the BBC's coverage of the issue abandoned the pretence of impartiality long ago.
Well, coming from Paxman, that's fairly compelling and unquestionably damning.
It's been revealed this week that the BBC had sight of the "climategate" emails weeks ago and sat on them. Apparently a weatherman called Paul Hudson was sent them over a month ago.
It begs the question, does it not, "Why did the BBC sit on one of the biggest stories this year?"
As I have always said, the BBC rarely strays into the arena of explicit bias, apart from the Middle East and Jeremy Bowen, or against Christians, etc. The BBC is riddled, is infected and stinking, with bias by omission; it's what they don't report - the people who you never hear on "Today" or "Newsnight", why the audience in "Question Time" is carefully picked, and so are the questions and why they exclusively recruit their staff from the media pages of The Guardian. Remember the Dan Hannan speech that went viral and the failure of two chief correspondents, Nick Robinson and Mark Mardell, to even give it a mention.? It didn't get a mention on the BBC until the BBC became the story for pointedly ignoring it.
I post it again here to make the point that, if you only had the BBC to rely on for news, you would never have seen it.