Labour Leadership 2016

Just looking at that article summarising the report - its conclusions
don't to my mind say the same thing as bias. They say more time is
given to criticism than support: e.g. this quote from the Huffpost:
"finding the BBC’s flagship 6pm evening TV bulletins gave double the
amount of airtime to Corbyn’s political enemies than those still
backing him."

But if more people are critical of JC than support him, perhaps that
balance could be correct? As JC's supporters dwindle, how much of an
effort does the news have to make to find people who do support him in
order to present what you think is "balanced"?

I'm glad someone in this thread has some media literacy. Well, you and @Velocio

@andyfallsoff has hit the nail on the head here.

The job of the media is to report the facts. The facts are: Corbyn as leader has been shambolic, disorganised and chaotic. He has failed to demonstrate leadership or articulate what the Labour party stands for under him.

It is not media bias to come to this conclusion, based on the evidence available, and report it.

Corbyn and his people are terrible at working with the media. They don't understand how it works. I can tell you from personal experience that this lack of understanding has cost them at least one good media opportunity and I'm sure there have been many more. He is actively anti-journalist and he doesn't seem interested in engaging with them.