote Conservative (Pensioners etc).

I saw a poll a while ago that suggested a very high number of SNP voters (around half?) didn't actually want Independence, but are voting SNP for other reasons.

Whilst that is a valid point, it doesn't adequately explain why UKIP's vote went from 1.5% in a General Election to about 18% in European one. Or that the BNP vote goes from 2% in a General to 7% in a European.

European elections only have about half the number of voters as Westminster ones do, which means a "freak" result is more likely.

However those who are anti-EU are more likely to vote in a Euro election (since they tend to feel a lot stronger than those comfortable with membership of the EU).

Really though, its an irrelevant vote (other than a "protest"), you might as well take by-election results as wholly representative.

FPTP doew seriously skew results and are not a reliable indicator for the nations political preferences (ironically). I might be stating the obvious but the Conservative vote is seriously under represented in the North and Inner Cities, because many people think there is no point in voting for them in many contituencies because they have more chance of seeing Lord Lucan riding Shergar than they are get a Conservatve MP. The same is true of course (although I would argue to a slightly lesser extent) for Labour in the South East.

...and similarly the Greens are very under-represented.

The Tories had the majority of Scottish seats in the 1950s IIRC, and the voting system hasn't changed since then.

 

[Get-Pulled-Off]

As I said before, do you think that all news organisations entirely reflect national society? Should they? Are you suggesting that people should be hired on the basis of General Election results?

No, what gives you the impression that I think they should?

I said I believe that the BBC doesn't reflect society, not that it should. I said the fact I believe it doesn't reflect society has had an effect on journalistic output.

However those who are anti-EU are more likely to vote in a Euro election (since they tend to feel a lot stronger than those comfortable with membership of the EU).

I agree, that is certainly one reason why UKIPs vote goes up 10 fold. If a national vote was to held purely propotionally with no "safe" seats, the result would be different, so to use a General Election as proof that the country is left leaning is errornous due to safe seats and tactical voting, factors which are less or not relevent in local and European elections. I voted Lib Dem in 2010, only because it was a straight fight between Labour and Lib Dem in my constituancy and I wanted to get rid of Labour. I would have preferred to have voted Conservative, but I did not want to waste my vote.

 

[Greenback]

True, but set in context to nation as a whole (similar sample size) where there were only 1.5 Liberals to 1 Conservative, the magnitude of the BBC result was quite staggering. I wouldn't like to suggest the result was 100% accurate, which is why I suggest it's not entirely credible to believe the result, but a result like that does not suggest to me that the organisation is entirely reflecting national society.

You seem to have missed the point that the poll reflects American political values, but is answered by people who live within a country that has a broader political spectrum.

Answering liberal or conservative in this context doesn't really match up with British voting patterns or decisions. Someone may actually vote Conservative regularly, yet think fo themselves as a liberal (small L) or vice versa.

It's quite a leap to suggest that this is evidence that the BBC is biased. I would expect that if the entire Uk population was asked the same question, the result would be fairly close to the ratio found in BBC employees.

 

[tbtc]

Going back to the subject, the Guardian reports (http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk/2011/oct/03/tube-drivers-salaries-50000) that London Underground drivers will be on over £50,000.

How long before this is used as a benchmark for drivers at London-based TOCs?

PS: Credit to Bob Crow for stating "In these days of austerity..."

 

[Get-Pulled-Off]

It's quite a leap to suggest that this is evidence that the BBC is biased. I would expect that if the entire Uk population was asked the same question, the result would be fairly close to the ratio found in BBC employees.

Despite quoting it in my post you seem to have missed the point I made that the same information was extrated from the national population (presumably using a similar sample size) and the result was NOT 11 to 1. It was about 1.5 Liberals to 1 conservative. The result for London as a whole was 3 Liberals to 1 conservative. So actually, no, you're wrong by a significant margin.

I did say, use the poll with caution. It's not a perfect poll for the reasons you have illustrated. But it's a hardly a shocking and outragous statement to say that the BBC has a left wing bias. It's been made by many people over many years now. Given the figures illustrated above, the BBC does have a different make-up to the population, but of course, we can't say that it is left leaning because the poll answers were not ideal. I'll leave others to draw their own conclusions though...

 

[Greenback]

It has also been claimed that the BBC has a bias towards the establishment and the right. It's not shocking or outrageous to have these opinions or make the claims, but that doesn't make either view correct.

It's fine to hold opinions, it's fine to have a viewpoint, or a belief, or a political outlook. It's just not accurate to present a view or belief or opinion as an established and indisputable fact!

I did miss the extracted bit of your post, sorry about that, my eyes are bad today.

 

[Get-Pulled-Off]

Right, so when a organisation as 11 times as many of one type of political preference when the nation as a whole only has 1.5 times as many, then no possible inference can be drawn from that.

Fair enough.

 

[Greenback]

Right, so when a organisation as 11 times as many of one type of political preference when the nation as a whole only has 1.5 times as many, then no possible inference can be drawn from that.

Fair enough.

I said I missed the fact that there was such a big difference!

I don't think it is actually that big (that is my opinion not a fact!) I also think that the question asked is not relevant to people's political views, rather, as I said, it is more indicative of how people view themselves.

There is an alternative argument that those who apply to work at the BBC, are by virtue of the fact they are seeking to work for a public service broadcaster, rather than in the private sector, are more likely to see themselves as liberal than conservative.

Anyone can draw whatever inference they want from these statistics. There is usually an alternative view or explanation that is just as arguable. There is no right or wrong, at best there is just a more or less likely explanation.

 

[Get-Pulled-Off]

It's a debate the nation should be having though. When it was claimed the Police were institutionally racist, people listened. When it was claimed there was sexism in the boardroom, people listened.

I'm not saying we've takled either of those whole heartedly. But the nation had the discussion, rather than just claiming the evidence was not relevent and that everything is just tickerty-boo.

 

[Greenback]

I'm all in favour of more debate. there isn't enough discussion these days about a lot of things.

The fact is, though, is that statistics can be used to justify just about anything. Sometimes, some of the 'facts' that are cited in a debate aren't relevant, or are in the least questionable.

 

[tbtc]

Right, so when a organisation as 11 times as many of one type of political preference when the nation as a whole only has 1.5 times as many, then no possible inference can be drawn from that.

Fair enough.

I love the way that you are taking a completely unscientific poll as if it means anything (especially anything relevant to this thread)

 

[Get-Pulled-Off]

Yes, I think it supports (but not proves) my opinion that the BBC's output has been affected by the political persuasion of it's staff. You don't, I guess? Right. Glad we got that sorted.

 

[tbtc]

Yes, I think it supports (but not proves) my opinion that the BBC's output has been affected by the political persuasion of it's staff. You don't, I guess? Right. Glad we got that sorted.

I think that it tells me a lot more about what you *want* to believe

 

[Get-Pulled-Off]

Aye, alright chap. A survey with drawbacks supports my opinion, so I provided it. Dismiss it by all means, at the end of the day this is just a railway forum. Nobody really cares what you or I think.

 

[Smudger105e]

The BBC is regularly accused by the government of the day of bias in favour of the opposition and, by the opposition, of bias in favour of the government. Similarly, during times of war, the BBC is often accused by the UK government, or by strong supporters of British military campaigns, of being overly sympathetic to the view of the enemy. An edition of Newsnight at the start of the Falklands War in 1982 was described as "almost treasonable" by John Page, MP, who objected to Peter Snow saying "if we believe the British".

I know it's from Wiki, but seems to reflect the views of certain posters on this thread.

 

[9K43]

We had a 7 week link, with signing on times between 0:001hrs to 23:59hrs.
Included in that link was 1 x 12hour Sunday ballast turn, signing on at 04:00hrs and every other Saturday we had 3X12hours ballast turns which s/o at 2000hrs, with an agreed 2hrs movement on that signing on time.
The ballast turns could be anywhere from HM depot to 100miles away.
To compensate for the rough turns, on week 4 of the link we had 7complete days off.
At this time EWS did not like groundstaff and did there up most to get rid of this grade.
Management did not do us any favours, and this was given back to them at every opportunity.

If anyone would like to see this link, I have it saved on a 3.5 floppy.