The BBC is utterly beholden to the right. Why else would it fear an Evan Davis podcast about heat pumps? | George Monbiot

IIt is no longer even demonstrating. Last week, the British Broadcasting Corporation (BBC), already the UK sergeant, has already instructed Lieutenant -Colonel Iva Davis Podcast He hosted his time around heat pumps. It was a nice and exciting look at the machines, with no clear political content. But BBC, Davis saysHe saw it as “directed in the areas of general controversy.” He – she You should stop immediately.

Are the BBC offers prohibited from saying anything controversial? Far from that. Take an article It was published earlier this year by Justin Web in the Times. She praised Donald Trump’s “political genius”, and indicated that Democrats are now viewing as extremists, and they claimed that Trump is widely considered “a manufacture [America] Naturally again. ”The BBC was fine with that, Complaints.

I think webb had all the right to write this article. But his allegations were indisputably from the “general controversy”. Why did the non -political podcasts of Davis closed on heat pumps, but not the inflammatory support of Webb for Trump? The answer is simple: economic power.

Heat pumps are the issue of “political controversy” for one reason and only one reason: commercial interests, led by gas suppliers and boiler installation companies, amazed a Culture War Against them. This is part of a broader attempt by fossil to reflect environmental progress (with help, by the way, by the BBC Studio, Storyworks, which, according to Desmog reports, produced Public relations materials For fossil fuel companies, transportation companies and other major pollutants). You may expect the public broadcaster to resist such pressure. But the BBC surrenders over and over again.

It is an institutional problem. The most powerful pressure groups from companies in the country, who have endless cultural wars, are unwanted neoliberally collected on Toftun Street and around Westminster. It seems one or more, apparently, It appears on the BBC Almost every day. Almost, the BBC breaks its editing instructions, which states that Thinking affiliations And funding “must be available to the public, when it is related to context.” Most right right Junktanks He refuses to say who finances themAnd BBC does not ask. Even viewers and listeners You don’t have a way to know Those who may speak on their behalf.

At the same time, the left’s voices are largely excluded (select the left as facing economic and right power as its support). A Study for nine years Written by Cardiff University in non -parties that were invited at the time of the question everyone People who have often appeared on the right. Many of them can be reasonably described as extremists.

Is there something wrong with people on the left? Do they have nothing interesting to say? If there is an experience before and just to determine whether the problem lies with them or with BBC. Well, there. The results can barely be clear.

Even a few years ago, while working in Express, Spectator, Eventing Standard and Telegraph and Mail, and it was clear that he was conservative, Peter Oborn was preferred in BBC. He was a leading introduction to his pioneering political program The week in Westminster. It appeared in newsnight, today, the time of question and other prominent offers. He made some strong radio documentary films. But in 2019, Oborn, a very initial man, broke the conservative consensus By publishing an article In OpenDEMOCRCY about the lies of Boris Johnson government, amplifies and amplified by the media, including mail on Sunday and BBC today. It was a local, accurate and objective account, each step was proven.

It is not surprising that Oborn had no choice but to resign from his pillar in the mail. Perhaps more surprising, the article represents the direct party to its relationship with the BBC. No one said anything, no message was sent. Instead, he told me that the phone stopped ringing. Without explanation, his work stopped 20 years with the week in Westminster.

Go He defends Jeremy Corbin And reporting and commenting, with great depth, on Gen. in Gaza. As a result, out of all major ports, it has become a comprehensive exhaustion of the great “freedom of expression defenders”. Although his journalist is comprehensive and responsible as it was always, he has not appeared in the BBC program since 2019, when his concentration, in fact, has shifted from right to left. Now it only works for the eye of the Middle East, frankly and secondary times.

How clear is this? Defending strong interests: Hello brother. The current situation faced, challenging lies, called for higher press standards in the BBC: Avaunt Ye, Devil. Be initial to be excluded. The tinnitus with the uninterrupted chancers.

BBC may argue that these are the sounds that prevail in public life. But it does not prevail by chance. They prevail through money: by pressing companies; Through the ownership of other media by billionaires and Hectomillionsirs; through Conservative network; Through the donations and influence that transforms political parties into the heroic power. Large money pushes politics to the right: This is a political base for political life. In the pursuit of the prevailing sounds, the BBC was walking in extremist sites more than ever.

It is not as if the truth has no place. In the main current, almost all doors are open. To the left, almost all closed. Outside of seeking to compensate for this imbalance, and the coordinated views of the acting acting such as the requirements of real neutrality, the BBC enhances them.

Part of the problem is that the right -wing party are very partisan It was imposed on the BBC By conservatives. He talks to the fatal Keir Starmer’s weakness that he did not seek to replace with unbiased numbers. But it is broader than that. A culture of fear and good dominates the organization.

Sometimes the British Broadcasting Corporation manufactures bold programs, such as Luis Thiro A new documentary film on the West Bank settlers. But you can name and numbering these deviations, while the perspectives and demands of economic power have become the background of the background through their entire news and the production of current affairs.

In other words, the BBC behaves like the Starmer government: the appetite for the right and the right, with the suppression of the left. In doing this, it undermines survival. When he faces an existential crisis, as the Labor Party and the BBC in 2029 may be, who will defend it? The right – the Bluetocrats on the right of the hero – wants to go, while the left now sees it as hostile power. She satisfies herself to death.