– several links about BBC coverage of terrorism and related issues.
Not exactly bias, but pretty funny. John Simpson today (18th) has an article about Afghanistan headlined “Resurgent Taleban. John Simpson asks if the war with the Taleban can be won.” (link.) If you do a
search for “resurgent taliban” on the bbc website, you’ll find a preview of Newsnight, 20th July 2006, in which John Simpson talks about a “resurgent taliban”.
(link)It’s John Simpson’s yearly resurge.
On 11 September 2001 armed people took control of four planes that were flying above the US.
Following the links to another page called Why did they do it?, here is the BBC explanation:
No-one can say exactly why the attacks were carried out.
But, the way America has got involved in conflicts in regions like the Middle East has made some people very angry, and the hijackers are likely to have been from this group.The US thinks a group called al-Qaeda is behind the attacks. Al-Qaeda leaders have in the past declared a holy war – called a Jihad – against the US. As part of this Jihad al-Qaeda members believe attacking US targets is something they should do.
When the attacks happened in 2001 there were a number of US troops in a country called Saudi Arabia, and al-Qaeda chief Osama Bin Laden said he wanted them to leave.
On this day when the BBC informs the world it has to be just a little more impartial, they report on a story from Afghanistan where a suicide bomber murders 3 people as well as himself. So on that note what do you think the headline for said article should be?
Suicide bomber kills 3.
3 people killed in suicide bomb attack
Suicide bomber strikes Kabul.
Well that is how any impartial news agency would report such a story . So just how do the BBC report on the above in light of its quest to report impartially?
THATS THAT THEN: JEREMY BOWEN
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/talking_point/6221606.stm
well Jeremy has answered the 6 innocuous questions that the BBC filter allowed …. so thats his days work done from Ramallah …
… I guess unless someone here has inside info, DennisM’s question as to wether Jeremy has been off the bottle since 23rd March 2000 will not be answered ..
bur Jeremy did provide a phenomenal insight into a critical question … “The BBC is not biased. We take an impartial approach to news coverage, and try very hard to get to the truth.” … so I we can all go home now … even the ones here who are at home already … you can go home as well.
Most Palestinians regard violence directed against Israel as legitimate resistance. Most Israelis regard it as terrorism.
If the BBC backed either definition we would no longer be impartial.
I recommend watching Tim Sebastian’s HARDtalk interview with Dr Azzam Al-Tamimi where that very issue is discussed.
Sebastian is quite rightly not impartial and manages eventually to get a straight answer out of the Hamas spokesperson.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/programmes/hardtalk/3985403.stm
Where are you now that we need you Tim Sebastian?
And in answer to my post above about how the BBC justs loves the Taliban.
Here is the latest BBC HYS on the subject;
Afghanistan: Why is the situation deteriorating?
How long should Nato stay in Afghanistan?
The UK presence in Afghanistan will need to go on for decades to help rebuild the country, British ambassador Sir Sherard Cowper-Coles has said.He added that the Afghan people wanted the UK presence to help resist the Taleban and develop the country.But as the International Committee of the Red Cross recently highlighted, life for ordinary people is getting worse.
http://newsforums.bbc.co.uk/nol/thread.jspa?threadID=6581&&edition=1&ttl=20070620134528
(Don’t know if the above link will work)
So I’m I the only one who gets the impression that in typical Liberal fashion the BBC is promoting the agenda that we should get out of Afghanistan and leave the people to fend for themselves. That it is a problem for the Afghans themselves. Which is strange as general consensus agrees that one of the biggest failings of recent times was to do just that when the Russians pulled out in the early 90s. This allowed radical religion to take root and which then was exported around the world as the vanguard of the new Islamic state. Don’t believe me look up the times lines for the growth of Islamic terror around the world, Algeria, Egypt, Philippines, Kashmir, Europe and of course Chechnya all of these conflicts can be traced back to Afghanistan. Now remind me again just where the Tipton three ,Mossam Begg and the rest of the so called victims of America’s Gulag were, when they got caught?
Just wondering
“Where did the BBC long term posting on ‘Muslims in Europe’ go?
Did somebody at the BEEB take notice of the negative posts about it on this board?
ClarifyDontObsc
Ahhh … so the village is called Mian Nishin thats different as ill*unt had made reference to a district called miyanishen … thats a bit similar to me asking for directions to a district called stradfroduponhaven … when in fact I meant the village of Stratford Upon Avon …
now thatyou have cleared things up let me give you an actual status report …. the district of stradfroduponhaven has been recaptured from the Taliban this morning … you’ll find details here
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/default.stm
unfortunately the village of Stratford Upon Avon has fallen to this lot
http://www.snappedshot.com/archives/964-Professional-Protester,-Jihadi-style.html
who launched an offensive yesterday from deep within the North West Birmingham territory …
Biodegradable | 20.06.07 – 1:33 pm |
And this:
http://www.google.com/search?client=opera&rls=en&q=%22palestinian+lawmakers%22+site:news.bbc.co.uk&sourceid=opera&ie=utf-8&oe=utf-8
Reports of its significance have been grossly exaggerated, presumably to suit the agenda of those so reporting
Sounds similar to last week’s big story (& HYS topic) about a by-law on saggy pants passed by a Louisiana village meeting. The law is going to affect whatever proportion of the 2000 residents show their undies/bum crack.
The BBC’s excitment over the topic couldn’t have been much greater if Bush himself had issued the edict.
max | 20.06.07 – 2:15 pm |
Yes, that’s a good one, only 25 results.
One wonders how many laws they’ve actually made.
“It looks like it’s a village and a district by the same name. ”
Ah, so it’s a Parish then. Now I understand. Perhaps the BBC could have made it clear that what the afghan’s describe as a “district” is what we here in Britain would describe as a “parish”. But that wouldn’t have been terribly exciting would it?
BBC reporting in Afghanistan is starting to sound a bit like “Carry on up the Khyber”. Perhaps they should rename the Taleban the “Burpas” and the head of the Taleban could be called the Khasi. The head of NATO forces could be renamed Sir Sidney Ruff-Diamond.
Spiffing.
BBC News: Not biased, just UNBELIEVABLY STUPID.
Bio, unfortunately all those lawmakers and ministers working for the government weren’t able to achieve this:
http://www.google.com/search?client=opera&rls=en&q=%22palestinian+civil+society%22+site:news.bbc.co.uk&sourceid=opera&ie=utf-8&oe=utf-8
So Iām I the only one who gets the impression that in typical Liberal fashion the BBC is promoting the agenda that we should get out of Afghanistan and leave the people to fend for themselves.
pounce | 20.06.07 – 2:01 pm |
No you’re not the only one.
BTW, anyone recall the New York Police Chief (I think) who burst out laughing at some BBC bimbo and said “This isn’t an interview, it’s an agenda” before dismissing her.
Measles kills Nigerian children
At least 20 children are believed to have died in an outbreak of measles in Nigeria’s north-eastern Borno State. About 400 children were affected by the epidemic which broke out last week. Measles is quite common in northern Nigeria early in the rainy season.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/africa/6767263.stm
So the BBC informs the world that there is a Rubella epidemic in the Northern state of Nigeria. it even goes as far to say it is a common occurrence.
What is strange is how the BBC omits from the story how for the past few years religious leaders in the region have been preaching to the faithful that immunisation campaigns by WHO are a plot by the US in which to make Muslims sterile.
Here is a story from 2005 on the region
Accusations by Islamic preachers that vaccines are part of an American anti-Islamic plot are threatening efforts to combat a measles epidemic that has killed hundreds of Nigerian children, health workers say. Government officials play down the anti-vaccine sentiment, but all the measles deaths have been in Nigeria’s north, where authorities had to suspend polio immunizations last year after hard-line clerics fanned similar fears of that vaccine.
http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2005/03/27/health/main683337.shtml
Any reputable news agency would have informed the reader just why there are children dying from this latest outbreak. I mean taken from that last link;
“Southern Nigeria, which is mainly Christian, had only 253 measles cases, and no deaths. Health services are much better in the south. But the anti-vaccination sentiment in the north, evident from interviews with parents, seems to be a factor.”
Instead of laying the blame where it lies the BBC instead promotes (In its round-about way) of how Bad America is in Nigeria.
Anger at deadly Nigerian drug trials
In school, Anas Mohammadu’s mates call him “horror” and make fun of him.
When the 14-year-old goes to bed at night, he dreams of becoming a soldier.
Anas survived the treatment, but was permanently damagedHis father, Muhammadu Mustapha, knows his son’s dream is unlikely to come true. “It’s only a pipedream..” But Anas is lucky to be alive. Many other children who were used in the controversial 1996 drug trial by US pharmaceutical giant Pfizer died.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/africa/6768799.stm
Yup the BBC loves to tell both sides of a story in which to get the message across in Nigeria. NOT
max | 20.06.07 – 2:26 pm |
LOL!
No, but they have an army:
http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&client=opera&rls=en&q=%22palestinian+soldiers%22+site%3Anews.bbc.co.uk&btnG=Search
JBH, just trying to build suspense š
BTW, you’ve compiled a great image gallery . Will browse through it later on.
@HillHunt
I don’t pay for VoA say I really don’t give a toss what they say. However, you really must be careful when you quote VoA as an authority, especially when they have gone to the trouble of putting this at the end of the article you linked to:
“Some information for this report was provided by AFP and Reuters.”
Ah, that would be words like “resurgent Taliban”, which hardly seemed credible when you consider the story revolves around a little village where a handful of Taliban shot up the police station.
But thanks, now we are getting closer to the truth. Fact is neither VoA or the BBC have anyone out in Afghanistan. These reports are coming through Reuters, who use local people to source their stories. These local people only get paid if they have a story to sell – they have a financial incetive to exaggerate a story. The BBC can use a story as long as it has a source (i.e. if someone else makes it up or exaggerates it, it’s OK). So they all have an incentive to publish a load of tripe about a “resurgent Taliban” because it fills the schedule and sounds a bit exciting.
The BBC are stupid for going along with this tripe and undermining their own credibility, and you are stupid for taking it at face-value, HillHunt.
Now why don’t YOU let it go.
BBC News: Not biased, just UNBELIEVABLY STUPID!
pounce | 20.06.07 – 2:30 pm:
Brilliant post. I hope Natalie picks up on it.
Max – an impartial assessment would be appreciated!
A MESSAGE FROM THE QURAN FROM AL HILLHUNT & THE BBC …
Al Hill@unt any chance of getting this incorporated into the BBC Royal Charter so that the license payers understand where things stand?
… It encapsulates the meaning of the message that the BBC and illc*nt have been driving at all along ….
SURA 2 Verses 12-14
002.014
When it is said to them (by Al Beeb): “Believe as the others believe:” They(license payers) say: “Shall we believe as the fools (Beeboids) believe?” Nay, of a surety they are the fools, but they do not know.
002.014
When they meet those who believe, they say: “We believe;” but when they are alone with their evil ones(? – I presume Voice of America), they say: “We are really with you: We (were) only jesting.”
002.015
Allah will throw back their mockery on them, and give them rope in their trespasses; so they will wander like blind ones
From Jeremy Bowen:
“The BBC is not biased.”
Maybe not, but you are stupid.
“We take an impartial approach to news coverage,”
You only think that because you are stupid. You are being manipulated and you are too stupid to check your opinions.
“and try very hard to get to the truth.”
No you don’t. When Hamas were shooting at Fatah you couldn’t even bother yourself to ask a spokesman of Hamas why they were doing it.
“That sometimes means that people with a strong attachment to a particular point of view don’t like our coverage.”
I don’t have a strong attachment to a particular point of view on Israel/Palestine but I still don’t like your coverage because [1] it is boring, repetitive and of little interest to us Brits. [2] it is long on opinions and short on facts.
“I assume that you are referring to our policy of not using the word terrorists… Our policy is to avoid words that are politically loaded, the use of which can be a barrier to understanding.”
Is it politically loaded? Most people would regard “terrorists” as people that declare an armed struggle without official backing from a defined state. A bit like Hamas.
“Most Palestinians regard violence directed against Israel as legitimate resistance.”
Are you sure about that? Have you actually asked them? Source?
BBC News: not biased, just UNBELIEVABLY STUPID!
Thousands of colleagues of BBC Gaza correspondent Alan Johnston have observed a vigil to mark 100 days since he was kidnapped.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/middle_east/6768423.stm
Ah a vigil. What sacrifices Beebs are prepared to make.
Hang on. The vigil consisted of downing tools mid-shift.
Ryan:
don’t pay for VoA say I really don’t give a toss what they say.
They represent the official view of our main ally in Afghanistan, the USA. Paying for them is nothing to do with it. VoA says this is a story the US accepts as true.
Why don’t you?
Ah, that would be words like “resurgent Taliban”
Are you saying that the official foreign broadcaster for the US Government would be happy to include duff information on such a sensitive issue?
However, you really must be careful when you quote VoA as an authority, especially when they have gone to the trouble of putting this at the end of the article:”Some information for this report was provided by AFP and Reuters.”
Reuters and AFP are internationally acknowledged news agencies. Important to note, again, that the Voice of America is happy to use their information and to acknowledge it.
Ryan:
Some other thoughts: The notion of a Taleban resurgence is not dependent on this one incident. It describes a series of events arounf Afghanistan, and is a phrase you can find in respectable media all around the world.
It does not mean that the Taleban are winning, or bound to win. It means there are more of them and that they are more active.
The BBC does have an Afghan bureau. I don’t know about VoA, but Reuters, AFP and other agencies are respected news sources, trusted by all major media.
You might not trust them. But who cares? You are effectively arguing for a form of comic-opera propaganda in which the other side can never be acknowledged as gaining even a fleeting advantage, and everyone has to toe a line of happy-ever-after….
.
Er… would that be this ‘respected’ and ‘trusted’ Reuters…
http://www.zombietime.com/reuters_photo_fraud/
stuck-record:
It would. And as you well know it owned up to some problems of staff misbehaviour and made the appropriate changes….
“You might not trust them. But who cares? You are effectively arguing for a form of comic-opera propaganda”
Um, no I’m not. It sounds quite enough like “Carry on up the Khyber” already.
I think I have been quite clear that we want to be told exactly what is happening. If a village has been taken by the Taliban then this is what we want to be told. “District” conjures up something else in the imagination, especially when you are shown a map indicating 10% of Afghanistan is involved.
But like I say time and again, BBC journos and news editors are stupid rather than biased.
Ever read Evelyn Waughs “Scoop”? A synopsis from Wikipedia:-
“One of the points of the novel is that even if there is little news happening, the world’s media descending upon a place requires that something happens, to please their editors and owners back home, and so they will create news.”
See the problem, HillHunt? I happen to know the novel remains an accurate portrayal of the MSM since my sister is a journalist. You, of course, have nothing to do with the MSM, so you wouldn’t know…..
BBC News: Not biased, just UNBELIEVABLY STUPID.
Ryan: Biased and thick as shit.
WHY IS THE BBC COVERING UP FOR HAMAS?
http://news.google.co.uk/news?hl=en&ie=UTF-8&oe=UTF-8&um=1&tab=wn&q=hamas+attacks+gaza+christians+
As I write Abu Mazen is giving a long speech on Al Jazeera attacking Hamas and listing their crimes, including the desecration of Christian churches, and the plot by Hamas to assissinate him, and their tourturing and killing of Fatah men … throughout the Arab world this is now known news but so far just like the attack on erez by gaza terrorists disgusied as journalists however (an act that even Palestinian journalists and Human Rights Watch openly reported and condemned) there is not one mention of it on the BBC website.
Why is the BBC censoring the outrages being committed by Hamas?
I can just about get my head around the insitutional pro-Arab and Palestinian bias at the BBC … but why are they increasingly becoming advocates for radical ISlamic movements like Hezbollah and Hamas? If ill@unt and Jeremy Bowen and Nick Reynold and JR had one shred of integrity the would face and answer this question instead of engaging in lies, prevarications and misdirection …
Ryan:
I happen to know the novel (Scoop) remains an accurate portrayal of the MSM since my sister is a journalist.
A PhD and you have a journo sister?
How do you manage to get so many things so entertainingly wrong?
Just one more time before we all die of boredom…this is how the official foreign broadcasting arm of the United States described the same incident:
Kandahar’s provincial police chief, Esmatullah Alizai, Tuesday said the Taleban took control of Mian Neshin district late Monday.
It’s the Yanks. They’re on our side. They care as much as us about truth. They can’t possibly be accused of sharing the BBC’s alleged political agenda. They will have used proper caution in handling agency material. But they still report the same incident as the BBC.
What do you think that means?
WHY DOES THE BBC CONSIDER SEMI CLAD ISRAELI SOLDIERS AS NEWS .. BUT MAKES NO MENTION OF THE ATTACKS ON CHRISTIANS BY HAMAS?
so the a$$hole editors at Al Beeb fel that this story
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/middle_east/6221714.stm
is more important and needs to be given more prominence than this
http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/spages/872293.html
someone really needs to get a grip at editorial meetings at Al Beeb. When will they stop serving us this rubbish?
How come no comment by JR and other BBC stooges about the incident mentioned above where the BC (Might as well drop the first B…)asks for information which could help the enemy.
Then again I remember during our little trip down South 25 years ago about the BC telling the Argies where 2 PARA were… and time and again showing units and locations during Gulf War 1…not to mention the pro IRA/anti Security Forces stories they pumped out in the Province. In fact throughout my entire 23 year career the BC has always been trying so hard to be impartial they end up supporting the enemy by default.
Is it coz they is thick, treasonable scum or just stupid?
Bijan:
Why is the BBC censoring the outrages being committed by Hamas?
…If ill@unt and Jeremy Bowen and Nick Reynold and JR had one shred of integrity the would face and answer this question
I’d love to help but, as I don’t work for them, I have no insight into BBC thinking at that level….
I certainly heard an Israeli commentator talking on Today last week about Hamas activities in Gaza, including their behaviour towards Christians and their Islamist agenda.
Just because something doesn’t pop up on the web news pages doesn’t mean they haven’t covered it….
Hillhunt: Happy to help. Where I can.
I’ve just got my Iraqi mate to write into them:
From: ARRSE
http://www.arrse.co.uk/cpgn2/Forums/viewtopic/t=70214/postdays=0/postorder=asc/start=15.html
Quote::
“I have just seen a large number of troops (Iraqi) chasing a BBC reporter through the streets of Baquba, followed closely by an M1-Abrams Tank. I spoke to my friend, Mr Baba, who is said that the BBC man is giving secrets to Al Qaeda and that some of the Iraqi and American soldiers have died because of it. My friend also say that this happen in Falklands! You people crazy and enemy!”
Methinks this is a succinct summary of what the Jocks on the ground think!
“Kandahar’s provincial police chief, Esmatullah Alizai, Tuesday said the Taleban took control of Mian Neshin district late Monday.”
Of course its true. But MianNeshin is a village of 13,400 people. So calling it a district is a little misleading. They shot up the police station. There were no NATO forces there at the time. End of. It is a non-event, unworthy of reporting. Nevertheless it has been reported. The BBC uses a map of Kandahar province (population 1million) to indicate where MianNeshin is.
Now I am not so foolish as to suggest that the BBC tells lies. This isn’t a lie. The BBC doesn’t tell lies. Perhaps it is biased. Bias is all about emphasising one part of the truth and de-emphasising another part. It is not at all easy to prove bias, and almost impossible to prove that bias was deliberate.
But I’m not interested in bias. Journos and news editors are bound to have views of their own that might colour their output. I’m interested in value for money, professionalism and competence. All sadly lacking in the current BBC.
And I can demonstrate BBC incompetence quite easily, because a report on that attack in Afghanistan that doesn’t mention that it was actually a police station in a village of 13,400 people is incompetence.
You will no doubt be hearing much more about this kind of incompetence from me. Sorry if it is boring you….
I resent being forced to pay Ā£130 p.a. for a service I consider incompetent. I have no interest in American services equalling such incompetence. As I say, I am not forced to pay for them.
By the way I have a PhD in electronic engineering and my sister is not only a journalist she has worked in the past for the BBC.
I just got the following reply to my email.
http://www.arrse.co.uk/cpgn2/Forums/viewtopic/t=70214/postdays=0/postorder=asc/start=30.html
From the BC:
“Thank you for your email. We can assure you there was absolutely no intention of putting any soldiers in danger as a result of our asking for people in the area to contact the BBC. We would not have published any of the information on the site – and are well aware of the security issues surrounding this. However, it is usual for us to seek out people who have direct experience in the region to contact us. Many people do use the email form to tell us what is going on in Iraq and this is invaluable in reporting the story from a country where it is increasingly difficult for reporters to reach all areas. We do accept the use of the word “troop movements” was not appropriate. We actually meant to seek out comment and eye-witness views, not anything which would in the slightest way have a military implication. We are sorry if there was some confusion in this. The postform has since been removed.
We hope this answers your complaint. Thank you for contacting us.
BBC News Online”
Here’s a very good point:
“And how do they know that the replies they receive are from Iraq, representing the opinion of an average Iraqi on the street? Sounds like an open invitation for some disinformation. What has happened to professional journalism? (or is that an oxymoron??) ”
Well said!
“Of course its true. But MianNeshin is a village of 13,400 people. So calling it a district is a little misleading. ”
So if a town with HALF the population of my own town in the Far North of Scotland were overtaken by the Scottish Liberation Army the BC would report it as the first step towards nationwide defeat for Scotland and the rest of the UK? Aye right! Clowns.
READ THIS HERE AS BBC WILL CENSOR IT
Abbas: No talks with ‘murderous terrorists’ in Hamas
http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/spages/873266.html
thats right Al Beebies this type of news will need to be suppressed or watered down back at the Al Beeb website …
All will be kept quite till Brother Haniyeh opens his porcine snout …. “all Muslims are EEeeequall!”
Ryan, Dave T:
One more time…
The BBC called it a district. Because it is.
So did Voice of America and several hundred leading media of all kinds. So did the provincial police chief, who’s apparently on our side.
I’m afraid the BBC did not report it as the first step towards nationwide defeat as Dave T thinks, although the barrage of whingeing, falsehood and weirdness thrown up by pounce, bijan and gang might well have given him that impression.
Clowns, aye.
But not, on this one at least, at the BBC.
Comrade Al illc&nt
barrage of whingeing, falsehood and weirdness thrown up by pounce, bijan and gang might well have given him that impression.
is your point that John Simpson known not so affectionately at Al Beeb HQ as “Simpson of Jalalabad blah,blah,blah” is not an overpaid, underworked, fat, lazy, egocentric ba$tard?
This my Mu$lim Brother is not the prevailing view amongst White City Beeboids .. report immediately after Friday prayers to Bush House for an ideological retraining session …
“Kandahar’s provincial police chief, Esmatullah Alizai, Tuesday said the Taleban took control of Mian Neshin district late Monday.
It’s the Yanks. They’re on our side. They care as much as us about truth.”
The armed forces of the United States are on the same side as the AF of the UK. Unfortunately the media of the United States is on the same side as the BBC, ie: the enemy’s, and cares not at all for truth that contradicts their chosen narrative; ( Iraq is a disaster, we must pull out at once).
Gasp! But Simpson liberated Kabul – he said so himself!
shrillshunt: So if Moray were overrun rather than just the City and Royal Burgh of Elgin would the BC not report it in the same way?
The perception being pushed by the BC is that the WHOLE of Afghanistan is going under because of one small district (that is smaller than my home town)being overrun. Watch and see how quickly same “district” is retaken once NATO etc finish wiping out the Southern Branch of Taliban R Us.
PS Anyone seen anything on the BC about the fact that China is now the world’s worst polluter and has overtaken the US? Can’t find it anywhere which is strange but for some reason not unexpected…. looked all over the Asian pages etc but only a video report on China’s problems. Err shouldn’t that be China and the way she cause problems for the rest of us?
Let’s break off from all this Afghan stuff, and have a quick peek at another example of BBC Bias, and how it tries to influence children.
See if you can spot the oh-so-subtle propaganda for the Vegan Society in this ‘revision aid’ link:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/schools/gcsebitesize/english/writingnonfict/writingtoarguerev2.shtml
Oops, that was me.
Jeremy Bowen’s Dazzling Verbal Gymnastics
DaveT
Anyone seen anything on the BC about the fact that China is now the world’s worst polluter and has overtaken the US?
It was mentioned several times on Today yesterday and across other media during the day. Not everything appears on the web site.
The BBC have not given the impression that the WHOLE of Afghanistan is going under because of one small district being overrun.
That’s in your imagination, I’m afraid.
AFGAN FOOTAGE BBC WILL NOT SHOW
which is why its worth watching …
http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=79f_1182029136
http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=45b_1181997411
http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=7bc_1181995412
and this classic from our US allies who show us how the like to play this game ..
http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=d5f_1181648676
meanwhile Fat Simpo “the Liberator of Kabul” is back in his cool hotel room in Peshawar surfing the web looking for a story that can illustrate the Allies inevitable defeat.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/south_asia/6756125.stm
http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/spages/872872.html
Thus are reports about the Middle East generated, I thought to myself. And this is a case involving two well-known journalists and an even more well-known magazine.
And suddenly I thought of a British ditty from the beginning of the last century:
“You do not have
To bribe or twist
The arm
Of the British journalist
Considering what he would do
Unasked
There is no reason to.”
Inspired by the “caveat emptor” principle of Roman law, which sounds a note of caution for potential buyers, media consumers should heed the unwritten warning, “Reader beware.” And some criticism within the journalistic profession wouldn’t hurt either.
So true.
Via Tim Blair.
http://timblair.net/ee/index.php/weblog/source_unreliable/
Stuck-Record:
Er… would that be this ‘respected’ and ‘trusted’ Reuters…http://www.zombietime.com/reuter…rs_photo_fraud/
Stuck-Record | 20.06.07 – 4:16 pm | #
hillhunt:
It would. And as you well know it owned up to some problems of staff misbehaviour and made the appropriate changes….
hillhunt | 20.06.07 – 4:38 pm | #
Oh. How easily you dismiss that.
For someone with such a highly developed critical eye — at least for what is said on this blog — you are remarkably uncritical and trusting of the behaviour of Reuters (but then, you do have a thing about ‘professionals’). I’m afraid the ‘professionals’ of Reuters came out of the Lebanon war last year looking very, very bad.
The Reuters smoke over Beirut, the indestructible ambulance, imaginary missiles, Green helmet man, toy staging, false captions etc… were all uncovered by eagle-eyed bloggers, and NOT by the Reuters organisation, or the BBC for that matter, itself. And remember, these were only the things that people spotted!
Reuters response to this shit-storm was to sack the Palestinian photographer. What about their photo editors? What about the editors? Reuters — as a news-gathering agency — is supposed to be getting the story right for the general public. It’s not supposed to be the other way around: the general public checking Reuters material to make sure they’ve got the story right.
The very fact that this happened, in such an enormous media story, simply lends credence to what we do here at B-BBC.
Since Reuters and AFP supply news to the BBC you’ll forgive me if I take everything they say without your unquestioning faith. They have a proven ‘history’ of incompetence.
I, personally, would rather think that it was incompetence than bias.
But it’s hard to see how the “appropriate changes” will make any difference in the future since they, and the BBC, are still accepting massive amounts of feed from Palestinian stringers.
SR, Don’t waste your time with Hilly!
When he first showed up a few months ago it only took me a handful of posts to get him to completely reverse his views.
Since that victory I have chosen to ignore every single posting he has made (why try to win the same battle more than once?) merrily scrolling past each and every one of his comments.
I’m not sure what he does with my posts although I wouldn’t be surprised if he gives me a wide birth after the trouncing I gave him.
Troll-Scrolling, one of my favourite pastimes,
Wayne:
When he first showed up a few months ago it only took me a handful of posts to get him to completely reverse his views.
Since that victory I have chosen to ignore every single posting he has made
It was clearly so catastrophic a defeat I have wiped all memory of it.
Remind me…
wayne:
Oh… one more thing…
I wouldn’t be surprised if he gives me a wide birth after the trouncing I gave him.
Why on earth would you want me to be your mother?
SEYMOR HERSH, ALISTAIR CROOK[E] & ROBERT FISK
max
You have heer a trifecta of trash sources. So im not surprised that the story is generally known to be bull$hit …
http://www.reason.com/news/show/118922.html
Hersh said he heard the story from Robert Fisk, the bureau chief of The Independent‘s Beirut office. But Hersh did not check out the story himself. For his part, Fisk said he heard the unconfirmed report from Alastair Crooke, a former British intelligence agent and the founding director and Middle East representative of the Conflicts Forum, a non-profit organization that aims to build a new relationship between the West and the Muslim world. Crooke, who gained his reputation through his involvement in the conflict in northern Ireland, does not know Arabic. When Lebanese journalists spoke to Crooke about the report, they said he told them only that he had heard it “from all kinds of people.”
Hersh and Fisk are two sides of the same coin. I learnt to stop believeing anything that Fisk wrote years ago when I began to notice that he would take one invented experience from one story and plant it in another to generate emotional sympathy for his Hezbollah chums …
Hersh is not a journalist, he is a story generating machine who has good contacts that allow him the odd scoop but how manipulate him the rest of the time …
Alistair Crooke is a Hamas propagandist pure and simple .. one in a long line of Arabists and now increasingly Islamists … Crook[e] started as the MI6s man with Hamas and has ended up being Hamas’ man in Europe. In his bias and extreamism and willingness to sell himself and his country out he would put George Galloway to shame …