Throughout their coverage of last night’s local election results the oh-so-pleased-with-himself Jeremy Whine repeated, ad-nauseam, the oh-so-clever sequence in the clip above with such enthusiasm he seemed at risk of wetting himself with excitement.
I wonder how many other groups the BBC would dare to depict thus…
Nice little headliner from AL Beeb about how an X-fool is like so innocent;
“The UK’s hacking community has strongly criticised how fellow hacker Gary McKinnon has been treated.”
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/technology/4984132.stm
Not only has the BBC spent more time and effort in reinventing this bloke as innocent simply because he messed about with American defence computers.
But now they use the words of a bunch of people who commit crimes in which to substantiate their claims.
Err Al Beeb hacking the last I looked is a crime. Leaving diatribes on somebody’s computer is a crime. This man isn’t innocent, neither does the fact he caught simply because he got sloppy exonerate him either.
P.S
Love how you linked into a website supporting his innocence.
Pounce,
In the eyes of Al-Beeb, anybody that opposed the war in Iraq is clearly divine. Those nasty Yanks should leave the poor boy alone.
(that was me)
Grimer
Sadly you have confirmed my first impressions. Your answers to 1 & 2 above demonstrate that you have no preference either way in respect of truth/accuracy as against lies/error.
Why, therefore, should I trust anything you say about 3?
I (and my colleagues) patrol blogs trying to raise standards. Blogs will never pose a real challenge to MSM so long as a double standard exists with regard to truth.
You expect accuracy from the MSM – especially the BBC. But you don’t care if something is fact or fiction so long as it advances your prejudices/ ideological line or the general attitude of the blog. If your approach is typical of posters here, this blog deserves a D rating. Try exploding urban myths instead of perpetuating them. Try not to be insouciant about falsehood. Only the truth will set us free.
Biased BBC or Art?
“Archbishop condemns Springer show”
“The award-winning West End production was seen by 425,000 people and was watched by an audience of 2.4 million when it was broadcast on BBC Two in January 2005.
But its content led to the BBC receiving a record 63,000 complaints as well as many messages of support.”
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/wales/4980398.stm
As well as many messages of support Al Beeb?
That funny as the BBC described somebody who put up a picture of the child rapist beloved by Plumbers everywhere as an ‘Extremist’
“Extremists have been blamed after a cartoon featuring the prophet Mohammed with a bomb in his turban was put up in a housing office in Oldham.”
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/manchester/4747816.stm
In fact al Beeb you went out of your way not to publish those cartoons in order not to offend the religion of peace. But how you refer to a satirical representation of Christ as art. (I’m sure that comment about messages of support was an Allah-send)
From snopeshound
‘I (and my colleagues) patrol blogs trying to raise standards’
What a pompous wally.
john reith back a gain and hiding under another nom de plume I presume.
Nice one Pounce! They really must be miffed your apostate, making it incredibly difficult to label you a racist.
Let’s hope the plumbers penchant for small children gets more exposure as the ‘Cardinal Pell Affair’ in Australia hots up. Al-Beeb will find it impossible to bury that story now that John Howard has stepped in. We live in hope!
Hello Rick!
Back from “doon bye” as we say and spotted your ‘interesting’ comment. Go and look at the BBC election maps and tell me whether the black (no election) parts are bigger than the bits that did have an election. My point was that the maps show large areas did not have elections and these include some strong Tory rural areas in Yorkshire, Richmond for example just by the biggest Army base in Europe and William Hague’s stamping ground. Conservative at the last election with 11 Tories but NOC for years now.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/shared/bsp/hi/vote2006/locals/map/html/map.stm
is the map. Now tell me that the tiny wee blue and red or even smaller yellow bits outnumber the areas where there were no elections. There are 340 councils and we only had elections for 176 of them this year.Hmm what is that? A smidgen (6 councils) over 50%?
THAT is the point I was making. Don’t forget the Tories and Libs control large rural councils – so hopefully when these ones DO have elections and if we have similar results then Blair WILL have to go. Hurrah!
Snopeshound, blogs 101 lesson for you here buddy:
Commentators on a site are more often not, not the blogger/s themselves.
I’m sure you can see how such an obvious fact renders your statements pretty absurd.
Did you spot the shameless piece of product placement on the 6 o’clock news? On the item on chip and pin fraud they gratuitously showed a bookshop with the reporter standing in front of a pile of Frank Gardner’s new book. Maybe the subliminal message was – buy this book and get ripped off?
Patrick
Everyone reported the death of the woman journalist when it happened.
But only the Times story this weekend revealed the gory detail, the animal cruelty of her killers.
Surely you can see the difference between the original story and the new detail ?
What we are saying is that the BBC will have seen the Times new info – but has not published it. A million webpages at BBC Online – but no room for this new story about the video of her death.
Oscar:
Wasn’t the beeb identified in a spot of product placement last year?
No coincidence.
Heard Frank ‘I thought about it, but I’m too hedonistic to become a Muslim’ Gardiner on R5 this pm. Plugging his book, but still peddling his ‘It’s all been a terrible mistake and Islam is a wonderful way of life’ schtick.
Like Prophet like followers;
I wonder why Al Beeb isn’t giving this story;
“Three men raped a solicitor after she got so drunk she could not find her way home, the Old Bailey has heard.
Mohamed Mohamed, 22, of Tottenham, Sabbir Sharif, 20, of Edmonton and Sami Muktar, 20, of Stoke Newington, all deny rape, sexual assault and burglary.”
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/london/4751973.stm
The prominence it is giving lesser stories such as anti abortionist refused hip treatment. Tetley horses put out to grass, vicar spreads the word by I-pod.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/default.stm
Don’t worry Al beeb I did love how you finished off that story;
“Mr Mohamed said the woman had consented when he was arrested six months later.”
Pity she wasn’t 9 years of age, then the rapists could have quoted on a certain holybook in which to base their defence.
That should have read;
Wasn’t the beeb identified in a spot of product placement TROUBLE last year?
Ooops
Just a few thoughts, guys…
1) Please skip all the off-topic stuff about TFT screens and so on.
2) It’s easy to get bogged down in the Israel / Palestine stuff. Its not an easy one to win, because there are all sorts of angles and lots of distractions. There are dozens of websites claiming that the BBC is too pro-Israel. The BBC governors’ report was itself very delphic in its findings – “no overall bias, but some lapses”.
3) Has anyone compiled a list – maybe several lists of really good examples of bias. Like the James Naughtie “when *we* win the election” quote for example. Or the Justin Webb quote about portraying America.
4) Maybe on each subject, half a dozen good examples. eg on the subject of the pro-Islam bias, much of the bias takes the form of “product placement” puff pieces, like the story last week on the middle of the BBC news site about a muslim girl who wanted to be a famous actress while wearing a hijab. She had failed the RADA entrance by the way. Or maybe the classic all-time product placement – the episode of Balamory where the children all visited a mosque. They have never visited any other place of religion. Ever.
5) Are there any sites or anybody at all that claims the BBC is right-wing, pro-US, anti-immigration, anti-Islam ?
Riddled with bullets, BBC correspondent Frank Gardner pleaded for his life in the Saudi capital shouting to bystanders to help a fellow Muslim, a police officer told AFP yesterday.
“I’m a Muslim, help me, I’m a Muslim, help me,” the British father of two daughters cried in Arabic, the officer said.
http://www.smh.com.au/articles/2004/06/07/1086460241226.html
to Jack Hughes, take a look at the following for in-depth analysis of BBc’s bias on the subject:
long list of documented BBC’s bias, http://www.camera.org/index.asp?…t=4&x_outlet=12
http://www.bbcwatch.co.uk/july04.html
http://www.bbcwatch.co.uk/current2.html
http://www.bbcwatch.co.uk/old.html
Jack:
Twice the BBC themselves were forced to admit they loaded the ‘Newsnight’ audience.
After 11th Sept and again after 7/7.
So much for representative audiences.
(Hmm. How many more times have they done that?)
Biased BBC and its hatred of the US of A.
On this day (8th of May) Al Beeb runs with the story how Moscow boycotted the American Olympics in 1984;
http://news.bbc.co.uk/onthisday/hi/dates/stories/may/8/newsid_2518000/2518931.stm
Which funny enough Al Beeb deems more newsworthy a story than this event which transpired also on the 8th of May;
“1945: Rejoicing at end of war in Europe
The Prime Minister, Winston Churchill, has officially announced the end of the war with Germany.”
http://news.bbc.co.uk/onthisday/hi/dates/stories/may/8/newsid_3580000/3580163.stm
It appears that Al Beeb thinks a Soviet boycott is more important than the end of war in Europe.
newsnight tonight leads with, yes , you guessed it
Blair versus Brown
groan….
“as anyone compiled a list – maybe several lists of really good examples of bias. Like the James Naughtie “when *we* win the election” quote for example. Or the Justin Webb quote about portraying America.”
i transcribed 2 interviews – one of John Humphries with Colleen Graffy , and another of Andrew Marr with Mozzam Beg.
http://islamophobic.blogspot.com/2006/03/bbc-gitmo-and-colleen-graffy.html
http://islamophobic.blogspot.com/2006/03/andrew-marr-has-love-in-with-mo-islam.html
Channel 4 tonight. John ‘lefty’ snow presents a documentary on if the media had sugar -coated coverage of Iraq.
that’s like asking if the bbc is biased against lefties.
Via “The Philosopher, The Model & The Auntie”
http://houseofdumb.blogspot.com/
is a link to smug git Nick Robinson’s blog,
http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/nickrobinson/2006/05/oxygen_of_publi.html
which in turn links to a video of Dimpleby interviewing BNP leader Griffin on election night.
Dimpleby is in best forensic mode, although ignorant of the level of BNP’s gains.
Talking about BNP plans for school meals Dimpleby asks whether schoolchildren will be denied “meals cooked in the halal style”.
I thought halal was more to do with the death of the animal rather than cooking style.
Was Dimpleby seeking to mislead over the nature of halal?
‘Oops time again’
Twice the BBC themselves were forced to admit they loaded the ‘Newsnight’ audience.
Sorry Jack; for ‘Newsnight’ read ‘Question Time’.
the atwar bahjat video is a hoax – its still in iraq, but its a nepalese victim.
more at LGF:
http://littlegreenfootballs.com/weblog/?entry=20445_Atwar_Bahjat_Beheading_Video_a_Hoax&only
will,
Children in tower Hamlets have no choice, it halal school meals or starve.
Rob Read
The idea that people should be content with chunks of London being colonised by Bangladesh – with very low rates of economic activity, low literacy and education achievements and high social/health/housing/welfare demands is plainly ludicrous. Unless you are part of the comfortable metropolitan chatterati, happy with the BBC line that multi-culti is good for everyone.
And of course the BBC is happy that these newcomers, with nil links to Iraq, should be acting as the tail wagging the dog and insisting on a reversal of British policy on Iraq.
And of course the BBC will be the last to tell us that Zarqawi’s band of jihadists are in real trouble in Iraq, that they are remorselessly being driven into a corner and are themselves recognising this :
http://powerlineblog.com/archives/014021.php
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/iraq_zarqawi_s_strategy
The terrorists in Iraq think they are losing, diminishing. That THEY are in a quagmire. Someone should try telling James Naughtie and John Humphrys that.
The idea that people should be content with chunks of London being colonised by Bangladesh – with very low rates of economic activity, low literacy and education achievements and high social/health/housing/welfare demands is plainly ludicrous
Govt figures show 60% Bangladeshi families live on Income Support – how can you call filling in those forms “low rates of economic activity” ?
will,
Children in tower Hamlets have no choice, it halal school meals or starve.
Rob Read | 08.05.06 – 11:50 pm | #
Halal pork chops ?
Was Dimpleby seeking to mislead over the nature of halal?
will | 08.05.06 – 11:00 pm | #
Having heard his brother’s ignorance exposed I really think you should assume that Dimbleby both are in a very sheltered world and probably do not even know the price of butter. It is foolish to think that these people know what they are talking about and in many cases the man on the Clapham Omnibus is far more worldly-wise
Thanks for the links, folks.
The middle-east stuff may or may not be correct, but the whole subject is a big turn-off for most people.
I am looking for something more punchy and clear-cut – something that I can tell to the “man in the pub”.
We had a discussion last week at work about BBC bias – I mentioned the binge-reporting about Hurricane Katrina, and the anti-Bush, anti-US tone of the coverage.
Many people said – “yes, but it was a Bush cock-up”. I then asked how they knew this – “from watching the BBC news” was the answer. Out of 5 work-mates, I would say two then realised the potential for a circular “world-view” – that a view created and moulded by the BBC would then agree with the BBC output.
Sadly the other 3 just thought that the BBC was reporting true facts and it really all was the personal fault of George W. Bush.
snopeshound,
I think you have misunderstood the point I was trying to make. I don’t care if Frank Gardener is a Muslim. It’s not relevant to my opinions of him or the BBC.
Again, it makes no difference to me if the Vines are related or not. I couldn’t care less.
However, I do care about BBC bias.
Now, as for your mission to “… patrol blogs trying to raise standards.”
I’m sure we’ll all sleep a lot easier at night, knowing that you and your ‘collegues’ are on the case.
As ‘Thoroughly Pissed Off’ stated, ‘What a pompous wally’.
Jack Hughes: Marc has quite a round-up of BBC bias at the bottom of this post. That would be a good starting point:
http://ussneverdock.blogspot.com/2005/01/bbc-is-turn-off-its-official.html
snopeshound,
Keep patroling here. You’ll change your world view if you are prepared to listen.
Two nasty bits of anti-Bush bias near the end of the Today programme. Humphrys talks at 8.43am to the parents of Rachel Corrie. The impression is raised by Humphrys she was crushed maybe deliberately – as a target of the Israelis. This is ridiculous – all the evidence is that the bulldozer driver did not even see her as she put herself in harm’s way. Any decent researcher could have found out this crucial fact.
They could also have pointed out that the bulldozing is to destroy tunnels under houses on the Gaza border being used for arms smuggling.
Then Humphrys let the Corrie parents get away with the nonsense that Corrie was a protestor for “Iraqi freedom”. What – freedom to be slaves under Saddam ?
What proportion of the British audience has any interest in the Corrie story ? 1% ? Why was it on the programme ? Reason = another swipe at the US.
This item was followed with an interview with a blues singer, Charlie Musselwhite (WHO ?) Whingeing on about Katrina and everything being the US Government’s fault. He rambled on ignorantly, not a word about gross failures of the Mayor of New Orleans – and the failure of the NO population itself to be ready to evacuate in the face of a severe hurricane. “It’s all Bush’s fault”.
So – 2 items with NIL news interest, in the prime hour of the Today programme.
dumbcisco
The post 8:30 spot on “Today” is the “dead zone”. I’m surprised the Corrie’s were in that spot. It’s usually reserved for the “balancing” items – non-Heseltine Tory politicians, non-climate warming scientists – when no-one’s listening.
The Corries should not have been on the programme at all. It is only the left’s obsession with their daughter and the “victim” Palestinians that gets any coverage for her petty protesting.
This was yet another case of the BBC putting the Palestinian “narrative” across. But not by a Palestinian, so it would not count in the Loughborough study approach for the Q Thomas review.
DumbJon – thanks for the USSNeverdock link – it’s a gem.
Jack Hughes:
If you’re looking for a definitive documented case study of sustained BBC bias, look no further than the investigation into the so-called “Neil Hamilton cash for questions” political controversy conduced by freelance journalists Jonathan Boyd Hunt and Malcolm Keith-Hill.
You will recall that the controversy turned the May 1997 general election into a “Tory-sleaze-fest” and helped Tony Blair into power with a landslide majority.
However, and sensationally, the two journalists claim to have unearthed copious solid proof that:
a) The Guardian invented the controversy in 1994 with the collusion of Harrods owner Mohamed Fayed specifically to bring down London’s then top lobbyist Ian Greer and smear John Major’s Tory administration
b) The Guardian and Fayed subsequently covered-up to escape legal redress from the innocent lobbyist Greer and the innocent MP Hamilton
c) The Guardian instigated the cover-up with Fayed’s collusion in order to pervert Greer and Hamilton’s original libel action against The Guardian of 1994-6
d) The Guardian developed the cover-up further with Fayed’s collusion and thereby perverted the official Parliamentary inquiry into the affair conducted by Sir Gordon Downey in 1997
e) The Guardian developed the cover-up with Fayed’s collusion even further and thereby perverted Hamilton’s second libel action, which was against Fayed this time, of 1999
Clearly, the above allegations are extremely serious, and deserve scrutiny by Britain’s national broadcaster the BBC.
HOWEVER, despite the two freelances’ research having been endorsed in writing by everyone who has examined it, including senior BBC journalists on BBC notepaper and leading parliamentarians; and despite several high-profile news events publicising their work over the last nine years, including a press conference in the Commons and acclaim from the Floors of both Houses of Parliament, the BBC has never mentioned the two journalists’ investigation in its national news and current affairs programmes. Never. Not once. Not once in nine years.
The BBC’s current Editorial Guidelines, which carry a preface by the BBC’s director-general Mark Thompson dated June 2005, state on page 7:
——————
“Truth and Accuracy
We strive to be accurate and establish the truth of what has happened…. We will weigh all relevant facts and information to
get at the truth….”
“Impartiality and Diversity of Opinion
We strive to be fair and open minded and reflect all significant strands of
opinion by exploring the range and conflict of views….”
“Serving the Public Interest
We seek to report stories of significance. We will be vigorous in driving to the heart of the story and well informed when explaining it.”
——————
AND YET, in February 2006 Mark Thompson rejected an official request that the BBC undertake an assessment of the two freelances’ research and findings as a first step, prior to the BBC giving their work a full airing.
Why? Because:
a) the two journalists’ research proves that the BBC’s favourite newspaper The Guardian enacted a criminal conspiracy
b) the BBC’s sustained censorship over the last nine years of the two journalists’ research constitutes an unarguable case study that proves what the BBC’s many critics allege: that the BBC is in fact an institutionally corrupt and dishonest news organisation posturing as an impartial one.
I know all this because I’m one of the two freelances.
Check out:
http://www.guardianlies.com
– especially Section One if all this seems too much to take in.
I’m amazed Tory Central Office haven’t complained