It’s Easter time, when the BBC gear up to cover the annual ritual that means so much to so many of the faithful – the annual conference of the National Union of Teachers.
This year, those teachers who want a national strike against Government education policy are being described on Radio Four as ‘committed activists’. Way back in December 2001, when I searched the BBC News website for occurrences of the phrase ‘far-left’ and ‘far-right’, the NUT, with its ‘various far-left groups’ was one of only five mentions of a British far-left.
The other four were in a Scritti Politti review, a story about Peter Hitchens having been a youthful far-leftist (how come we never hear that about Andrew Marr – or indeed any of the vast number of other BBC journalists to which it would apply ?), a story that the Animal Liberation Front had both far-left and far-right members, and a Peter Tatchell profile.
There were 32 stories about the British ‘far-right’ – of which no less than 11 involved the Tory party.
The overall figures were – ‘far-left’ 46 stories, ‘far-right’ 338. I repeated the search in August 2002 – 66 far-left, 502 far-right.
And one minute ago – Fascinatingly 97 far-left, 420 far-right. Is this an indication that the BBC is now reporting at a 1/4 ratio rather than 1/8, or does the BBC’s search engine needs its indexing looking at ? Fortunately I kept all the 502 search results, but further analysis will have to wait till I have more time.
Not needed – try the ‘advanced search’ option and drop down the date listboxes, while leaving the range at 1997-2006. You still get 97 far-left stories, while the far-right feature in a staggering 1,550. Looks like the ratio is 1/15. Anyone using BBC search is advised to use the advanced option.
If, like most human attributes, political views were subject to a normal distribution about a mean, you might expect far-left and far-right views to have a pretty equal distribution. Unless, of course, there’s bias in the measurement. The kind of bias, say, that doesn’t consider the Socialist Workers Party, who support the Iraqi ‘resistance’ while simultaneously controlling the ‘anti-war’ movement, to be far-left. After all, half their college friends were in it.
ON TOPIC
…if you try Marxist, Trotskyite and Communist to your search terms, you’ll find about 1400 more.
reith
Palast did not hide his enthusiasm for Chavez. We all saw that just a few nights ago.
Once more, reith, you display a kneejerk tendency to defend the indefensible.
And Andrew Neil does not hide his all of his strong opinions. First and foremost he likes journalistic truth, he dislikes the sort of cant you specialise in. He also likes the central values that Scottish philosphers have developed – like hard work, the capitalist system of free enterprise. This shines through clearly in his broadcasting. Just like Palast’s leftie anti-Bush spleen shines through in his.
Trust you to leap to the defence of Palast. You always sound as though you are well on his side of the divide.
I wonder why Andrew Neil springs to john reith’s mind as an exemlpar.
Almost the only BBC presenter whom we know to be non-statist. Almost the only presenter whose opinions could appear to reith to be “biased”? What was it Jeff Randall said about reith & his chums?
well dumbcisco and will, how wrong you are.
I am firmly in the Neil camp. But i dispute that his opinions ‘shine through’. His questions are impeccable.
And on and on about Chernobyl – this time it’s the 6:00 news on Radio 4 – last night it was BBC 24. No mention, of course, that this was a Soviet style piece of crap (ill-designed and badly controlled) which melted down. It’s just the BBC helping its Green and CND pals. Mind you CND likes the idea of nuclear power in Iran – I wonder why: nothing to do with my enemy’s (=USA) enemy is my friend by any chance?
This atrocity is described by Reuters using the word terrorists only as part of a quote.
http://www.nysun.com/article/31185
Beheading someone in front of primary school kids can only be intended to cause terror. There is no other word that fits. Yet the news agency steadfastly avoids the T word.
No sign of this atrocity being reported by the BBC. They usually like reporting deaths from Iraq.
But the BBC is also refusing to use the T word except in quotes in this report about the round-up of suspects who targetted churches and tourists. Is that legitimate “insurgency” or “militancy” – or is it terrorism plain and simple. Reuters, AP and the BBC use weasel language all the time like this.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/middle_east/4922658.stm
Scum.
reith
the issue is not Andrew Neil – whose opinions do come through, whatever you say. He does not attack socialists more fiercely than wet Tories, he shows genuine balance of approach – but his views are clear to anyone but you.
The issue here is the BBC using a total polemicist like Palast. Or quoting with approval a total polemicist like Juan Cole.
reith
I expect you totally approve the BBC’s avoidance of the T word as well. Even when it involves the killing of children – like the incident of a crowd of scores of kids on Baghdad being deliberately killed and maimed by Iraqi terrorists. You will no doubt see them as something other than terrorists. Or – if you don’t agree with the weasel words of the BBC, how come you don’t try criticising them ?
Answer – because you simply have a kneejerk reaction to any criticism of the BBC.
I think any act of violence deliberately directed at women, children and other non-combatants for political motives is terrorism. Simple as that. I DO NOT believe in the spurious moral relatavism that is encapsulated in the slogan ‘one man’s freedom fighter is another man’s terrorist …or vice versa.’I think the word terrorism should be used to describe such acts. But I don’t think it is useful or helpful to devalue the currency by simply branding individuals or groups as terrorists, especially where the truth is more nuanced. To do so is to reduce the significance and the impact of the word properly applied. Look what’s happened to the word ‘fascist’ since the Left started applying it willy-nilly. Words are precious.
Did the BBC report that the Tel Aviv bomber followed the usual Palestinian practice of soaking the nails and ball bearings that were the shrapnel for his bomb in rat poison, an anti-coagulant – to ensure that some of victims bled to death before they could receive medical attention ? Have they ever reported that ?
No – they would rather have a long belleding-heart interview with the terrorist’s mother. Longer than any interview broadcast of any of the relatives of the victims – some of whome could have literally bled to death through the use of rat poison.
And still the BBC refuses to use the T word to describe this sort of atrocity.
reith
You appear to defend the BBC’s avoidance of the T word in describing the sort of murders that happened in Tel Aviv. You do not criticise the BBC policy and practice on this.
No surprise there.
This possible appointment as White House Press Secretary would sort out a few problems :
http://gopandthecity.blogspot.com/2006/04/bauer-replaces-mcclellan-as-press.html
Dumbcisco
Can you read? The Tel Aviv bombing would fit my definition of terrorism absolutely….women and children deliberately targeted…etc.
Here is Denis Murray’s report on the Omagh bombing in 1998. No T word …and stronger for it:
“There should have been a carnival here, instead there was carnage. Saturday afternoon shoppers here because it was safe, crowded together away from a bomb scare. Instead the bomb was in their midst.
It killed fourteen women and three young girls…
It killed five men and four young boys…three of them came from County Donegal, another was a 12 year old boy from Madrid, they were all friends on an exchange scheme.
It killed three generations of one family…a 65 year old grandmother, her pregnant 30 year old daughter and her 18 month old daughter.
A litany of the dead…of the slaughtered innocents.”
reith
We are not discussing YOUR view so much as the BBC POLICY.
You still fail to criticise the BBC policy.
The Omagh text you quote is irrelevant, it was about the victims. Not about the perpetrators.
Try sticking to the issue – how the BBC describes atrocities like Tel Aviv. Do you think they should be criticised for unfailingly avoiding using the T word except when quoting someone else ?
Or do you agree with the BBC policy ? That is a question that admits only two possible answers – YES or NO. It does not admit your kind of ducking the issue.
Absent any reply to the contrary, I believe you SUPPORT and do not criticise the BBC policy and usage. And why do I believe this ? Because you come across as a complete shill for the BBC.
John Reith
I think that in fact it is IMPOSSIBLE for any honest correspondant to be un bias. This was always the wrong thing to expect from any honest person. Only a dishonest organisation like the BBC would claim to do this. Only a dangerous political idealology like socialism would force it into any broadcasters mandate.
This site does not just show the Labour party political bias running though the BBCs entire content, but also shows how subtle bias of any type can be.
If the BBC had a longterm policy of splitting journalistic opinion along roughly political lines, and letting their paying customers decide what they like. This whole problem would not exsist at all. Neither would the Labour party or the BBC in its present form.
I know as well as you should do, the BBC as part of the political establishment is not able to do this. It is not in the BBCs or its political allies interests to even discuss it.
In my 46 years experience there never has been a credible Tory for long on the BBC,not even on interview. Anyone proposing small accountable goverment, and human freedom, with personal resposibility under universal justice, is simply marginalised and then ignored.
Do you think that if a political organisation seriously wanted to end the states only force-funded broadcasting monopoly, the proposal would be given any unbias reporting or in fact any reporting at all?
OF cause not. The BBC IS the product of authoratarian unaccountable big goverment,and the BBCs overblown ego and wages, depend on its continuation.
Does yours as well? If not stop defending the indefenceable, you just make yourself sound stupid and nieve.
If the BBC is not politicaly bias why is it only non Labour Party supporters that complain and want it closed down?
If that is not true, why has it not been closed down already? Because no-one trusts it.
If you can answer either of these two questions, you get a Blue Peter Badge.
Gary Powell: “After my visit to France Belgium Germany Austria and Switzerland I can report that there IS further evidence of this countries rapid decline into authoritarian socialist tirany.”
The proposals by Charles “Safety Elephant” Clarke , to treat miscarraige of justice victims like pieces of s**t only confirms this dreadful decline from the long standing notions of English common law and justice.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/4921230.stm
“Individual awards will be limited to £500,000 to bring them in line with the maximum amount paid to victims.”
In other words, the State can imprison you wrongly for 25 years, say “sorry guv” at the end of it – and all you get for a life wrecked because of STATE criminality is £500,000.
“I know as well as you should do, the BBC as part of the political establishment is not able to do this. It is not in the BBCs or its political allies interests to even discuss it”
On PM this evening, Eddie Mair cut off an interview by saying “I’ll have to cut you off there, we’re not allowed to criticise the BBC governors”
I kid you not.
You should be able to hear it on “listen again” – roughly around 5.45pm or thereabouts.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/radio4/news/pm/
“In my 46 years experience there never has been a credible Tory for long on the BBC,not even on interview.”
driving home, i listened to the radio 4 6pm news, to get an update on the dreadful Peugeot fiasco
not a single representative of the Conservative party was interviewed. Not one.
The Slovak Charge D’Affaires was briefly on – about 2 sentences – and he managed to get “flat tax” into his soundbite. The report went on for a good ten minutes, but beyond that Slovak soundbite, you were none the wiser on the real reasons behind the Peugeot decision.
The BBC yet again – lying by omission in order to cover up New Labour incompetence and economic mismanagement.
from DFH:
http://www.thesun.co.uk/article/0,,2-2006180185,00.html
paxo gets £1 million
chris moyles – 630k
from the Sun:
*********************************
Moyles yesterday bragged about his income on his show.
He asked caller James Smith, a farmer from Lincoln: “Do you make a lot of money?” When James replied, “No” Moyles said: “I do.”
Referring to Radio 2’s Terry Wogan, he added: “Me and Wogan have identical palaces on an island, in the shape of the BBC and the Pound sign.”
*****************************
archduke
In any decent world the hubris you quote of Chris Moyles would be followed by his nemesis.
But then the BBC is not a place where decent rules are followed any more.
John Reith
I note with much interest that you believe words are precious. Indead they are. But when it comes to politicaly bias propergander it can be the difference between poverty and prosperity, life and death, freedom and slavery,
It will soon be self apparent what is happening in the world if it is not to you and the BBC already. When this does happen the BBC will have the credibility that it deserves, with the over trusting British people. That is, none at all.
George Bush and (although it greives me to say so) Tony Blair will look like responsible world superhero’s. The BBC and you will look like dangerous ignorent fools, at best.
Quite frankly whether the BBC use the T word or not will no longer seem like an issue worthy of any debate.
The subtle and not so subtle lies that have eminated from the BBC, will be.
i had the misfortune of witnessing the Conservative party political broadcast at 6:55pm this evening. “Vote Blue , Go Green” or something like that. With the Tory torch replaced by a similar logo to South West Water. and it prattled on and on about “recycling” and , god help us, “green” stuff.
i fear that Cameron has just given the BNP a serious boost by doing this wishy washy nonsense.
regarding that Cameron broadcast – is that saying anything to the laid off Peugeot workers? No.
or what about the disgruntled white working class of Dagenham and Barking, of which Margaret Hodge talked about? The white working class that voted Thatcher into power – will they be brought back into the Tory fold by Cameron’s wind turbine?
Err… no.
Nick Griffin must be rubbing his hands with glee.
And the most unfortunate aspect about this , is that the right wing vote will be split, and Labour will coast towards another victory at the next election.
If you have time, take a look at the BNP Council Manifesto Launch at
http://www.bnp.org.uk/bnptv/bnptv.php
Nick Griffin talks about the bias, dirty tricks and other undemocratic behaviour used against them.
Will:
You say:
“The BBC have responded to my complaint about the appointment to Newsnight of Greg Palast, as his past work shows him to be highly opinionated. The BBC write
“I understand that you are concerned that Greg Palast will not adhere to the BBC’s standards of impartiality.
“However, I must stress that all our programme contributors are appointed on the basis of their experience and talent.”
This is absolute typical BBC posturing. Palast is nothing but a typical Leftwing trooper, just like the beautiful Labour Party member and total rookie Melissa Bell, whom the Beeb employs as its Westminster reporter, no less, for no other reason that, without having a clue as to the facts of the matter, she nevertheless helped her equally ignorant-of-the-facts, self-regarding, dishonest, posturing white-suited father oust from parliament a flawed but honest Conservative MP (the nationally reviled Neil Hamilton) on demonstrably baseless, trumped-up corruption allegations based solely on the word of the world’s most documented, erratic, vengeful liar, Mohamed Fayed, and three of his provably coerced staff.
The BBC has got so bad nowadays it’s beyond parody and clearly irrecoverable. I’m lovin’ every day of its inexorable terminal demise.
If anyone out there doesn’t know what I’m talking about scoot around the website that documents the biggest story so far that the BBC is proven to have ignored because it’s hamstrung by institutional, terminal, unfixable Leftist bias:
http://www.guardianlies.com
i’ve wondered about this BNP woo-haa from the BBC… Nick Griffin wonders about it as well.
http://www.bnp.org.uk/news_detail.php?newsId=870
“The only question is whether it’s all just one of those accidents, or if Labour’s secret focus group opinion polls have actually told the spin-meisters and the BBC allies that the BNP’s fastest growing voter-base is among former Conservatives. Could it be that New Labour and its friends are ‘talking up’ the British National Party ‘threat’ in the hope of inflicting a crippling blow on Cameron’s Torylites?”
good point actually. as i said above, it’ll split the Tory vote.
Then again, this debacle is all of David “Wind Turbine” Cameron’s making.
There’s one thing I admire about Blair – his political spin machine is incredible in its professionalism and dirty tricks. it really does know how to set the agenda.
Conservative activists told to canvass for Labour against the BNP.
How low can they go?
henry -> unfortunately Cameron doesnt realise that the right in England has split , as badly as the left split in the 80s.
Nowadays, on the right, we have the Tories, UKIP and the BNP.
On the left, we have the Labour Party.
even Tony Benn didnt leave the Labour Party , despite the Iraq war. Therein lies Blair and Brown’s political genius – how they managed to pull that off, and keep their party together, will engage historians for decades to come.
Unfortunately , Cameron cant see this happening before his very eyes – the fragmentation of the right wing vote, which he is directly causing.
I agree with you. It is a credible rumour that UKIP are a Labour/MI5 op to split the right. The way DC is acting seems like a delibrate ploy to finish the Conservatives off. These marxists know their game.
henry -> just look at Sinn Fein and the double agents they had in their midst.
ever think that the lessons of Northern Ireland could be applied to England?
in my view – probably yes. its well documented that MI5 infiltrated the left during the 80s and earlier. no doubt, Labour is just doing this back to the right.
that is why i have not joined UKIP or the BNP. i value my privacy.
newsnight tonight – goes on about the “tory blue vote green” thing. and how labour are green, and the lib dems are green are well. all very Notting Hill , and bugger all relevance to the overtaxed middle and working classes of England.
in all this “green” stuff, i hear the muffled cries of laid off Peugeot workers, and working class unemployed in Barking.
friends of the earth are now on. and Matthew Parris.
good god.
of course nobody mentions the fact that maybe we should build some factories to employ those Peugeot workers.
of course, this is all of huge interest to a tiny elite, who never experience unemployment or high taxes.
personally speaking , i couldnt give a f**k – build a factory, employ the 2,700 laid off today. f**k green issues.
archduke
I’m not a member but I send money when I can and I was outside Leeds crown court on the first day of the trial. I was photographed so I’m probably flagged ready for a re-education camp or a mental hospital when they finaly get their way and we become a one party state. It is sad really that a great democracy can come to this.
henry -> i’m irish, so i’m probably biased towards the ideals of the Republic and the American idea of the Bill of Rights – but i think the english missed their opportunity when the Levellers failed in their revolution way back in the 1450s.
and the English dont have a written constitution, which has allowed Blair to introduce some incredibly authoritarian laws – such laws would never in a million years be passed in the United States.
And yet, the likes of the BBC and “Today” tell us that the USA is the great satan and everything is hunky dory in Britain.
But then the BBC is not a place where decent rules are followed any more.
dumbcisco ===============
You need decent people in the BBC to start with, you can tell a person by the company he keeps.
It’s takes a creep to know a creep.
its around 11.23pm at night and i turn over to BBC 1 – and its a documentary about paparazzi.
your tv tax at work.
in the past, about this time of night, you’d have some interesting documentary about science or engineering.
its no wonder that the Discovery channel is a runaway success.
which begs the question – why the hell are we paying the tv tax , if the “educate” and “inform” bits are being dropped from the BBC’s output.
The telly was on the BBC so I wasn’t watching, but I did hear ‘Nablus’ and ‘Kathmandu’ thru the ether, “Ah” I thought “tis the British broadcasting corp”
Out of idle curiosity I looked up
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/south_asia/4890290.stm
and in the box I saw this
HAVE YOUR SAY
Why hasn’t the West taken any interest in the plight of the Nepalese?
John Lugo, London
Don’t worry John the BBC can do our worrying for us. it’s another worry to add to the worry list.
so many worries. such a big world.
ah shucks – the bbc – tries to worry about everything on the planet. what would the world do without the bbc?
(hint: it would carry on as normal…)
god – arent they a depressing bunch?
archduke:
I dont consider the bnp to be right-wing, you cannot be neo-nazi AND right-wing because that would be a contradiction in terms.
——————————-
As for the green politics the newsnight piece with Frank Lunz(?) showed that the witless voters have swallowed this crap hook, line and sinker.
Cameron is getting a boost from this, much to the chagrin (I imagine) of the beeb who now have to decide whether to continue with their green agenda and thus help Cameron or drop it for brownstuff & bliar’s sake.
That fool Eddie Mair on (socialism this) PM discussing the inflated salaries paid to sub standard “jouralists” an DJs at the BBC
But isn`t the BBC just paying the market rate?
Interesting that Mair invokes The Market when it suits his purpose (i.e. you would never hear him invoke market forces in a discussion about the NHS).
Interesting also that Market Forces are ok when you are spending BBC money but that the BBC is protected from those same forces in raising the money in the first place.
Useless Bastards.
Archduke
I have made this point before, but what the hell.
The Conservative Party of Britain is a true right-wing party the BNP are socialist statist racist looneys. And are therefore Left-wing. The Labour party and the BBC are far more worried about losing votes to the BNP than should the Conservative Party be.
DC is going for the Liberal vote which is not only far far bigger in marginal constituencies. It also represents the core believes of the Tory Party and to my knowledge its entire membership. Which are indead liberal in nearly all important respects. Just a lot more practical than the Liberal Party.
I have never been to any party meeting where any and I mean any racist views have ever been expressed, by anyone at all. This would be unthinkable as at least 20% of our members are from ethnic minorities including my wife.
Our local candidate is also from a ethnic minority even if he is an inflicted Eton educated public School Boy, and a tottal pratt.
And I want his job.
I cant blaim people for not understanding these important facts. By definition contributors to this site watch to much BBC.
If you think the Tory party has anything in common with the BNP, please get a membership and go to a local party meeting, dont stay conned by the BBC.
The Liberal Party are far far more worried by DC than Nick Griffin and so they should be.
This country not only needs a Conservative victory it needs a landslide one. This could not happen if the Tories got every single BNP and UKIP vote in Britain. DC knows this.
…….now this guy wants foreign office help!!
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article/0,,7374-2142406,00.html
You could not make it up.
More good news
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article/0,,2-2142332,00.html
One more thing if any BNP thinking people went to any of our meetings I personaly would hound them straight out of the door. My liberal believes only go so far. If I thought that we gained power by pampering to these types of people I would rather vote for the Monster Raveing Loony Party.
Enock Powell did not and never would have joined the BNP he was far more intelligent and humain than that, and a true Conservative.
gordon bennet
Thank you for making the same point much shorter than myself. However I feel this central and what should be an obvious point, can not be made enough times.
It has taken the BBC and MSM a long time to confuse the people so much. Letts hope it does not take us as long to put them right.
According to the beeb (1).
The Conservative Party should publish data about loans which they consider confidential even though the Party is NOT funded by taxation.
According to the beeb (2).
The beeb should NOT have to publish data about payments/salaries which they consider confidential even though the beeb IS funded by taxation.
Here is some more data about how communism and fascism are the same thing.
http://www.tfp.org/what_we_think/fascism.html
Here is some more data about how communism and fascism are the same thing.
Who doubts that ? Eah has the same role for The State – as a dictatorship.
even though the Party is NOT funded by taxation.
Untrue. It receives ‘Short Money’ to run its research and parliamentary business, its leader is paid by the taxpayer, and it gets free postage and free broadcasts during election time, and free travel.
Incidentally – Charities must publish accounts
This country not only needs a Conservative victory it needs a landslide one.
Been there, done that, no thanks not again !