The big irony here is that this is absolutely totally virtue signalling itself: the BBC is not trying for the actual impartiality of high quality journalism, but instead the impartiality signalling of hiding private views and displaying “balance” https://twitter.com/jimwaterson/status/1321895591304171520

What this means is not that the BBC is “more impartial” - if anything, it’ll be harder to identify the causes of editorial bias - and doesn’t fix the problems of the BBC which are weak editorial for long reads, myopic click bait reporting on niche social media tropes ...

... and essentially no effort to find out “the truth” of contested arguments, particularly where politics is concerned, instead just presenting them as an unresolvable comparison of just two conflicting viewpoints

With its resources, the BBC could do such high quality national and local journalism. It has the time and scale to pursue real facts; it has the scale to cover important but niche questions well, and the status to provide real accountability - and it does ... on the World Service

Instead, British consumers get a clickbaity homepage, a baffling selection of terrible long reads, press release journalism and Kuenssberg-style mouthpiece journalism

None of this is fixed by this - it doesn’t even address the complaints of the right or left, about the organisation’s socially progressive and economically centre-right tilts.

It’s the worst type of virtue signalling: just ineffectively obfuscating a lack of actual virtue