…but the same conclusions. Helen Szamuely and The Rottweiler Puppy take on the BBC over bias. Helen reports the work of Robin Aitken, former BBC journalist:
‘Robin Aitken is writing a book on the BBC bias. He has already done a good deal of the research and marshalling of the material for a dossier he presented to the Governors in the 1990s. It was comprehensively ignored…’
OT
After lots of rioting and deaths in Afghanistan, and ranting all over the Muslim World, over a report in Newsweek that the Koran had been flushed down a toilet, Newsweek is now being forced to admit that its story was false. Another example of the left-wing media making up the news. Part of the NY Times/BBC/CBS/CNN pattern. But this time Newsweek has a lot of blood on its hand.
I bet the BBC does not report that Newsweek lied – and people died. Just like BBC never admitted properly that they lied over Dr Kelly – and Kelly died.
Meanwhile it is strange what a hornets’ nest the Newsweek lie has stirred up in the so-called “Religion of Peace”. The religion that brought out a grand total of 3 dozen people to protest against terrorism at a Washington meeting this week. Religion of Irrational and Uncontrollable Rage, more like ?
The BBC bias is not simply now standard left=right/rightwing=bad, and black=good/white=bad, but it is also increasingly strident in its proselytising feminist agenda. Anyone who (God help them) watches the BBC’s hospital soaps Holby City and Casualty must be struck by the anti-male bile and stereotyping of thick callous men versus intelligent, sensitive yet strong women. The scripts are risible in any dramatic sense yet clearly written with a perverted political passion.
The BBC’s values are best understood as a hilarious consequence of the one dimensional way lefties think about things.
Thus: Gays are good, strikers are good, women are good, blacks are good, Asians are good, Islamic fundamentalists are good; straights are bad, bosses are bad, men are bad, whites are guilty, whites are Islamophobes, the Christian right are fascists.
The result is a sort of heirarchy, in which you get sympathy according to where you stand in the BBC’s sentiments. If you’re a white middle-class motorist you’re a long way down the pecking order.
Thus, any story about oppression of gays will be treated with grovelling respect for gays’ rights. Where it all goes pear-shaped is if the oppressing of gays is being done by another Beeb-favoured group, such as Islamofascist clerics. At this point, the BBC logic circuits do a HAL and try to kill or ignore the story, because it is impossible to decide whom to favour more, gays or Islamobigots.
“Where it all goes pear-shaped is if the oppressing of gays is being done by another Beeb-favoured group, such as Islamofascist clerics.”
Indeed, or by black rap singers. I once responded to a piece in the Guardian by Zoe Williams – of whom the word “inimitable” is quite apt – in which she had insisted that even when black rap singers sing lyrics calling for the killing of gays, it isn’t homophobia. It can’t be, she claimed, because blacks are a minority (say what?).
When I commented to her that it sure sounds like homophobia to this gay man, she replied that it may sound like it, but in fact it’s a cultural value imposed on blacks by whites. Black rap singers don’t hate gays; they just say they do because whites make them do so.
You couldn’t make it up, could you?
I have just checked the BBC on line News page to see the beeb take on the issue
It is published under the headline “Koran abuse report’may be wrong'”.The fact that the words “may be wrong” are within speech marks tells me all I don’t want to know about the Beebs attitude…it is evident that they want the allegations to be true.They cannot bring themselvee to suggest that the magazine actually may have lied.
The piece itself is very wishy washy and full of ifs buts and maybes.
I thought that Newsweek hadn’t categorically admitted that the story was wrong, but had suggested that the sources might be less watertight than at first thought.
Correct me if I’m wrong!
To be fair to the BBC they led with the correction. I expect that’s one of those cases where they are more or less ordered to do something by teh Foreign Office and the BBC high and mighty don’t say no.
On the more general topic of Islam, I want to applaud Terry (the “Mancunian Mouth”) Christian for his programme on ITV last night. For the first time ever I saw Muslims actually being challenged on their beliefs by a heavyweight debater – Richard Dawkins. Dawkins’ own position of atheism was philosophically shaky but it was wonderful to see Dawkins actually exposing various aspects of Islam.
Muslims are normally very careful to avoid appearing on programmes involving open debate.
I very much doubt this sort of programme could appear on either BBC or Channel 4 (aka “The Voice of Mecca”).
Channel 4’s Shariah TV was a travesty of real debate – a complete fix from beginning to end.
“When I commented to her that it sure sounds like homophobia to this gay man, she replied that it may sound like it, but in fact it’s a cultural value imposed on blacks by whites. Black rap singers don’t hate gays; they just say they do because whites make them do so.
You couldn’t make it up, could you?”
Indeed, you couldn’t. In other words, Zoe is arguing that blacks are too stupid to form their own prejudices for themselves. It is in fact clever whites that have to do it for them. Thus proving that the Left are just as guilty of the appalling racism that they accuse everyone else of.
Jon wrote:
‘I once responded to a piece in the Guardian by Zoe Williams – of whom the word “inimitable” is quite apt – in which she had insisted that even when black rap singers sing lyrics calling for the killing of gays, it isn’t homophobia. It can’t be, she claimed, because blacks are a minority (say what?).’
Indeed – blacks outrank gays, so the Left cannot condemn homophobia (awful word) if it’s blacks doing it.
One bit of the Left’s discrimination heirarchy that appears quite stable is that blacks outrank gays, but Muslims outrank blacks. Black slavery was more or less invented in the Middle East and still continues today, but the Left has nothing to say about this and prefers to focus on whites’ role in the slave trade two centuries ago.
The thing to remember is that whether something is racist or not depends above all on the race of the racist.
Similarly, whether something is bigotry against gay men or not depends on the prejudices of the bigot reporting on it.
Yes, the PC hierarchy is an interesting issue in itself.
I think it’s right to say that Muslims outrank Blacks and then Gays. But also Gays outrank Women. When did the Left last stage a demo in defence of women’s rights in the Middle East say?
Of course it hasn;t always been like this. There was a time when Blacks outranked Muslims and Women outranked Gays.
I think what one has to look at is the CCT Index. CCT is the “Capacity for Causing Trouble” – specifically trouble for the established order. So the Left gave scarcely a thought to Muslims when they were quiescent mill workers in the 1950s. Since some of their brethren started ramming jet aircrafts into commercial buildings in New York and into the Pentagon, they have moved right to the top of the charts!
OT
the BBC did play Newsweek’s weasel statement. Subconciously, I’m sure they find it acceptable because the voice is American. They didn’t use the words “lie” or “false”, though – they did use the mushy term “inaccurate” 😆
Newsweek’s MSM buddies will try to brush this one under the carpet.
The BBC reports I have seen were incredibly soft, why no talking heads giving Newsweek a bollocking?
The media’s attitude is clearly “oops! never mind.”
These “unnamed sources” at the Pentagon always seem to be bogus, yet the MSM happily believes them.
Funny stuff about the left’s hierarchy of victimization, and so true.
I’ve noticed that the HAL short-circuit phenom also appears when the left must deal with a person of the pigmented skin variety who espouses “right-wing” political views. The descent into outright racist comments about minority conservatives is breathtaking: “Uncle Tom” “Aunt Jemima”, “Flips” etc. being just the mildists ones.
Menwhile thye BBC continues to try to put some blame for the hundreds of deaths on Usbechistan on the US, because the US has a major base there.
And no mention of the fact that the one defendant in the gruesome Reading murder case who has appeared in court was holding a Koran.
If someone reported that Bibles were being flushed down toilets, I highly doubt that very many Christians would be upset.
However, claim that Korans are being flushed, and people die.
Religion of “Peace”. Pfft.
Monkey,
Bibles were used as toilet paper during the siege of the Church of the Nativity by Palestinian “freedom fighters” 3 years ago. They also peed and shat on the altar and stole a bunch of gold-plated religious artifacts.
Christians didn’t riot and kill people in protest. I also don’t remember Buddhists killing a lot of people over the destruction of the Buddha statues by the Taliban. Or Jews going violently ballistic when Palestinian freedom fighters destroyed Joseph’s Tomb.
Not that any of this would be noticed by al-Beeb.
Good news from Iraq?
“I’m sorry Dave, I just can’t report that”
Latest: Glowing Red eye new symbol for BBC Left Views 24.
David,
Re your CCT model, it’s either that which drives the Left or some sentimental version of it. The Left historically has slobbered emotionally all over murderous striking miners, Irish terrorists, blacks, gays, and now Muslims, dropping each in turn as they ceased to be electorally useful. I’d love to know who they’re going to be adopting en lumpen masse next. I reckon it will be feckless pensioners who don’t have a pension.
Pensioners, commandant? Surely you jest. They are excluded on the basis of having fought and suffered for King and Country (an unforgiveable sin), plus they are mostly white and of Christian background.
Ron Aitken might be more credible if he didn’t have his own political axe to grind.
Basil
Aitken declares his own position, then states facts and lets us judge.
The BBC does NOT declare its position. And certainly does not declare that a lot of its staff are active in leftie political parties, whereas Aitken was not politically active.
Susan,
Pensioners won’t be old soldiers in about 10 or 15 years’ time. Pensioners — skint ones — will be debt-loaded losers, with negative equity and mortgages higher than they were when originally taken out, because they’ve bought a new car every 3 or 4 years and added it to the mortgage.
They should be a fertile constituency for a party offering them a free pension funded by a further raid on the pensions of those who actually bothered to save for one.
I suspect that *that* sort of pensioner will make lefty politicians feel very emotional in about 15 years’ time.
Oh, I see now, commandant. I thought you were talking about the remnants of the Greatest Generation, but I see now that you are really referring to the impending torrents of aged members of the Peter Pan Generation. Yes, we have the same problem here, probably worse.
“Refinancing” your house to “take that vacation you’ve always wanted”, etc. is a huge business in the US right now. What it really means of course, is “wiping out your home equity.”
Everybody had to pay for the public temper tantrums of the Peter Pan Generation in the 60s and now we will have to pay, pay again for their adult diapers in dotage.
thedogsdanglybits (responding to Ken Kautsy):
“And who do you suggest Blair appoints to the post of ‘Communications Minister’?
Cut to scene in Downing Street, PM’s sofa.
“Blah blah blah. . . New Labour is just not caring enough . . . blah blah blah . . . where’s the real socialism . .. blah blah blah . . . Why can’t Gordon take over . . . blah blah blah . . . Andrew Marr is a beautifu Pagan God . . . blah blah blah . . . let the people pay forever . . . blah blah blah . . . blah”
No. Not anymore thanks. The preferred option is, of course, to privatise the BBC.
However, assumimg the UK, for now, maintains the publicly funded State Broadcaster, then obviously there would be no better people to run it than those with the actual mandate from the people (i.e. please read about responsible government).
Your alternative is to leave this massive information bureauctacy in the hands of the hard left; people with absolutely no mandate whatsover.
Even the Conservative Party, when ever they decide to wake up – which is a political organisation with a signicant level of community support – would prefer New Labour to effectively run this orgaisation than the present farcical situation.
New Labour and the Conservatives notionally reflect closing on 70 percent of the community. Let the people have back their own broadcaster; after all – they’re the ones who are paying for it.