…or so hits to go. 1,000,000 will happen while I am asleep Sydney time, so preemptively, congratulations and thanks to the indefatigable Natalie for all of her hard work in “keeping the bastards honest”.*
*Australian political slang (see Don Chipp if you are interested).
PS Remember to vote – the good guys are gaining ground!
the hatred the bbc has for america is something to behold.
The hatred the BBC has for the white working class is even more shocking!
Watch this Newswatch article below about the disparity in reporting of racist murders against whites.
This woman, Fran Unsworth, is supposed to be in charge of news, and she doubted whether the horrific murder of the white teenager Kriss Donald was was racially motivated!!! Truly shocking and repulsive!!
Is there no end to the blatant distortions that we have to suffer at the hands of the BBC!!?
http://news.bbc.co.uk/nolavconsole/shared/player/vid100.stm?clippos=0&clipurl=http://news.bbc.co.uk/media/avdb/news_web/video/9012da68002d768/bb/09012da68002d97c_16x9_bb!asx&title=NewsWatch%202%20December%202005&wintype=200&rhs=http://news.bbc.co.uk/nolavconsole/ukfs_news/hi/newsid_4490000/newsid_4499400/bb_wm_4499440.stm&cs=news&fsname=bb_wm_fs&bw=bb
Leftism is a mental illness. They truly beleive in the racist concept of identity groups the members of which can do no wrong.
Congratulations to Natalie, Andrew and the rest of the team on the million! Well done! Keep going – I sense the site may just be beginning to make a bit of a difference. They know we’re out here, and it spooks them…..
I got a screenie 🙂
Sarah
Fran Unsworth is beyond cretinous. Her words demonstrate that she is making up excuses as and when the BBC is caught out. One reason given for Kriss Donald’s murder not receiving the prominence that Anthony Walker’s is that Kriss Donald was murdered during the weekend! Does she seriously expect people to believe that bullshit?!
OT
Man guilty of City banker murder
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/london/4524810.stm
My advice to the murderer when he gets to prison is: ‘campaign’ against violence & write a couple of childrens books. Before you know it, you be nominated for the Nobel peace prize and have the Beeboids on side for an early release….
What a world.
Pete – reasoned comments from you as always!
“We could have done more” she said.
“I have some sympathy” – in response to whether they got it wrong.
“Scottish blindness” – The BBC is famously backwards at dealing with news stories outside London/England.
It’s clear she’s admitting a mistake was made.
But she’s also right that the Anthony Walker story was “more interesting” from a news perspective. That is regardless of race.
I could only stand to listen to Ms. UnctiousWorth for about 3/4s of the way through. Then I had to click off — the woman is just so blatantly lying through her teeth. She’s as fake as a 7 dollar-bill. British folks, I truly pity you, for having to pay big bucks to keep something like this in regular employment.
I have never heard such a pack of flimsy excuses in my life. Whoever wrote her PR “talking points” should be fired for incompetence.
Just admit that you screwed up and resolve to do better. Short simple and sweet.
Iraqis are voting in massive numbers in a democratic election today. I just posted this on the BBC board and dont expect it to be published by their ‘moderators’/censors :
”A great day for the brave Iraqis and a significant victory for the American administration. Both parties have been responsible for setting the foundations for the first democratic election Iraq has seen in generations. Shame on those who have doubted this project from the beginning and who have done everything in their power to undermine it, the BBC in particular.”
Everyone interested in protesting against the disgraceful manner in which the BBC have reported events in from the very beginning should immediately be posting on the BBC message boards. In the meantime, congratulations to the Iraqi people and to George Bush for seeing this through.
“The woman is just so blatantly lying through her teeth.” Really? IS that a fact, your opinion or what?
“Everyone interested in protesting against the disgraceful manner in which the BBC have reported events in from the very beginning should immediately be posting on the BBC message boards.”
Strange how that anti-Iraq war BBC has open forums for people to air their views.
Or do you think anti-Iraq war moderators are taking these comments out?
How deluded.
Typical posting on the BBC HYS:
“A great day for Iraq!!!! Freedom and end of dictatorship!!! End of Baathest!!!! many thanks to Bush and Blair..well done to Iraqies, Arabs, Kurds, Turkmans and Christians
Farhad Shikak Hawlery, London ”
Another example of BBC bias…?
Er…..
Dan
The BBC do censor comments out..the reason why we’re nearing 1000000 hits here at Biased BBC. Their forums are neither open nor moderated impartially – you must be new here, it’s a private joke on this site that people’s intelligent comments never get posted.
By the way, did you hear? The Iraq war WAS justified. Millions of Iraqis voted today in a genuine democratic election. Seems Iraqis kinda like this Bush guy.
Must make ya mad, Dan…
Dan – “But she’s also right that the Anthony Walker story was “more interesting” from a news perspective. That is regardless of race.”
Well, not for a zombie like you maybe, but to any normal sentient being who’s critical facilities are still intact, would find the kidnapping of a fifteen year old child who was beaten, kicked, stabbed sixteen times, sodomized with an iron bar and then set on fire – whilst still alive, to be sort of newsworth, and to put it in your terms rather. “interesting”.
Dan,
When you work in the real world and have to make profits and please people for your money you can spot bu11$h1tt3r$.
“Posting” Macht Frei.
> Or do you think anti-Iraq war moderators are taking these comments out?
We do.
Why don’t you give it a try? Post 2 comments. Maybe you won’t think we’re deluded when you play your own game of “moonbat bingo”.
What proof do you have that they are not moderated impartially? Any commissioned studies? Independent analysis? Or just gut feeling?
My trawl of the comments section revels scores and scores of pro-war, pro-election comments.
And as for the war… the debate about whether the war was justified or not is just that, a debate. And I want a BBC – and in fact a media – that reports that debate. I feel it does.
BBBC Admins.
Congrats on the Million++. Keep up the good work even if it means erasing my odd “sod-em sonnet”.
😉
Again I ask for proof of anti-YOUR VIEW moderators.
It’s also rather sad that posts here descend to the level of base insult and bitterness within moments.
I’ve only posted here a handful of times and I’ve already been called a zombie.
To be fair, I did judge some of these posted comments deluded.
But I’d love to see proof of this pro-Arab conspiracy that many here seem to think is running at the BBC.
Whatever Dan, I think the last 3 years have proved the poor quality of the BBC. We have had directors kicked out, a BBC journalist doctoring his notes to support an anti-Blair/ anti-Bush stance, rapidly declining ratings and a rising opposition to the license fee. We’ve had the BBC switched off during the military campaign by HM armed forces, we’ve had journalists weeping over terrorists like Arafat and the BBC getting kicked out of Israel.
If you want a media that reports the debate, stay well away from the BBC.
Let’s be clear:
One journalist weeping over Arafat – and she was later admonished, albeit slowly and reluctantly.
One DG and one chairman resigned. They were not kicked out.
One journalist who did not have notes and later resigned. I don’t recall him doctoring notes.
Declining ratings? All terrestrial channels are decling in the multichannel world.
Rising opposition to the licence fee? Has that been quantified? My own
experience supports your view, but in the subscription world, it’s hardly surprising.
As for HM armed forces switching off the BBC and the BBC getting kicked out of Israel. Well, context is everything. I don’t know the details and I’m confident you don’t either.
You can take those events as proof that your view of the world is correct or – like journalists should do – look at whether there is another side to the story.
Dan
The journalist was never admonished and is still employed by the BBC.
The directors resigned when Hutton found the BBC had effectively been dishonest in its reporting over the Iraq dossier.
Gilligan doctored his notes to include the words ‘sexed up’.
BBC’s ratings are declining rapidly as a result of new competition, especially SKY. Without the funding of a license fee, the BBC would cease to be financially viable.
No there is no context – the BBC was switched off by the armed forces and the BBC was kicked out of Israel. They are known as FACTS, Dan.
You are the weakest link.
Back to your BBC paymasters, who lost big time today in Iraq.
Dan
Working as a journalist, I fairly often find myself writing up stories that also run on the BBC. I can write the BBC angle pretty well in my sleep – no thought required really, once one’s got all the unexamined assumptions in place. The BBC always takes the most simplistically Lefty line, heavily larded with a reflexive anti-ameriocanism. This makes for very thin and tedious journalism, but it does seem to make folks at the BBC feel good about themselves, which is the main thing. Unfortunately I have to pay for their self-indulgence, and I rather resent it. As do an increasing number of other people, it seems.
Again – thanks for the level headed comments. Sigh
As for HM armed forces switching off the BBC and the BBC getting kicked out of Israel. Well, context is everything. I don’t know the details and I’m confident you don’t either.
Okay Dan, HMS Ark Royal was on station in The Persian Gulf during The Iraq War and the crew was so irritated at being patronised by the sneering contempt of the BBC Gliterati that they asked the Captain to switch the feed on their TV units to SkyTV.
That was the fact of the matter. I read about it, heard it reported, and had it confirmed by my cousin who was in the crew of HMS Ark Royal at that time
And a merry Christmas to you too.
Dan, I have even found you a link to read
http://www.command-post.org/archives/004604.html
Dan,
Pity about your way-off-the-mark criticism.
Sigh.
Poor Dan, so depressed at how facts get in the way
Sigh
Rick – thanks for the explainer.
But, c’mon is that an argument for BBC bias? I’ve no doubt that military personnel are/were unhappy about a media which automatically does not take its side as opposed to waving the patriotic flag, a la American news channels.
The Armed Forces do an incredibly difficult job at the behest of political leaders without ever questioning their motives.
But surely a media which questions the motives of those leaders – as all media should do – is not automatically denigrating the work of the armed forces?
Ric/Ted,
Funny how your facts seem to be open to interpretation!
And that’s the heart of it, isn’t it? You don’t like a media that questions the world as it is presented and doesn’t necessarily report the “facts” of the world as you see them.
You’d have to be pretty narrow minded to believe there is a world where facts are simply that.
A man kills a second man – is a fact in language.
Is he a murderer?
A man kills a second because he is a soldier fighting in a war? – Is he then justified?
What happens if that “soldier” is in fact a member of a paramilitary organisation? Is he a murderer, soldier, defender of a way of life?
The world is full of facts Ric/Ted. But all of them are open to investigation.
Dan
Media organisations are there to report verified facts, not to provide opinions. The former is journalism, the latter is something else. The BBC do not report all the verified facts and do not let viewers form their own opinions. 1,000,000 posts can’t be all wrong.
There is nothing wrong in questioning people’s motives as long as it is based on quality research and verified facts. What we see from the BBC is no facts, the omission of relevant facts, the addition of irrelevant facts, poor research and poor editing with a persistent anti-US bias. That has been proved time and time again on this blog and others.
Phil, You say you are a journalist. For whom?
The BBC enjoys thousands of journos, and yet you say they “always takes the most simplistically Lefty line, heavily larded with a reflexive anti-ameriocanism”.
Do they receive special training for this? Is it a conspiracy? Is it subconscious?
Are there no American loving, pro Israeli, right wing journalists at the BBC who work hard to ensure objectivity?
Dan, since your IP address is from the BBC staff space, perhaps you’d care to tell us about your employment first…
But, c’mon is that an argument for BBC bias? I’ve no doubt that military personnel are/were unhappy about a media which automatically does not take its side as opposed to waving the patriotic flag, a la American news channels.
Sorry Dan I don’t understand your point above. I don’t know about US Channels since i cannot receive them here but I was unaware that US Networks provided “News” – when I lived in the US they were more interested in Hollywood than Moscow and amazingly insular.
We do have a tendency to judge the BBC against the standard of what it was – I think you will find when you spend more time with British military personnel that they find US “Yankee Doodle Dandy” stuff very funny………….they do not expect however to listen to Lord Haw Haw on BBC transmitters.
Are there no American loving, pro Israeli, right wing journalists at the BBC who work hard to ensure objectivity?
Dan | 15.12.05 – 6:05 pm | #
Come on Dan, you know full well that it is the editorial desk which sets the stories, edits the feed, and plays back the script to the journalist in the field.
You know that the BBC staff in Baghdad are inside the Green Zone and Iraqi stringers are used for news stories which are then written up in London and played back to the journalist for a voice.
Just as Time Magazine takes feed from bureax around the world and then does a New Jersey rewrite to get a US perspective on each report.
But she’s also right that the Anthony Walker story was “more interesting” from a news perspective. That is regardless of race.
Dan | 15.12.05 – 4:47 pm
Why?
Dan,
O/T – Katrina reprise..
“Statistics released by the Louisiana Department of Health and Hospitals suggest that fewer than half of the victims of Hurricane Katrina were black, and that whites died at the highest rate of all races in New Orleans.”
Got that?
http://www.cnsnews.com/ViewNation.asp?Page=Nationarchive200512NAT20051214b.html
Dan:
Can you explain why it is that the only people ever to show up here to defend the BBC are either Guardian-reading lefties, or BBC employees, or, more commonly, both?
The incestuous relationship between The Guardian and the BBC is well documented.
As my fellow Biased-BBC commenters so eloquently put it, the BBC is the broadcast version of The Guardian.
Lest we forget, HMS Ark Royal didn’t turn off the BBC feed because they were upset about tone, nuance, interpreation, or any other Lefty weasel words. They turned it off after the BBC claimed – based on evidence that they didn’t reveal then or at any time since – that a collision between two of their helicopters occurred due to ‘bad maintenance’.
In other words, in time of war, and with the bodies still warm, the BBC slandered the Royal Navy. This is what the BBC calls not waving the patritoic flag.
Yep! Also confirmed by two pilots I was chatting too after their return when they were helping my old unit with their pre Iraq deployment training last year.
Remember the Falklands anyone? Had H Jones VC lived he was all for suing the Beeb for putting his mens’ lives at risk by telling the Argies what was going on! How little things have changed…..
“The woman is just so blatantly lying through her teeth.” Really? IS that a fact, your opinion or what?
Yes, “Dan”, that’s an opinion (but since you are a BBC employee, I understand your confusion over the definition of the word)– an opinion which I formed by observing Ms. Unsworth’s obviously uncomfortable demeanor, much umming-and-awwing, and much shifting of eyes whenever she was fielding an especially pointed question, especially the one about the Beeb’s having an agenda to de-emphasize non-white attacks on whites.
I’m entitled to express my opinion here — at least I don’t put them in supposedly “objective” news articles and try to pass them off as “impartial.”
Dan “It’s also rather sad that posts here descend to the level of base insult and bitterness within moments.”
When having to confront typical liberaloid, scattershot, ignore or ignorant of the facts, coverall approach to debating, then base or emotionally driven p.o.v are axiomatic and perfectly justified.
Now seeing how you ignored my point, and instead perfered to whine, I shall repeat the Kriss Donald case again, just to make sure it registers with you!
– A child was kidnapped, beaten, tortured, sexually abused with an iron bar, then dumped on waste-ground and set on fire; His body was so badly mutilated that the people who discovered his corpse thought it was the remains of a dead dog.
This heinous crime was inflicted on this child for no other reason than because he was white. Now you, the liberal aristocracies cocooned within their enclaves, revolting BBC apparatchiks like Fran Unsworth, don’t think that any of this newsworthy, or “interesting”. I say you’re wrong!
What the…where did “Dan” go? So full of himself, rebutting posters left, right and centre, then poof! Into thin air.
Since, “Dan”, you’re probably still lurking deep in your lair in White City, I’d be interested in you backing up your comment about Anthony Walker’s murder being “more interesting” than Kriss Donald’s?
What are your standards of comparison, “Dan”?
Ok Dan, let’s humour you and imagine that many of the gripes on this site aren’t borne out by the facts. Now, just to ‘balance’ things, will YOU provide us with however-many-hundred-thousand-it-is versions of Guardianistas’ complaints about BBC bias, ie from THEIR point-of-view? Tell us about the thousands of times the BBC have given bias that is right-wing, pro-Israeli, anti-PLO, anti-EU, pro-USA, anti-NHS, anti-multiculturalism, sceptical-of-islam etc etc…
“But, c’mon is that an argument for BBC bias? I’ve no doubt that military personnel are/were unhappy about a media which automatically does not take its side as opposed to waving the patriotic flag, a la American news channels”
Dan, please name those news channels. I live in the USA and I sure can’t. Our MSM pushes defeatism every bit as hard as the BBC. Of course we do have Fox and Talk Radio to counter them….
OT:
James Bartholemew has caught the BBC at it again:
BBC tries to imply that private hospitals have equally low standards of cleanliness as NHS ones.
I don’t think anyone should be surprised that left-wingers love the BBC and never see any signs of bias.
They see it as one of our “great institutions”, alongside the NHS.
Just like the NHS, the BBC exists to institutionalise welfarism.
Actually the whole report is meaningless since the results are banded – private hospitals are focused factories compared with NHS general hospitals and are not comparable.
If you break down these figures by postcode you get a better picture ie. Southern England has a high cost of living and low wages for cleaners because of outsourcing – so you get high turnover, illegals, and poor quality.
What matters is geography
Roxana:
“Of course we do have Fox and Talk Radio to counter them….”
Have a shufti at the following and find something very wrong.
http://www.rogerlsimon.com/mt-archives/2005/12/fox_news_fair_a.php
As long as Fox News still have people like Ann Coulter, Steve Emerson and Tom Tancredo on I’m not going to worry about the “Sheik”.