Take a look at this new blog, The American Expatriate. The author, Scott Callahan, is what it says on the box. He says his primary aim “is to document and counter the misinformation about America that regularly flows forth from the British media.”
Of interest to Beeb-watchers is this post about how the BBC has changed its tune about the release of John Kerry’s military records.
But the one I really liked was this one, about the nomination of Christopher Cox to the Securities & Exchange Commission. I like it for its textual analysis:
Note the constant use of the passive tense. The SEC “is expected to…” Expected by who? The BBC doesn’t say. Doubts have been raised. Who has these doubts? The BBC doesn’t say. Mr. Cox is “seen as” close to the finance industry. Seen by who? The BBC doesn’t say. Even when the passive voice is abandoned, the actors are vague and unknown. Anonymous “experts” say this and “some commentators” say that. Hell, search the internet long enough and you can find “some commentator” saying virtually anything.
And I like it because it provides a comparator:
…compare this article with the Beeb’s piece on previous SEC head William Donaldson when he took over in 2003. Note how almost the entire piece is given over to Donaldson’s own words, while in this recent piece quotations from Cox are comprised of a single, 6 word sentence fragment.
Hey, I wanna know! How come your bbc doesn’t tell us stuff like this? Maybe it’s on account of their reporters are too stuck up to learn local languages and talk to real people: Here it is:
The issue of land sales to Jews is one of the most disturbing indications of what the Palestinian Authority’s true goals are in its dealings with Israel. When the PA was first established in 1994, one of the first laws “promulgated” by then “justice” minister Freih Abu Meddin was to make the selling of land to Jews a capital offense. In short order, Arab land dealers started showing up DEAD in dumpsters in Ramallah and Jericho. Two were MURDERED in Jerusalem. Dozens of other Jerusalemites underwent TORTURE at the hands of the PA militias.
The beeb does this all the time. Their favourite is “but critics say…[insert whatever beeboid minority lefty comment you choose]”. In most cases we never hear who this ‘critc’ is.
Here’s a thought for you. does the British broadcasting corporation have any duty to be patriotic?
Something that really annoyed me this morning on the R4 Today prog was how Sarah Montague [for I think it was she] harrangued on and on about the UK giving up it’s rebate because no other member state [of the EU] supports the rebate. So what?
If this is the BRITISH Broadcasting Corporation, lets have a little Britishness in tone. If they want to be the European or World Broadcasting Corporation, fine, but let them get their income from outside the UK.
This is what annoys me about the beeb – they are the ‘reds under the bed’ – traitors to their own country.
And another thing. Every other week, some lefty/NGO/human rights agency issues some report which criticises the UK law in some way or another, gets plenty airtime on the Beeb news and I am fed up with it. The UK has/used to have a sovereign parliament that makes laws for us and if we don’t like it we vote the current lot out and a new bunch in.
Sometimes I feel like I’m watching not BBC News but ‘Human Rights Watch News’ of ‘Lefty Campaigner News’ for theat is how some days it comes across.
I need to get out/watch Sky more…..
Miam,
You need to right to cease funding it.
miam
Socialists have captured the culture in Britain because Conservatives are too timid to stand up to left wing BS and slap down lefty nonsence wherever it rears its ugly head. Lord Tebbitt calls a spade a spade but I cant think of any others. Conservatives richly deserve to be bossed about by un-pretty Lesbians, enviromentalists and smelly tossers wearing wristbands to promote a cause. Dont even get me started on that duo of tinkers Geldoff and Bonio, I just wonder when the appauling Stingo will stick his oar in.
We really are being patronised by the B Team of washed up middle age whack offs.
If this is the BRITISH Broadcasting Corporation, lets have a little Britishness in tone. If they want to be the European or World Broadcasting Corporation, fine, but let them get their income from outside the UK.
This is what annoys me about the beeb – they are the ‘reds under the bed’ – traitors to their own country.
I could kiss you Miam ;o)
The pathetic thing is seeing David Davis try to position himself to be as ‘Conservative’ as the BBC will permit him to be. Anything less than a platform to ‘Take back the BBC for the British people’ will leave whoever leads the Tory Party spitting in the wind.
Just imagine what an excellent Conservative Party political broadcast there is waiting to be made setting out the entrenched anti-Tory BBC bias and how subversives must be purged to reclaim the BBC from the post-Marxist Thought Police.
British Democracy simply can’t take much more of the Tories and sincere democrats ducking this key issue.
Hey, thanks for the link! I’ve bookmarked the site, and jumped right in :).
Hal: “Anything less than a platform to ‘Take back the BBC for the British people’ will leave whoever leads the Tory Party spitting in the wind.”
Right on Hal.(Either your “platform” or privatise the behemoth – as we all know, the Conservatives are too damn lazy to regulate anything)
“British Democracy” is a contradiction in terms!
There should not be a British Broadcasting Corp, but maybe an OBC, Objective Broadcasting Corp!
How come they don’t have stories like this one from the Wall Street Journal?
A French court last week found three writers for Le Monde, as well as the newspaper’s publisher, guilty of “racist defamation” against Israel and the Jewish people. In a groundbreaking decision, the Versailles court of appeal ruled that a comment piece published in Le Monde in 2002, “Israel-Palestine: The Cancer,” had whipped up anti-Semitic opinion.
The writers of the article, Edgar Morin (a well-known sociologist), Daniele Sallenave (a senior lecturer at Nanterre University) and Sami Nair (a member of the European parliament), as well as Le Monde’s publisher, Jean-Marie Colombani, were ordered to pay symbolic damages of one euro to a human-rights group and to the Franco-Israeli association. Le Monde was also ordered to publish a condemnation of the article, which it has yet to do.
The real question is “what do we need the BBC for”?
Broadcasting? Nope, anyone (like Sky, or ITV) can broadcast on the available infrastructure/satellite/cable/whatever.
Programme making? Well, nope, because anyone can make programmes and sell them to the highest bidder.
Objective unbiased news? Well yes, but the BBC fails so badly on this score (by objective measure) that it needs to be divested of this power, maybe public service news should be run by a mix of Sky, C4, ITN and so on.
That does leave local radio as a valuable public service….
Local BBC radio should not survive either. Fewer people use it, so why should the rest of us support it ? If there is any real demand, let the market support it.
And anything run by the BBC will continue to be grossly inefficient – because they are spending other people’s money.
D
Two other points:
The BBC is supposed to provide a more intellectually challenging and educational output than that provided by private broadcasters, for the greater public good. Call me a chattering class up his own a*se north london elitist but I think it’s fair to say that the market is demanding ever more moronic entertainment and contributing to the burgeoning underclass of the irredeemably stupid. Whether the BBC is much improvement is a different matter….
Far more successfully, the BBC provides a service in giving Britain a public profile and international respect far in excess of our current economic and military power. I can’t think of another national broadcaster which is so synonymous worldwide with its home nation and impeccable standards of quality (even if that might not actually be 100% accurate these days).
As it goes we remain one of the biggest economies (5th – 7th by most measures) in the world and (at least until the next round of cuts) one of the most capable military powers.
Cockney
You are right. I’m just amazed people think that the quality of public service programmes bought with public money is uniquely better because the talented people are employed by the BBC.
Innovative and intellectually challenging programmes and content are made by people who aren’t employed by the BBC (shock). The idea of spreading the licence fee around a bit is a great one which instantly takes the whip hand back to the people as consumers (as the Government become broadcasting shoppers) rather than the 100% -> BBC “choice” for our telly tax at the moment.
I too listen to the Today programme, but this morning’s interview with Brown (at least when my wife’s hairdryer wasn’t on) was unchallenging on the serious problem of 3rd world debt. In the very first question Naughtie’s question was ignored and Brown proceeded to deliver a political broadcast on another scheme… uninterrupted by his “Labour colleague” (remember the ‘we’ quote) Naughtie. Actually Brown interrupts Naughtie at one point, who lets Brown rattle on for ages and ages and ages and ages saying, softly, “Yes … right …. so …. um …. yes …”
Someone should keep an ‘interruption’ index for Lab/Con/LibDem interviews by Today, and question:answer proportions between interviewers and interviewees. I think the figures would be startling.
Any volunteers?
Andrew, sure but from my travels (and I appreciate that there’s no quantitative way of measuring such things) we’re probably the second most ubiquitous nation in terms of cultural reach, and we prompt less hostility than the first. I think this is a positive thing.
Obviously that’s partly the language and partly a colonial hangover but the BBC (to the extent that it is separable from the above) also plays a big part.
D
I’ve no probs whasoever and would probably prefer decent BBC programming to be commissioned from private producers. My point was that a private broadcaster wouldn’t commission decent programs in the first place when there’s more advertising revenue in Kirsty’s Home Videos.
Re BBC anti american conditioning; After the England football team had defeated Columbia 3-2 at Giants stadium 31st May although the Beeb leaves precious little time for post match analysis Gary Linacre (ever smiling)had the time to introduce an item during the match round up. “I thought you might like to listen to this” What followed was an American commentary on England’s goals. Apart from describing Beckham as the world’s most famous player, there was nothing remarkable (apart from the accent) that one wouldn’t hear from any sports feed. On being asked by Gary “What do you think of that then?”, Alan Hansen ever the professional passed the parcel to co panellist Ian Wright, who to give him credit looked suitably embarrased, shrugged his shoulders after affecting his TransAtlantic(/South London) voice “Yeah it just doesn’t sound right with the Yankee accent does it?” It recalled another Gary comment at the time of the Bush UK visit. His opening words to the live broadcast from Cardiff of the Wales / Russia qualifier were ” Well George W Bush doesn’t know where Wales is – but we do – we’re at the Millenium Stadium to see……” bla, bla. At the time I assumed that this was a blokish ‘I know what you’re thinking’effort to show the Beeb bosses that Gary was (politically)onside, but the Columbia item was of a different order. Presumably in watching the 2nd half of a match which contained not a little drama (3/2) with plenty of first time England appearances and around 10 minutes of summary time with his guests Gary ;-
1) didn’t spend his time, when there was more than enough content, listening to other media feeds,
2) didn’t influence his Producer to feature the (lame)item – as there was more than enough relevant, legitimate
football related subjects in the limited timeframe.
I presume that this must of been a premeditated soupcon planned by the producer for our amusement (Football- Yanks – Aaah!).
On a similar theme and not at all amusing check this out:
http://spaces.msn.com/members/ManchesterBuccaneers/
Disgraceful anti American anti capitalist etc etc etc
petern – london?
There is another. T’was not me.
Cockney
You cultural imperialist.
In any case, so what? I object to having what is mine taken from me by the BBC simply to buy the state’s permission to own a TV.
The merits of the BBC can be bandied around the universe for ever more, but no argument can dispute the basic fact that the way it is funded is deeply, morally wrong.
As it goes we remain one of the biggest economies (5th – 7th by most measures) in the world and (at least until the next round of cuts) one of the most capable military powers.
Achieved by not investing in infrastructure to go into the future with, and by having ‘sold off the family jewels’ (all the public services that were privatised during the Thatcher years). Our real wealth is very much more down the scale than that.
Yesterday (13.06.05)morning on “Today” John Humphreys interviewed a former New York prison official on the theme “prison doesn’t work”. The guy said that the proof of this was that 60% of prisoners re-offended after release and both he and JH chatted about alternatives to prison being more effective. At no time were the details of any alternatives mentioned and certainly no reference to the re-offending rates of such alternatives. JH particularly constantly kept repeating the “prison doesn’t work” mantra. My conclusion – it was a great opportunity to combine two of the beeb’s constant refrains….let’s knock the law and order lobby and also take yet another swipe at the USA……….a classic “soft” JH interview where a very easy ride is given to anyone who shares his views (….for further examples just listen to any JH interview with George Monbiot..)
The bbc is like the monarchy. You have to pay for useless pomposity whether you want it or not.