Or rather "not in the news"

jingle - I watch the news most days on BBC and I haven't seen much, if anything (that I can recall) about protest marches against austerity measures. It may be that on the days when I haven't watched the news that those are the days it was reported and it was just my bad luck.

Ana - yes it was

No, but they'll be saving up any 'good news' for nearer the election and claiming that as their austerity measures have worked so well, they can now ease up a little (as we've all been so good!)

Surely we have? (heard about people reacting to the measures in the news)
We have heard loads about it. Quite rightly, of course. Whether or not the government can be expected to back-track on their savings plans is another thing.

Was that tongue-in-cheek, HollyDaze?

The measures going on for some time is undoubtedly true - people openly reacting to it must be a new thing or we'd have seen it in the news, surely ...

The austerity measures have been on going for some time now. Stands to reason Suraez biting another player in a World Cup match would get more temporary prominence.

My point was that I think it's simply a plain fact that more people are interested in the biter Suarez story than in an anti-austerity march and that the BBC is fully aware of this. I don't agree that events in our own country are necessarily of more importance than events abroad. They might be, but they equally well might not be.

I disagree with your first point and your second point - I didn't say events in our country are of more importance than events abroad; I do, however, think they are more important than one adult biting another.

Perhaps. Or how the BBC works. I'm puzzled why the government has any say in setting the licence fee. That suggests to me that the BBC cannot be independent of or neutral about government news let alone any other sort.

....but doesn't the article illustrate how No 10 works?

Oh, sorry! I misread your post!! Yes, I agree. Tgraph could hardly be accused of being revolutionary.

xposts, when. Er... why?

The article mice linked to is from four years ago.

I liked this comment:
"Fortnum • 4 years ago
Editorial independence is not the same as a neutral viewpoint, which is what the BBC is supposed to provide."

I don't think the title 'Revolutionary' could be levelled at the Daily Telegraph, bags

My point was that I think it's simply a plain fact that more people are interested in the biter Suarez story than in an anti-austerity march and that the BBC is fully aware of this. I don't agree that events in our own country are necessarily of more importance than events abroad. They might be, but they equally well might not be.

I'm going to read mice's link now.

It wouldn't be the first time that governments have used the freezing or reduction of the licence fee to get the BBC to tow the line.

Does sound like the BBC is being made to shut up, or else.....

Isn't this rather telling? (From MiceElf's link to the report about the BBC visit to Downing Street):

'Before yesterday’s meeting, senior Conservatives had been growing increasingly angry over the BBC’s reporting of cutbacks.
One Cabinet minister told The Daily Telegraph: "The reporting has been outrageous. They have been the only media outlet that we have consistently had problems with. Every announcement is met with a report about the effects of the cutbacks. It is virtually never explained that we have to make these cuts or the country will topple over the edge. The bias is pretty appalling at times."
The Government is understood to be alarmed at wasteful spending at the BBC and is expected to push for the licence fee to be frozen, or even reduced, when it is next up for review next year.
There are growing signs that the BBC is seeking to align itself more closely with the Coalition and admit previous mistakes.'

I'm sure they are thatbags - just the same as people were interested in the march and the reasons for it; it's why one is deemed as newsworthy and the other wasn't (I do think that things that are happening in our own country rate higher than one footballer biting another!).

Yes, I am wary of titles that bear the word 'Revolution' too, bags, but I had a good look at the article and compared it with others and this one provided more evidence in the form of tweets and pictures, and many comments from readers were contributed. I guess that, like me, many of the readers aren't revolutionaries either - just concerned people who wonder what's going on.

That comment also made me chuckle thatbags - it does highlight the inconsistency of what is considered newsworthy.

I do find it odd that the march wasn't mentioned at all given some of the drivel that is presented as news; it's understandable that people will end up reading what they will into the reasons for it.

I'm sorry. I couldn't resist it.

Gosh Jingle, I'm overwhelmed by the sophistication of your political analysis.

That was meant to follow Bags' research.

So there! nah nah na nah na!