Monthly Archives: March 2005

According to The Scotsman:

Negligent prison staff ‘contributed to death of inmate’

Over on the BBC there’s a subtle difference:

Private prison blame over suicide

, I chanced up their story about Private Johnson Beharry, VC, UK soldier wins highest honour. In it they include the line:

Private Johnson Beharry, 25, becomes the first person to receive the award for more than 20 years.

Would it really have been too much to mention, even in passing, that the last two VCs were awarded during the Falklands War in 1982, perhaps even going so far as to remember their posthumous recipients, Colonel H. Jones, VC, and Sgt. Ian McKay, VC? It’s not like there’s any shortage of related material on the web, for instance,
this or
this or
this or
this.

This isn’t an issue of bias, but to include this small but noteworthy detail (even as a link) would be part of the BBC’s mission to educate, entertain and inform, and might even provoke curious youngsters to go and find out a bit more about British history. But then again, maybe that’s why the BBC didn’t mention it. Or perhaps the CBBC hacks were too lazy to look it up, or worse, have low expectations of their audience’s ability and interests.

The reason I originally went to the CBBC Newsround site was to find out what they said about the Hair-braiding sparks school row story. Newsround’s TV coverage on Tuesday evening included viewer’s feedback on the story, although neither the recap of the story nor any of the selected feeback mentioned the race discrimination aspect of the story.

Even though it is obliquely mentioned in their web coverage, why omit the relevant detail, the nub of the story, from their TV coverage? It is the race discrimination aspect of this story that makes it a story – it wouldn’t be much of an issue were the policy applied consistently to all pupils at the school (although Shabina Begum may beg to differ!).

Further to this, while they say that “Olivia has been given the chance to work in a unit at the school”, they omit to explain that it is the chance to work separately from her friends and fellow pupils. Hardly an adequate solution.

A reader of Tim Blair’s pointed out a discontinuity between a BBC link and the story it linked to.

The BBC’s link to a John Simpson column:

Not quite Vietnam – the war in Iraq defies all predictions

And what Simpson actually wrote:

“The situation in Iraq is nothing like the Vietnam War, and it will not be.”

Simpson has other views besides, not all of them happy reading, but balanced and reasonable.

Tim Blair’s first link, the one that says “not quite Vietnam”, appears to have moved. It now appears, oddly, on the politics page rather than the main page. But the wording is the same.

As you can see from Andrew Bowman’s post further down, Kevin McNamara, a left-wing Labour MP, has distinguished himself by saying that Michael Howard’s views about gypsy encampments and the planning laws have “a whiff of the gas chamber about them.” For various reasons I am not Michael Howard’s biggest fan, but I do think that saying that to a man whose grandmother was murdered in the gas chambers of Auschwitz is… well, in the light of Ken Livingstone’s recent remarks, shall we settle on newsworthy?

The news has reached Australia.

At the time of writing, four minutes to midnight, it hasn’t yet reached the BBC website.

The BBC’s Britain’s Streets of Vice series is being repeated on BBC1, starting tonight with Sex in the City, described by Radio Times as follows:

Sally Magnusson tells the story of a young prostitute struggling with her addiction to crack cocaine and heroin, one of more than 5,000 women thought to be working on the streets and risking violence, disease and a criminal record

It’s on at 11.05pm – it’s on so late because of the adult nature of the material and topic – not that that stopped the BBC showing it (and the rest of the series) at 9.15am in the morning three weeks ago, just as toddlers and children off school sat down to watch. The next episode will be on late at night next Tuesday. Make sure your kiddies are safely tucked in bed, just in case they find these programmes as ‘challenging’ as Alison Sharman, BBC Daytime Controller, bragged.

For the full story, see my previous post: All right my darling? Looking for business? What, at 9.15 in the morning? Are you kidding?

(Realplayer, 224Kbps) spent its first seven minutes covering the Conservatives proposals for dealing with the problem of illegal traveller camps built in contravention of planning laws, both on their own land, and, more often, on other people’s land, often in the green belt.

All the usual leftie hot-button words were used – racism, bigotry etc., with lengthy Going Live! reports from Vikki Young in Essex (with Michael Howard) and John Kay in Worcestershire.

Between 5’35” and 6’58” into the broadcast the following exchange took place:

Anna Ford: “Our Chief Political Correspondent, Mark Mardell, is at Westminster. Mark, why have the Conservatives decided to focus on this issue?”

Mark Mardell: “I’m sure the fact that the powerful Sun newspaper is running a vociferous campaign on this issue doesn’t put them off, but there’s something broader than that, I think a lot of the political parties realise that there’s a sense running through British politics for a number of years now of respectable outrage at, uh, uh, uh, an injustice. Now, we’ve seen this with single mothers on benefit, we’ve seen it with asylum seekers, but the feeling that respectable people who feel that they’ve played by the rules see others really taking the mickey out of society and getting away with it and that’s what the Conservatives are tapping into here, and it also allows them to say ‘we’re listening to you, uh, uh, the Labour government is not'”.

Anna Ford: “Now some people are being extremely critical of the Conservatives policy aren’t they?

Mark Mardell: “One Labour MP has, in the last few minutes, said this policy has, [pause] the whiff of the gas chamber about it. Now those are very serious words indeed, and of course Michael Howard has made it clear that, uh, there is no hint of racism behind what he’s doing as far as he’s concerned, but more broadly than that, as I think we’ve heard already in the programme, the other parties, uh, feel that, er, the Tories have brought this upon their own head or upon society’s head, in that they, in 1994, er, er, abolished the, uh, need for councils to provide these sites and they say the problem is simply there aren’t enough sites legally available.”

Anna Ford: “Mark, thank you”.

My jaw dropped at the emboldened words. How about yours?

Michael Howard’s Grandmother was murdered at Auschwitz, as the BBC well know. To say such a thing about him without a shred of evidence is deeply offensive in a number of ways to a wide range of decent people.

It doesn’t surprise me that a Labour MP is stupid enough to say such a thing – but that Mark Mardell should repeat such offensive tittle-tattle without the decency of at least attributing it to the moron concerned shows, at best, a distinct lack of judgment on his part.

That apart, whilst smearing Howard and the Conservatives with talk of gas chambers, Mardell has a cheek to suggest the problem is all the Conservatives fault for changing the law in 1994. Well hello Mark, but T. Blair esq. has been in power since 1997, so if there’s a problem with illegal traveller camps now he’s had some time to do something about it himself.

On a related note, I’d like to see more detailed coverage of this issue, rather than simple political point-scoring all round. For instance, in Vikki Young’s report she mentions that there are 5,964 caravans on council sites, 4,813 on private sites, 1,855 on land without planning permission and 2,377 on other people’s land, again without planning permission. We aren’t told the origins of the travellers, where they come from and go to, how they make a living and pay taxes, how many of them there are in the UK each year (are there more now than before? if so, why?), how many vacant pitches there are (are travellers being fussy about their location?) and so on. At the moment the broadcast media are reporting this issue as if UK has a responsibility to provide legal pitches to roaming herds of nomadic travellers wherever and whenever they happen to pitch up in the UK, regardless of the available space or the concerns of local residents, which is not something I recall any public debate on.

Update: According to several B-BBC commenters, the above remark has now been attributed to Kevin McNamara – an old-time leftie retread who’s standing down at the next election.

Recently, a rather odious Conservative MP, Jonathan Sayeed, now expelled from the party, has been mentioned several times on BBC News Online, with headlines such as Sayeed to stand down as Tory MP and Tour row MP loses Tory party whip. BBC News Online’s coverage of old Seedy has been fulsome and detailed, leaving no doubt that Sayeed was, to use their term, a Tory.

Compare and contrast this with the sparse coverage of Chris Pond MP, quietly mentioned in passing on BBC News Online’s UK and Politics index pages (no picture or feature box or prominent billing for him), leading to their story MP cautioned for criminal damage.

Nowhere in the headline or even in the story is it mentioned that Chris Pond is a Labour MP. Nor is it mentioned in the headline that Pond is a government minister, no less, at the Department of Work and Pensions.

To see what the BBC omitted from their coverage you have to locate the original report in The Mail on Sunday, Minister arrested for attack on young mother, where we find that, apparently unnoticed by the BBC:

Neighbours in the modern mews development where the incident took place said yesterday that they had at first understood from the police that Mr Pond would be prosecuted. But, after the decision was referred to both the Director of Public Prosecutions and the Attorney General, the MP escaped with a police caution.

The fact that such senior Government law officers were consulted raises questions over whether the decision not to prosecute was made in order to save Mr Pond’s Ministerial career which would almost certainly have been ended by an ensuing court case.

Another interesting snippet unmentioned by the BBC is the fact that “Mr Pond, 52, has repeatedly spoken out on the need to crack down on ‘nightmare neighbours'”. Indeed.

As with much BBC bias, either of these stories, Sayeed or Pond, taken in isolation, would be fine. It is when you put them together and compare the detailed coverage of ‘Tory’ Sayeed with the bland coverage of ‘MP’ Pond that the BBC’s ‘angle’ becomes apparent. If Pond were a Conservative Minister in a Conservative government in the run up to a general election you could bet that the BBC, along with much of Fleet Street, would be much more interested in his story, leading bulletins with it and generally baying for his head. Lucky for Pond that he’s not a ‘Tory’.

Update: More in Today’s Times: Parking row MP escapes court action.

was the headline in a news summary by Philip Hayter on BBC News 24 just now, followed by a brief mention of the Conservatives plans to reform the law to protect homeowners and the environment from the blight of illegal traveller encampments.

This surprised me – the last thing the Conservatives would want to do is go anywhere near starting a race row, particularly knowing how the shrill harpies of the left screech on and on at the merest hint of race being an issue – so who has suggested the issue involves race, and, more importantly, why does that become the BBC headline to the story rather than proper coverage of the substantive issue itself?

The issue is that it appears that anyone from anywhere in the EU with a caravan and an attitude can settle wherever they like in the UK, in complete contravention of the planning laws, using their ‘human rights’ to disregard everyone else’s human rights.

Turning to BBC News Online, the story is a little clearer – although their angle on the story is the same – Tories deny Gypsy race row claim. It turns out that:

Planning minister Keith Hill said the Tories were “tapping into the biggest vein of bigotry – prejudice against Gypsies and travellers”

So, there we have it, a not particularly bright leftie minister (who, one is left to assume, is Labour, since the BBC fail to name his party) has neatly demonstrated the old truism that goes:

Q. What’s a racist?

A. Anyone winning an argument with a leftie.

…and that then becomes the BBC’s focus on the whole story. Trebles all round in the newsroom.

Further down the story (timestamped 11:52, 20MAR05), in a classic piece of BBC News Online sloppy journalism, we find:

The Conservatives have already said they intend to review the Act and scrap it if it cannot be rewritten to their satisfaction.

They claim it is putting the interests of criminal “chancres” before hard-working members of the public.

While ‘chancre‘ might well be appropriate, I suspect ‘chancer’ is what was actually said – as has turned out to be the case, following a stealth edit between 3 and 3.30pm – a mere three hours after the story went online!

to Andrew Bowman’s earlier post about CBS reporting of the meeting between President Bush and the McCartney sisters, I received an email from Fausta Wertz of the Bad Hair Blog, pointing out this post.

Shamefully, this morning’s BBCA newscast, after reporting on the above, invited a former SF/IRA public relations man. His position was that the women were puppets of political opponents, nearly the same exact words Martin McGuinness, Sinn Fein’s chief negotiator told the same BBC earlier this week. The BBC reporter had previously concluded his report by saying, “When it comes to Northern Ireland, there’s no longer much to celebrate.”

To the contrary. It’s time to celebrate the courage of six women.

To be fair to the BBC, it seems to me at least possible that their intention in running the Sinn Fein guy was to give him rope to hang himself with, metaphorically speaking. Hard to tell. Very hard to tell. The record of the BBC in regard to Northern Ireland is uneven. Good reporting has often been combined with determined efforts to shoehorn the conflict into a colonials-versus-natives template.

, the BBC ‘will cut 1,500 extra jobs’. This is one set of redundancies (sorry, ‘cuts’, as the News Online hacks call it) that’ll be given the full treatment whenever possible by BBC News staff. On with the reform!