The BBC had been run by the BBC trust, which was headed by ext-Tory ministers* and is now run by OFCOM, which is the government media regulator.
It's clearly visible in the political coverage of BBC News, which is ran by @bbclaurak. She's a conservative firebrand, the Sarah Sanders of the UK. Only she's running what is supported to be a neutral news organization.
Further, I don't know - you just have to watch the way they cover subjects that you understand and see how they totally bend the facts to favor which ever corporate interest they've been told to support. This is particularly the cases with coverage of climate change (their position seems to be that the solution is plastic straws and letting consumers decided to buy 'green electricity') and the hostility to Jeremy Corbyn.
The problem with the BBC is that it has been under attack by Sky TV (the premium commercial TV provider then owned by Murdoch) for two decades. A weak or compromised BBC is good business for them and a BBC under the control of the government is great a win-win for those in power..?
The BBC comes under fire from both the left and the right for being biased, and a quick Google search shows that if anything, there appears to be more concern about it being bias towards the left [1, 2]. Here's a really detailed Wikipedia page on BBC bias if you're interested (or want to contribute) [3].
Surely the BBC has a tough line to walk; differing perspectives on the left and the right mean that both sides likely will view its content differently (and sometimes conclude it was biased). Despite this, it has to broadcast some content, since that's (literally) its mandate.
Perhaps the best solution is to have continued scrutiny from both sides of the political spectrum, and independent regulator to manage complaints... which is what we already have (and what you're helping achieve!)?
I've read a lot about the "left" bias of the BBC. The thing is, "leftwing bias" has been a meme of the far right for since ever. It's the same strategy of projection that Trump does so fantastically well - project whatever they're doing (or trying to do) onto the opposition and pummel them with it. Sure they won't get exactly what they want, but every time they do it moves the needle a little towards their direction.
They should just me made to report the facts with the correct weight. The problem is that they include things like flat earthers, homeopaths etc into the conversation in a way which legitimizes them.
What they should be doing is requiring their news content to be fact based. So fact check politicians. Don't give the basket cases a platform (and fact check them if they slip in).
