BBC’S news reporting is not fit for purpose

ONE of the positives of Donald Trump’s presidency is just how much more I now know about the achievements of President Obama – and I was already a fan. And there has certainly been a cathartic uncovering of the dark underbelly of US society and exposure of many who operated with impunity in the dark shadows of the law.

Like an increasing number of interested people in the UK I now watch a variety of US news channels. What has shocked me is just how stark the contrast to our own publicly funded broadcaster, which now appears more lame. The BBC “news” is behind step constantly, interviewers seem unable to challenge the nonsense spouted by many interviewees and overall there is an absence of anything that could reasonably be classed as good quality news or analysis.

Day after day (I thankfully have no TV so this is via radio) there are bland reports of items that have been passé on the internet for at least 72 hours. The usual conveyor belt of politicians and commentators fill up airtime with guff that goes unchallenged even though a scant knowledge of the politics of the last half decade would give a slightly bright 13-year-old the equipment to challenge what is spewed out.

There was much talk at the start of the year about the gender pay gap at the BBC. I believe that is the least of its problems. If there were even a handful of interviewers who came from backgrounds more removed from the usual suspects they drag on with boring regularity to spout lines we can predict before they are said, these programmes might be worth listening to. They are not. It is depressing.

I have said it many times – why does anyone not white, not male, not privileged and or not living in London pay their licence fee? Amanda Baker,

Saughton Gardens,

Edinburgh.