BBC is threatened to become privitised.

[Nadkor]

The BBC News section is a powerful propaganda tool that the UK government would be foolish to surrender it has a reputation for fairness (even when it isn't) and is well regarded world wide.

As far as the entertainment section is concerned, there are two primary considerations. Did the BBC buy it or did it produce it? The BBC should not be using purchased content such as American sitcoms etc ( I don't know if they do this) . By doing this they effectively engage in unfair competition with other broadcasters. I also don't believe that they should be profiting from advertising in the same way that private broadcasters do.

I agree with you that the BBC has increasingly become a simple mouthpiece for prevailing government policy.

One of the things you'll notice about the BBC is that it gets accused of bias by everyone.

How much did they have to reveal about the Downing Street memo?

Hmmm?

I'm going to assume you aren't about to suggest that if a news organisation comes into possession of a document (and let's not forget, of course, that the Sunday Times was the newspaper that broke it originally, and they're owned by Murdoch; what bias does he have, would you say?) that throws massive doubt on the reasons, and the intelligence, the government of the country the news organisation is in had for going to war they shouldn't run with it.

Because that would be silly.

So I am going to ask what on earth your point is? Because it certainly couldn't be what I first thought.

[Nadkor]

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/8458271.stm

The report by the free-market think tank

I think that explains all we need to know.

The BBC, the world benchmark of unbiased (or little in the way of bias) reporting

Not quite. They have a heavy anti-Israel bias.

I disagree with you regarding anti-Israel bias. I think they ask tough questions of Israel but is that not perhaps to the function of a new organisation?

Precisely this.

[Nadkor]

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/8458271.stm

The BBC must undergo a radical overhaul and Channel 4 should be privatised, a think tank has said in a report on the future of UK broadcasting.

The centre-right Policy Exchange said the BBC should cut the amount it spends on sports rights, popular entertainment and shows for 16 to 35-year-olds.

It also urges the government to drop its controversial "broadband tax".

The BBC Trust said any proposed changes must not put the public value of the BBC or its independence at risk.

The report by the free-market think tank said public service broadcasting was under strain and needed radical reform if it was to survive in the digital age.

It said the BBC should put quality before ratings and leave sport and popular entertainment to commercial channels.

Star salaries

It highlighted the reported £6m a year salary of Jonathan Ross, who announced he was quitting the BBC last week.

"The problem was not so much what the BBC paid, but what the BBC was doing in the bidding ring in the first place," the report said.

It recommended licence fee money should be spent on Channel 4 or E4, rather than BBC3, in order to reach 16 to 35-year-olds.

And it called for BBC Worldwide, which is the corporation's commercial arm, to be privatised and the BBC Trust to be scrapped.

Policy Exchange said a Public Service Content (PSC) Trust should be set up to promote public service broadcasting across all TV, radio and broadband.

The current UK broadcasting system was set up in the 1950s and now struggles to keep up with the extraordinary changes of the digital age
Mark Oliver, author of Changing the Channel

It would lead the way in tasks such as monitoring the delivery of BBC services and reviewing the effectiveness of the BBC's co-funding obligations.

The report also said government plans for a "broadband tax" to fund super-fast broadband should be scrapped and funded from general taxation, if it is shown to be necessary.

Meanwhile, Channel 4 should be privatised in 2012 but retain a public service broadcasting licence for at least 10 years.

The report said it should receive extra digital capacity, reallocated from ITV and perhaps the BBC.

Channel 4 should also be granted cross promotional and linked access to BBC new media services such as http://www.bbc.co.uk and the iPlayer.

The BBC Trust said any proposed change must not put the public value of the BBC or its independence against inappropriate political or commercial influence at risk.

Mark Oliver, the author of the report called Changing the Channel, was previously the BBC's head of strategy and has advised the government.

He said: "The current UK broadcasting system was set up in the 1950s and now struggles to keep up with the extraordinary changes of the digital age.

"It is clear that the 20th Century analogue institutions that were created are now worryingly out of date.

"We need a dramatic rethink if we are to continue to deliver public service broadcasting in an entirely new age."

The BBC, the world benchmark of unbiased (or little in the way of bias) reporting, and it would be compromised by business to be biased toward commercialism and public opinion./oppinion

it's not unbiased, i watched BBC world news, that's anti-American.

No, that's about as neutral as you'll ever get from any organisation. the BBC World News is almost obsessively neutral.

It's not their fault that an objective view of the USA looks bad to you.

[Avenio]

it's not unbiased, i watched BBC world news, that's anti-American.

Reality has a well known anti-American bias. Everyone knows that!

But in all seriousness, as posters have said before, it's been accused of a bias of some sort by practically everyone. Just because it decries a nation's actions (or lack of them) on the world stage doesn't mean it is biased.