Andrew McCann has written of his attempts to put his views across to the Beeb over Sweenygate. I am referring, of course, to the bullying, hectoring behaviour (caution, highly entertaining stuff) of the BBC’s fearless sleuth, John Sweeney, as he ventured into the deep hidden danger facing us all from Tom Cruise’s religion, Scientology. McCann’s words are well worth reading. Summary account of the incident here.
He points out the BBC’s complacent reliance on the freedoms accorded them in the US and UK. He demonstrates what true objectivity might mean- the fearlessly equal treatment of all on an equal basis. His analogy was the most obvious one going- between the BBC’s treatment of Scientology and its treatment of Islam- but the point is a deep one.
Talking of his approach to the BBC’s phone-in minders he says:
“I posed a rhetorical question as to whether Sweeney would have lost his temper if treated in the same way by Muslims outside the Masjid al-Haram in Mecca. In other words, would Sweeney have behaved that way had it not been for his own prejudices and the environment in which he found himself?”
Indeed. PS. I notice that Sweeney has done investigations in Saudi Arabia, but one does indeed wonder if he treated the Saudis as imbeciles as he did so, or whether it was their religion he was interested in targeting.
Check out 600 high-res images of newspaper articles on BBC bias here. Make a pop video and upload to YouTube!
http://www.esnips.com/user/bigstory
They are to be found in the folders numbered 100-111.
Here’s a funny thing: Radio 4, and specifically, the Today programme.
I was on the Today programme the other day, very briefly, in the small hours of a Saturday morning. Very amusing it was too, if I say so myself.
But what had my jaw dropping was the huge number of people in my circle of friends – right-wing, rural, central southern England, who said, “Heard you on the Today programme the other morning!”
How does the Today programme manage to pull the wool over so many right-thinking and Right-thinking minds?
I have created a slamming rock track to go as background music for a slide show, based on your hi-res clippings, of the BBCs most egregious statements.
I need 5 minutes worth with each clip lasting around 5 seconds. So I need about 60..
If you could help pick out the best I would be very grateful.
Why is it left to Channel 4 to do an in depth investigation which I am watching about Brown? It is really good and shows some very worrying stuff, much of which I knew about but has never appeared on the BBC. People should have the right to see this stuff on the so called main media so THEY can make their minds up rather than the rubbish the BBC are pushing about Brown.
The BBC – oodles of journos but none available to do some real work if it affects our mates. It is what we don’t do.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/manchester/6654923.stm
No comment
The BBC – oodles of journos but none available to do some real work if it affects our mates. It is what we don’t do.
dave t | Homepage | 14.05.07 – 8:56 pm
But C4s Dispatches DO do it, and did it again with Peter Oborne’s excellent doc on Gordon. Really shows up the BBC – couldn’t agree more Dave t.
Okay here is my compositional schema so far. I shall split all of the clips into catagories:
Anti American
Pro Terror
Global Warming disinformation
Anti Christian
Could anybody care to add more catagories?
—
The overall format will be like this little video:
ultraviolets:
Okay, if you insist. I’ll have to go through the lot, copy their URLs and then post them. It’ll take me time. You’ll have to hang on for me.
Er, and a slide show of 60 would be okay I guess but it surely wouldn’t have anything like the watchable spread-the-word appeal of a heavily cut video with lots of zooms in and out, plus tracking shots using, say, a resource of a couple of hundred at least. It’s not my film, clearly, but if I had the editing skills I’d go for a combination of lots of short fixed shots between 0.5 and 2 seconds, plus quick zooms, plus slow tracking shots and slow zooms of anything up to 5 or 6. I’m aware that such a project would take some time to put together and that you do have a life but given the importance of the final product would it be too much of a pain for you?
Ultra and JBH:
A very good idea, but could you discuss it elsewhere please, as these open thread comments soon get in the high hundreds even without private discussions.
No offence intended.
Mick in the UK
On one hand I disagree and “thinking out loud” on this project will allow others to chip in with ideas.
However; from a security point of view, shouldn’t let the enemy know what we’re up to!
Beeb propaganda HQ will be planning their smug counter interviews as we speak.
We are the vast right wing conspiracy after all.
Mick in the UK:
Take the point. I’ll just post this before retiring:
ultraviolets:
Good news about the soundtrack – looking forward to hearing it.
Re: the issues to be covered. There isn’t a collection of articles dealing with the global warming issue. To work in a video or slideshow the image has to have a headline that encompasses the point being made and there aren’t any regarding the global warming issue.
The subjects to be covered are defined by the titles of the eleven folders whose titles begin with the numbers 100-111 here:
http://www.esnips.com/user/bigstory
You’ll need to take a look at a few images to get some inspiration as to how to cut them together.
Try this one for a slow zoom in on the headline:
Blair Tells Murdoch ‘gloating’ BBC is ‘full of hatred for America’
Try this one for a slow zoom out from the two words “Blatant bias”:
Blatant bias – and the BBC will live to regret it
This one for a longer ‘fixed’ shot, with actually just a little bit of zoom in to give it some movement:
This one for a zoom out and/or tracking shot of the headline:
How the BBC shamed Britain
See what I mean?
Yes it’s all good, but I have to tell you that my talents lie basically in music.
http://www.myspace.com/thechemicalcinema
I’m not a very good film maker. If we want to make a serious go of this we best get Block 813 on board. The overall quality of my videos aside, minus comedy value, is pretty poor..
Where do they get these people from
a load of PC cr*p masquerading as comedy!!
http://www.bbc.co.uk/cgi-perl/whatson/prog_parse.cgi?FILENAME=20070514/20070514_1130_49700_43962_30
I’ll have a hack at something, and get it on YouTube… 😉
Does anyone know where I can donwload to my machine, and AVI or MPEG of the Sweeny thing?
You may have to use some kind of screen video capture program.
Block 813:
Really good news that you’re about to create something.
Apparently the Firefox browser has an add-on that allows the recording of streaming video, which would allow you to create a file from the Sweeney YouTube rant.
Ultraviolets:
Don’t worry that you’re not an edit-suite expert. I’m not either. Your suggested slide show will compliment Block 813’s pop video nicely. I’ll dig out sixty of the best images and post a new document on my esnips site containing links to them so’s not to clog up this blog.
Even if your film is made up entirely of images of fixed duration, adding the movement of a slow zoom-in to all of them would make it more interesting to watch, so if you could work out how to make this single editing effect it will certainly make your film more interesting.
Pop video?
Just my shorthand for a short pacey video cut to rock soundtrack
The BBC used to claim that it was neutral, but now it is part of a massive social engineering project paid for by its listeners and viewers.
http://www.guardian.co.uk/smoking/Story/0,,2079734,00.html
I listened to Radio 4 reporting the ‘damning’ report against Paul Wolfowitz circulating round the World Bank. Although Wolfowitz was reported as having secured his girl-friend a substantial pay rise, the BBC refused to state the fact that Wolfowitz wished to recuse himself from that matter and that the same people who drafted the report told Wolfowitz to remain involved with the matter of his girl-friend’s internal promotion. If the BBC refuses to stae these simple facts, then there is an agenda. How about John Reith clarifying the BBC’s stance?
Montaquinn paraphrased this morning:
“Dr Death of Hamas, who do you blame for the factional violence in Gaza at the moment?”
Dr Death:
“The occupation, the Israelis, the conspiracy, the wall, the economic blockade, the Israelis…”
Montaquinn:
“Dr Death, thankyou very much.”
Ridiculous article no. 33845637 from the BBC
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/6655435.stm
If the BBC refuses to state these simple facts, then there is an agenda. How about John Reith clarifying the BBC’s stance?
Allan@Aberdeen | 15.05.07 – 8:23 am
I would second that request and remind everyone how the BBC has utterly misrepresented this matter. Wolfowitz, in essence, tried very hard to follow the ‘rules’ of the World Bank in as honorable way as possible, asked to ‘recuse’ himself from involvement and was essentially shafted by the World Bank ‘ethical’ committee.
http://www.melaniephillips.com/diary/?p=1512|
Of course and unsurprisingly – since we’re talking the EU here – the BBC has gone strangely quiet (which, if it ever murmured anything, is probably buried in the BBC long grass) about this sink of corruption
Oscar writes:
“I would second that request and remind everyone how the BBC has utterly misrepresented this matter”
Indeed, and nowhere more so than on its World Service, where the relentless demonisation of Wolfowitz (and all things American) has become a parody of itself.
Sadly, the majority of its listeners are only too ready to lap-up this blatantly biased nonsense.
“The London neighborhood of the author’s youth, Finsbury Park, is now one of the breeding grounds for a new phenomenon: the British jihadist. How did a nation move from cricket and fish-and-chips to burkas and shoe-bombers in a single generation?”
by Christopher Hitchens
http://www.vanityfair.com/politics/features/2007/06/hitchens200706?printable=true¤tPage=all
.
Anonymus quotes Christopher Hitchens:
“How did a nation move from cricket and fish-and-chips to burkas and shoe-bombers in a single generation?”
I realise it was a rhetorical question but it begs an answer, all the same.
And that answer is uncontrolled immigration.
Meanwhile the BBC’s Labour love-in rolls on.
We are now halfway through R4’s The World At One and the entire focus of the programme has been on internal Labour politics.
Do these imbeciles ever give a thought to the many listeners who are in danger of losing their lunch, as one socialist halfwit follows another in the dreary procession of obsessional Labour navel-gazing that R4’s ‘news’ (sic) programmes have become?
Allan@Aberdeen | 15.05.07 – 8:23 am
Oscar | 15.05.07 – 9:26 am
GCooper | 15.05.07 – 11:58 am
How about John Reith clarifying the BBC’s stance?
As ever, the BBC’s stance is to report a complex story impartially, giving due representation to the various perspectives.
It is evident from the ignorant comments made here that some of you haven’t been keeping up with what has been a moving story.
I commend to you Paul Reynolds’s excellent Q&A on the subject, which explains many of the subtleties and technicalities you may have missed.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/business/6655019.stm
I also suggest that you follow the links the BBC provides and actually read the Second Report of the ad hoc committee.
http://web.worldbank.org/WBSITE/EXTERNAL/NEWS/0,,contentMDK:21335418~pagePK:64257043~piPK:437376~theSitePK:4607,00.html
Perhaps then we could avoid this sort of nonsense from Allan:
the BBC refused to state the fact that Wolfowitz wished to recuse himself from that matter and that the same people who drafted the report told Wolfowitz to remain involved with the matter of his girl-friend’s internal promotion.
The ad hoc committee conducting the investigation was set up by the World Bank’s Executive Committee. They are not the same people as the Ethics Committee.
The BBC does not ‘refuse’ to report Mr Wolfowitz’s initial attempt to recuse himself. The BBC has reported it many times. But we are way beyond that issue now.
Read the ad hoc committee report – particularly pages 17-25 and 28-33 and you’ll see what I mean.
As for the BBC’s reporting being biased. Rubbish.
John Reith rites:
“As for the BBC’s reporting being biased. Rubbish.”
I’m afraid I’m going to be the second today to describe you as disingenuous.
Leaving aside the minutiae which your research elves have dredged-up for you, I would simply point to the obsessional concentration on this story.
You might care to contrast it with the vast acres of finest Axminster beneath which your employer tried to sweep the scandals surrounding Kofi Annan.
Then again, you might not…
> “And that answer is uncontrolled immigration.”: GCooper
It’s worse than that. Taxpayer extortion funded subsidised immigration through the “welfare” state and the “N”HS.
Subsidy creates more volume and lower quality.
The UK needs to
a) fund asylum through charity not extortion.
b) Have an immigration market.
c) Check entitlement before handing out taxpayers money.
d) Have a reciprocal agreement with other states to pay for the costs of foreign criminals
e) Insist on insurance against those costs if people arrive from countries without a reciprocal agreement.
f) The BBC to stop describing handouts from extorted taxpayers as “generous”. The more “generous” the handout, the more odious the tax level to fund it.
Apologies if anyone’s posted this already. Not bias, but amusing nevertheless
http://www.theregister.co.uk/2007/05/15/kylie_outrage/
Abandon ship, I heard that interview with Dr.Death Hamas too. The Today programme never disappoints.
To be fair, Montaquinn seemed a bit taken aback by Dr.Death Hamas’ incoherent ranting, but clearly not prepared to challenge him. The BBC seem to view the Palestinians as their darling proteges – many of them violent and stupid, but who must never be contradicted or spoken to in tones reserved for John Boulton or the wicked Israelis. The Palestinians should really organise a protest against institutional condescension by the BBC.
G cooper
If it helps you though the day.
The BBC naval-gazing is good news for everyone. Because it was exactly what the BBC was doing in the late seventies when the “devil women” herself slipped though the net.
They are doing the same with Cameron. Which is ignoring him as best they can, which is a big BBC mistake. And exactly what Cameron wants them to do. That is untill an actual general election campaign is underway.
It may be personally frustrating but it really is the only way for any Conservative leader to get elected PM. Surly you can see this by now.
If you listen to Gordon Browns speeches you would think he is a cross between Adam Smith and Winston Churchill. He does in fact SOUND wonderfull to Conservative floating voters.
This type of talk right go left spin works just as well as the talk left go right type. It confuses the BBCs small minds, and castrates them very nicely thankyou.
Try not to let Cameron bother you so much, you may live longer. Save up your anger untill he is in power and actually does something you dont like. Because the Conservative Party membership will be wanting their pound of flesh, I can assure you of that. Or he will not last a parliament.
This is a new low for the Beeb and its spinoffs:
http://rfraley301.blogspot.com/2007/05/and-you-thought-walt-disney-had-jewish.html
Can I politely suggest that Reith et al read the various Wall Street Journal articles about the Wolfie case and explain how the guy causing much of the problem did in fact write two private memos AGREEING with Wolfie’s stance and is only now claiming the opposite? When ALL the evidence is examined the BBC has yet again shown her anti-American anti-anyone to do with Bush colours rather than remain impartial and show both sides as it is meant to.
garypowell
Sorry if I were to accept your line of reasoning I would be saying good luck to you cameron you are hoodwinking us all with spin and being economic with the truth but when you are in power you will do things very differently.
In other words out new labouring new labour.
Just doesn’t hack it for me I’m afraid.
I really can`t believe that Newsnight are inviting nominations for a “Brown Nose Award”
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/programmes/newsnight/6655471.stm
Methinks they are taking the Mickey.
GCooper/ Dave t
You should see how other media outlets are reporting Wofie’s troubles. Here’s the Melbourne Age for starters. (Yeah…..the whole world’s ‘biased’except you guys):
AN ANGRY and bitter Paul Wolfowitz spat abuse and threatened retaliation against senior World Bank staff if his orders for pay rises and promotions for his long-time partner were revealed, according to new details…..
..Sounding like a cast member of mob series The Sopranos, Mr Wolfowitz said: “If they f–k with me or Shaha, I have enough on them to f–k them too”, according to witness testimony from Xavier Coll, head of human resources at the World Bank.
… The remarks were published in a report detailing the controversy that erupted last month after the size of Ms Riza’s pay rises was revealed. The report slates Mr Wolfowitz for his “questionable judgement and a preoccupation with self-interest”, saying he “saw himself as the outsider to whom the established rules and standards did not apply”.
The report brushed off Mr Wolfowitz’s defence that he thought he had been asked to arrange Ms Riza’s pay package, saying the interpretation “turns logic on its head”.
http://www.theage.com.au/news/business/wolfowitz-abuse-threats-revealed/2007/05/15/1178995155817.html
davet….you are well out of date if you are still banging on about the Ethics committee chairman’s supposed ‘agreement’. Read the REPORT!
The BBC its love of Iran and half a story.
Iran probes detained US scholar
A US-Iranian academic detained in Iran last week is being investigated for suspected “security” crimes, officials in Tehran have said.
The BBC its love of Iran and half a story.
Iran probes detained US scholar
A US-Iranian academic detained in Iran last week is being investigated for suspected “security” crimes, officials in Tehran have said.
Haleh Esfandiari, 67, was being held in Tehran’s Evin prison, Iranian judiciary spokesman Ali Reza Jamshidi said. Mr Jamshidi said the investigation was still going on, without giving any further details.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/middle_east/6658353.stm
Anybody read the above story. At first glance nothing out of the ordinary and by all means a balanced bit of reporting from the BBC. But hang on did anybody grab the name of that prison?
“Tehran’s Evin prison”
Only the same prison where this little Canadian-Iranian lady was murdered by the security apparatus in Iran. ‘Zahra Kazemi’
Strange how the BBC which so loves adding adjectives in front of any reference to Abu Ghraib;
“Notorious Abu Ghraib prison”
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/americas/5308656.stm
“Country’s notorious Abu Ghraib prison.”
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/americas/6115810.stm
(As wrong as those wankers were, at the end of the day the guilty people were punished over a few bloody photos. Yes liberal idiots photos.)
Now contrast the BBCs reporting of Evin prison where ‘Zahra Kazemi’ was murdered and the evidence burnt and buried in a foreign land.
Nothing.
And how did Mrs Kazemi die BBC, she was beaten to death;
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/3923837.stm
and the prison which she was taken to;
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/5077180.stm
I mean its not as if the BBC doesn’t know about Evin prison.
But what is strange is how the BBC remains very quiet on just where Haleh Esfandiari is being kept under detention. I mean what are the odds she may suddenly faint , bang her head and die? (Nothing unusual I suppose to happen to any female in the Muslims world)
The BBC its love of Iran and half a story.
The BBC its love of Iran and half a story.
Iran probes detained US scholar
A US-Iranian academic detained in Iran last week is being investigated for suspected “security” crimes, officials in Tehran have said.
Haleh Esfandiari, 67, was being held in Tehran’s Evin prison, Iranian judiciary spokesman Ali Reza Jamshidi said. Mr Jamshidi said the investigation was still going on, without giving any further details.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/middle_east/6658353.stm
Anybody read the above story. At first glance nothing out of the ordinary and by all means a balanced bit of reporting from the BBC. But hang on did anybody grab the name of that prison?
“Tehran’s Evin prison”
Only the same prison where this little Canadian-Iranian lady was murdered by the security apparatus in Iran. ‘Zahra Kazemi’
Strange how the BBC which so loves adding adjectives in front of any reference to Abu Ghraib;
“Notorious Abu Ghraib prison”
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/americas/5308656.stm
“Country’s notorious Abu Ghraib prison.”
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/americas/6115810.stm
(As wrong as those wankers were, at the end of the day the guilty people were punished over a few bloody photos. Yes liberal idiots photos.)
Leaves out the facts about ‘That prison’ Now contrast the BBCs reporting of Evin prison where ‘Zahra Kazemi’ was murdered and the evidence burnt and buried in a foreign land.
Nothing.
And how did Mrs Kazemi die BBC, she was beaten to death;
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/3923837.stm
and the prison which she was taken to;
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/5077180.stm
I mean its not as if the BBC doesn’t know about Evin prison.
But what is strange is how the BBC remains very quiet on just where Haleh Esfandiari is being kept under detention. I mean what are the odds she may suddenly faint , bang her head and die? (Nothing unusual I suppose to happen to any female in the Muslims world)
The BBC its love of Iran and half a story.
The BBC,Uganda and half a story.
Ugandan widow Santa Akanyo, 35, recalls the night when her husband and two oldest sons were killed by rebels from the Lord’s Resistance Army. Since then she has lived with her four children and one grandson in Agweng Camp in northern Uganda’s Lira district.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/africa/6458653.stm
Anybody read this horrific story of what Ugandan people have had to endure at the hands of the Christian ‘Lords Resistance Army’ truly shocking but what gets me is how the BBC omits any reference to which Government gives these religious bigots sanctuary and supports them in their terrorist aims.
Sudan that’s who. Yes the same country which is busy murdering millions in Darfur, the same Sudan which killed Millions in the South (Hence the reason for the support of the LRA) and the same Sudan which is destabilising the border with Chad and CAR. Funny all of this is about Oil, yet not a squeak from the BBC.
There’s something unnervingly creepy about the BBC’s coverage of the McMann toddler story. Yes, the whole affair is terrifying and almost too ghastly to contemplate – expecially for any parent – but I find the Beeb’s – and, come to think of it, most of the media’s – approach really tacky. The BBC’s melodramatic style is in full flow; TV reporters despatched to the scene for live coverage. ‘Witnesses’ interviewed way past the point of any meaningful information.
Then there’s this story: http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/6659327.stm
It is written in such a “he’s guilty!!!!” style. Indignation at the lack of arrest seeps from every line.
And, of course, there is the wholly unneccessary but beautiful, and therefore tragically ironic, picture of Madelaine herself.
The BBC is attempting to bury facts but, in the internet age, that’s not so easy. On the Wolfowitz set-up, because that’s what it is, the WSJ has something to say. What does JR think?
http://www.opinionjournal.com/editorial/feature.html?id=110010050
Following on from allan@aberdeen more from Melanie Phillips on the Kangaroo Court at the World Bank
http://www.melaniephillips.com/diary/?p=1517
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/wales/6659201.stm
Why mention the Tory viewpoint? Afterall, as they came second in the list vote they clearly merit no attention.
Reith
You fail to answer the question (how unusual…). I refer to the memos which came to light yesterday….how more up to date do you want to be?
http://www.opinionjournal.com/editorial/feature.html?id=110010075
“But we’ve now seen two other documents that reveal the investigating committee’s clear bias against Mr. Wolfowitz. They concern its key witness, Xavier Coll, the bank’s vice president of human resources, who has joined those saying Mr. Wolfowitz dictated a raise he knew was excessive and then tried to cover it up. In his testimony, Mr. Coll claims that “there is no doubt that the President [Mr. Wolfowitz] knew or had been made aware of by me that this was outside the rules.” The investigating panel relies heavily on Mr. Coll’s claims to support its findings against Mr. Wolfowitz.
But to reach that conclusion, the committee had to ignore a pair of August 2005 memos in which Mr. Coll told a very different story. Mr. Coll dictated those memos for his own files and marked them “Strictly Confidential and Personal–For Xavier Coll’s eyes only unless authorized explicitly by Xavier.” They are a contemporaneous account of his negotiations with Ms. Riza and Mr. Wolfowitz.”
Allan@Aberdeen has already put the latest link to the WSJ which shows yet again that the EU and others are trying to ease Wolfie out and get their wee man in (probably Malloch Brown who lives in a rented house owned by Soros…)If the Africans want Wolfie to stay as they have seen a dramatic increase in the help they get why is this not reported as well. You know, just to balance things?
And don’t quote the Age for Gawd’s sake…it is the equivalent of the Guardian down under! If that is all you can come up with….jeepers!
Care to get yourself up to date John? Balance please.
PS: And can you tell your colleagues that in this country we believe in innocent until proven guilty by a jury not a screaming horde of so called media experts who refuse to acknowledge there might be a different take on this story (and countless others of course…)