"Super-diversity" and the BBC

I find it odd that this article on the BBC is actually declared as being an "opinion". There seems to be less "opinion" in that article than in most other non-opinion articles on the BBC.

It certainly doesn't compare to this piece by Matt Wells published a couple of weeks ago. Astoundingly that article was published originally without "viewpoint" included in the title. I don't think its original absence was an error. It was more likely to have been deliberate. Only when people started to question such opinionated bilge did they add it to cover themselves. The BBC seems to be increasingly showing its true colours recently. They can't report on anything to do with Bush, or America in general without their biases showing through.

Those at the BBC ought to remember they are supposed to remain impartial.

We don't pay their license tax so that they can shove their one-sided political beliefs down our throats.