I'm fairly sure that the BBC and Westminster/the Establishment are very closely linked and what gets reported is determined not by a BBC editor but by what that BBC editor is told to report. No longer a public broadcaster but the state broadcaster.
My partner works in BBC current affairs TV journalism and has been an active Union rep over the years.
The impression I get is there is a massive variety of views amongst BBC journalists.
The notion that a conscious centralised controlling editorial policy could exist at the BBC is implausible. BBC journalists have a variety of motivations and a good capacity to express themselves or their story should they believe things are wrong.
That is how the Saville story got to ITV for example.
Edit : something to be careful of as well is the BBC has definitely screwed things up recently, Saville being the most glaring example. IT project over spend, costly relocations out of London, etc. etc. This does make it very vulnerable to criticism. With charter renewal issues around the corner and a semi-Tory government, there's a real possibility for some damage to be done to the high quality programming that they do produce. It's worth thinking about that.
Due to funding constraints, Tony Hall apparently is about to send out a larger proportion of programming to the private sector. Its about trying to save money but I suspect it will end up with lower quality.