At 7:10am, GMS had Kevin Corbett on to argue for no more lock-downs and the freedom to go where you like without a face mask. They did interrogate and challenge his views but why did they have him on in the first place?
Some listeners may have been persuaded by him, may then follow his advice and put themselves and elderly relatives at risk.
There is no meaningful debate now on this issue. The evidence is in and all governments agree. See this from 8th July:
Oxford COVID-19 study: face masks and coverings work – act now https://www.ox.ac.uk/news/2020-07-08-oxford-covid-19-study-face-masks-and-coverings-work-act-now
Corbett is also an anti-vaccine protester. Would they give equal voice to those views? In England MMR uptake is worryingly low and deadly measles infections are spreading through some communities.
Would they give equal voice to scientists on both sides of the climate change debate even though the scientific community almost unanimously attributes global warming to the effects of human behaviour?
Would they give equal voice to those who believe in the freedom to smoke in public places and those who have proven beyond doubt that it kills?
Some people believe that sex with children is acceptable. The BBC has unfortunate history there.
This is False balance or bothsidesism:
A media bias in which journalists present an issue as being more balanced between opposing viewpoints than the evidence supports. Journalists may present evidence and arguments out of proportion to the actual evidence for each side, or may omit information that would establish one side’s claims as baseless. False balance has been cited as a major cause of spreading misinformation.
Why has GMS done this?