…if not the story. As Natalie, Ed, Andrew and B-BBC commenters have noticed, bias by omission is an ingrained habit in Beebdom. For example, in this story on Bush and McCain, the BBC manages omit a developing story whilst misrepresenting the Republican party.
He [John McCain] called a Republican campaign ad criticising Mr Kerry’s military service “dishonest and dishonourable” and urged the White House to condemn it.
To begin with, the ad in question was neither produced nor funded by the Republican party but by a group of Vietnam War Swift Boat Veterans who have just published a book rebutting key aspects of John Kerry’s version of his Vietnam experience. Though McCain seems to have rejected their version of events out of hand, a careful examination of the Swift Boat Vets’ account (registration required) seems far from a simple bashing of Kerry. The BBC remains studiously uncurious about this story. Recall that there was plenty of coverage of George Bush’s military records, even to the recent mention of the Bush National Guard records mysteriously being ‘found’, as the BBC put it. No, if the story diverges too far from the script, the Beeb simply omits the unpleasant facts and bears down on earthshaking issues involving Donald Duck or Koko.
Hat Tips: Instapundit, Hugh Hewitt, and Power Line.
And one more: Robert Novak deconstructs Kerry’s war record here: http://tinyurl.com/3rhvq
Unlike the pansified frauds at the BBC, he’s actually read Unfit for Command.
Paging Mr Frei, Mr Frei…Calling the weakest and worst in the West, M Frei Esq…calling Frei…your book report please…Hello?
A search of the BBC website for “swift boat veterans” finds not one reference.
Breathtaking in its shamelessness.
Although “swift boat veterans” doesn’t generate any hits, when you input “Bush National Guard” there are 121 search results, including the “Bush 1972 payroll records ‘found'” story commented on in this blog.
Let’s face it, Frei and his BBC colleagues will quite shamelessly bury any anti-Kerry story, but gleefully report any new linguistic Bushism, or carp on endlessly about anything that puts Bush in a bad light.
I wonder how our gang of BBC supporters will try to justify this? How does criticism of Bushes ANG service constitute news, but criticism of Kerrys not? This isn’t even a new story, the Swift Boat Veterans for Truth have been around for ages, it’s only the book which is new.
Are you suggesting the swift boat veterans *aren’t* Republicans? That would be an interesting scoop…
Some are of course, but there’s no reason to suggest they all are.
john b, they may be supporters of the Republicans but that doesn’t alter the fact that the ad is not a Republican campaign ad. Assuming that you support the BBC, should I take your comments as being official BBC statements?
The BBC reporter was either incompetent or a liar (I use the past tense because the story has been edited so much that it has become a different story with a different headline) . Which do you think?
*Important*
It seems that BBC News Online may be changing the way it presents its output. It may now be treating links/pages as locations for ‘semi-rolling updates’ on an ‘area’ of news, completely changing what is on a page as events unfold – rather than as discreet and finite reports. I have seen two pages completely change character in this manner (one of which is in the link Kerry provides).
Coincidently, perhaps, there seems to be a change in the way such links/pages are searched/accessed via Google. Entering the sentence Kerry provided into the regular Google web engine did not result in a link to the BBC. However, using Google’s new (beta) News search service, the BBC link comes up in isolation, complete with original headline. Unfortunately the link goes to the latest version of the page, and there is no cached version of old content available.
cont…
…cont
It’s doubtful to me that Google is doing this entirely off its own bat, but has actually made a deal with the BBC (and other news providers). As it stands (it’s still beta) this has rendered Google pretty useless for keeping tabs on certain news organisations, the BBC included.
If this is a ‘design feature’ of the new Google, it means that the service has become a tool for the old media information gateways – it has become more of a ‘push’ medium for providers rather than a ‘pull’ medium for users.
But that’s a Google issue, for wider internet/blog discussion.
I think the Biased-BBC bloggers, and anyone else interested in monitoring the BBC, may need to adopt a more thorough and immediate procedure for logging and archiving BBC Online output. As soon as an item is noticed, you should save the page to your hard drive, possibly including a screenshot capture.
Stealth editing may be taking on a whole new depth and breadth.
.
Good point, PJF. If anyone has some suggestions along these lines, please share them.
Days pass, but there is still no mention of the Swift Boat Veterans on the BBC website – just about the biggest website in the world, but they can’t find room for this developing story. A search on the BBC website yields a nil return.
Likewise a search for “Kerry Cambodia” yields no BBC story about the allegations that Kerry lied about being sent into Cambodia – allegations that his own team are now conceding are correct.
If such stories were circulating about Bush, the BBC would be all over them like a rash.
Anonymous,
The big story apparently is that the new head of the CIA is quite modest.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/americas/3560484.stm
and more Respect propagnada…
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/3552640.stm
BBC Biased? No they are the enemy!
read this;
0 likes