While you’re visiting the future, could you check the racing results as well?

By | |

A commenter says he spotted and grabbed a screenshot of this.

Click through to read and contribute comments on this post.

Bookmark the permalink.

24 Responses to While you’re visiting the future, could you check the racing results as well?

  1. Franko says:
    May 5, 2005 at 12:33 am

    Probably just a test page.

       0 likes

  2. dave t says:
    May 5, 2005 at 1:45 am

    Ssh. Don’t tell Charlie K – let him get excited….

       0 likes

  3. thedogsdanglybits says:
    May 5, 2005 at 8:05 am

    OT
    Excellent bit of politiking on Radio 4 late last night when Steve (Nobber) Norris- Tory Party, Left Wing & Roy (Spray-away) Hattersley -Labour Party,Left Wing were invited to give their thoughts on the election so showing that the BBC is not biased and Blair does indeed occupy the centre ground. Shirley(Barking) Williams- All Things To All People Party typically provided the comedy relief.

       0 likes

  4. Eamonn says:
    May 5, 2005 at 8:49 am

    The Today programme is at a loose end this morning, with election day under way, so why not talk about other things, such as, such as….. Iraq. Who would have guessed it? Clearly the BBC are doing their best to get out that Lib-Dem vote.

    This morning (around 8.10 am) we had some prehistoric American former state official who more or less said that Iraq is worse off now than before, that the Iraqi elections were meaningless, that Iraq is a “quagmire”, that the coalition should pull out immediately, that the coalition presence will lead to “Son of Saddam” appearing, and that the money would have been better spent on environmental issues. All to the billing and cooing of Edward Stourton.

    Then a member of the Iraqi govt comes on, and Stourton’s tone changes. Stourton is almost sneering in his dealing with this Iraqi. A nuanced laugh here, a little guffaw there, just so we know what Stourton is thinking.

    But doesn’t that just sum up the BBC and the Today programme?

    They can’t get enough of the antiwar left-liberal worldview, especially when espoused by a “good” American sat on his fat backside in Washington, whilst they haul an Iraqi politician, who has his life constantly under threat by fascists, over the coals.

    Shame on the BBC.

       0 likes

  5. Natalie Solent says:
    May 5, 2005 at 8:52 am

    Franko, we agree it’s a test page.

       0 likes

  6. john b says:
    May 5, 2005 at 9:58 am

    Eamonn – it’s interesting the way you always, without exception, assume that the BBC crucify politicians you agree with and “coo and bill” over ones you don’t. Just as I tend to feel they’re overly mean to Charlie K and give Michael Howard a soft ride.

    Perhaps you’re just like everyone else in the world, in that you get riled when you hear your views being challenged?

       0 likes

  7. Natalie Solent says:
    May 5, 2005 at 10:31 am

    John B,
    You assume a symmetry that is not present. Your side and Eamonn’s side might be equally predisposed to coo/get riled over your respective champions. (I don’t know about either of you individually, but in general, that’s human nature.) The difference is that the BBC journalistic staff overwhelmingly are far closer to your opinions than his. I don’t think they would deny this. Being no better than other men they tend to coo and bill over *their* favourites. What we object to is having to pay for it on pain of imprisonment, and having it presented to the world as the voice of Britain.

       0 likes

  8. Anonymous says:
    May 5, 2005 at 10:40 am

    OT ?????

    Tory complaint partly upheld

    http://news.bbc.co.uk/newswatch/ukfs/hi/newsid_4510000/newsid_4513600/4513695.stm

    “Yes there was bias”
    “No, it was no-ones fault”

    There, that’s alright then.

    Institutionally bias – thats the BBC of today.

       0 likes

  9. Eamonn says:
    May 5, 2005 at 10:42 am

    John B

    You underline the problem with the BBC in your comment.

    Why don’t I sometimes (i.e. 50% of the time) agree with the BBC presentation of politics and world events?

    Is it because my centre-right viewpoint is woefully unrepresented by the average BBC presenter?

       0 likes

  10. Pete_London says:
    May 5, 2005 at 12:14 pm

    “Just as I tend to feel they’re overly mean to Charlie K …”

    Nurse!

       0 likes

  11. Miam says:
    May 5, 2005 at 12:23 pm

    What we need is some good measurements of possible bias to give an overall views as to whether the BBC is institutionally bias or not.

    The Centre for Policy Studies recent report was a good stab but the BBC NewsWatch pages gave it a bit of a fisking so it’s not watertight. I though some reasonable measures were:

    How long on average does each interviewee get to talk without being interupted by the questioner? CPS found that labour/left leaning speakers tended to be able to speak longer uninterupted than tory/right leaning opinion.

    I think that is a significant measure if there is a large enough sample over a long period.

    If a body ws willing to conduct a rolling research with bi-annual reports that would be good – would suit OFCOM maybe, compare across uk broadcasters?

    The problem with the BBC’s inability to provide unbiased new IS due to the unique way it is funded. I hope that within 10 years (and the analogue switch off) we can move to a subscription service similar to Sky where you can pick from a range of BBC packages (Starter, Gold, Kids, Whatever) or no package as you should wish. I believe this would make an enormous difference. Too much detail to go into, but two words “market forces”. That would sort it.

    Miam

       0 likes

  12. Ian Grey says:
    May 5, 2005 at 12:45 pm

    I also found a BBC results “test page” myself yesterday afternoon, for the Yorkshire constituency of Elmet.

    I had the forethought to hit save and you can see it via my Blog at http://iangrey.blogspot.com, a few posts down.

    (I can’t link direct, when I access Blogger from work it makes my Internet Explorer crash!)

    Why the Beeb have to be so incompetent as to do tests on live sites with their resources beats me. If they had to do it live, why couldn’t they have invented a couple of dummy seats to play with?

       0 likes

  13. PJF says:
    May 5, 2005 at 1:33 pm

    Maybe john b has captured one ‘showing’ a Conservative win…
    .

       0 likes

  14. Anonymous says:
    May 5, 2005 at 2:22 pm

    “Is it because my centre-right viewpoint is woefully unrepresented by the average BBC presenter?”

    Perhaps your definition of centre right isn’t in line with what the public, i.e. most other people see as centre right? See You Gov’s instructive graph, originally published in the Economist:

    http://www.washingtonmonthly.com/archives/individual/2005_05/006250.php

    If you are asking why you don’t agree with 50% of news output, why assume that your beliefs should sit neatly on one side of, or close to, an imaginary middle line, or that the middle line is necessarily where *you* think it is.

       0 likes

  15. James says:
    May 5, 2005 at 4:25 pm

    We’re dealing with an organization that thinks the editorial stance of the Guardian and Independent, and a comfortable North London middle class lifestyle is the middle line.
    It has so poisoned public perception of what constitutes right-wing and used it to variously describe fascists, economic liberals, hardline communists and mentalist mullahs to render those pretty charts useless.

       1 likes

  16. Zevilyn says:
    May 5, 2005 at 5:33 pm

    The Beeb was pretty harsh on Ashdown when he was leader (a much better leader than Kennedy ever was or ever will be. Ashdown you could imagine being an effective PM).

    When Michael Howard quoted Roy Jenkins’ on immigration, it seemed strange to me that CK was never challenged with the Jenkins quote.

    Above all, the BBC’s view of Britain is uncannily similar to New Labour’s “vision”; the Iraq war has not changed that BBC idiom.

       1 likes

  17. john b says:
    May 5, 2005 at 5:59 pm

    James – time to dissolve the public and elect a new one, perhaps?

       1 likes

  18. Pete_London says:
    May 5, 2005 at 6:22 pm

    O/T

    I’m sure many will remember the footage of a Marine in Fallujah shooting an injured man in a derelict mosque. I remember seeing it repeatedly on the news, with appropriate black screen as the shot rang out, how dramatic. Newsnight went big on it and BBC News Online has it up as the main item.

    Buried today on the middle east page is this:

    “MARINE CLEARED OVER FALLUJAH DEATH”

    http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/middle_east/4516159.stm

       1 likes

  19. sunbonnet says:
    May 5, 2005 at 7:16 pm

    Discussion of a terribly biased BBC report about US Aid. The BBC wrongfully claims that US Aid will not fund AIDS treatment of prostitutes.

       1 likes

  20. James says:
    May 5, 2005 at 7:18 pm

    John B, in the words of Stewie from Family Guy, “Eviscerate the Proletariat!”
    Would be a hell of a lot easier than taking down the BBC.

       1 likes

  21. saul says:
    May 5, 2005 at 7:54 pm

    And what about Sky news…? Now its much worse than Bbc…with their “objectivity”.But of course Bbc is number One

       1 likes

  22. PJF says:
    May 6, 2005 at 3:30 am

    The BBC fantasy election didn’t turn out quite the same as reality.

    The Conservative David Davis managed to scrape in by increasing his vote +4.3% (fantasy = -0.2%); while the Liberal Democrat Jon Neal just missed by reducing his vote by -2.1% (fantasy +4.4%). The Conservative majority is now 5116; in 2001 it was 1903; in fantasy land it was to be minus 122.

    BTW, I had to use the free-market Sky website to get the info. The one luxuriously financed via the police powers of the state wasn’t working as of 0315hrs.

    So much for all that live “testing”…
    .

       1 likes

  23. Al says:
    May 6, 2005 at 2:19 pm

    Yep. I’d imagine that the BBC one wasn’t trying to serve 1000000 times more bandwidth than the Sky one at all, PJF.

       1 likes

  24. PJF says:
    May 6, 2005 at 8:41 pm

    Luckily your imagination isn’t required, Al. The BBC’s online graphics whizzed consistently in a most frivolous way, with colour zooms and fancy tables galore. Its bandwidth handling seemed fine – you’d hope so considering its budget (nearly £100000000). It was just the actual information that was scant or scrambled.

    Sky’s effort may have been modest in comparison, but hey, it worked and wasn’t funded by force.
    .

       1 likes