We all know the BBC’s corporate view of the Great Satan America, but I think this is going beyond rhetoric.
“Politicians reacted in disbelief to the revelation that for over two hours yesterday, the BBC News website carried a request for people in Iraq to report on troop movements. The request was removed from the website after it sparked furious protests that the corporation was endangering the lives of British servicemen and women.
But according to accounts last night, a story on a major operation by US and Iraqi troops against al-Qa’eda somewhere north of Baghdad contained an extraordinary request for information about the movement of troops. Last night the BBC confirmed the wording of the request was: “Are you in Iraq? Have you seen any troop movements? If you have any information you would like to share with the BBC, you can do so using the form below.”
The BBC confirmed last night that this form of words had appeared on the website from “late morning” until early afternoon.”
The request was more likely to endanger the lives of US and Iraqi forces, being appended to this piece on the Diyala province offensive north of Baghdad.
Thanks to the glories of Revisionista, we can see that the request for troop information was there from revision 3 at 09.30 GMT up to revision 10 at 13.40 GMT – more than four hours.
The squaddies at ARRSE aren’t best pleased.
“Did you realise the BBC are now helping insurgents in northern Iraq with their intel ??”
I do hope if the BBC are going to request this sort of info that all their staff are security cleared. One wouldn’t like to think of such information falling into the wrong hands. Alternatively, could they try a radical new departure and request information on the movements of “militants” and “insurgents” ? And what would they say if Al-Jazeera asked their viewers to report on the movements of BBC staff in Gaza, Iraq or Afghanistan ?
Hat-tips to Max, Heron and David in the comments (via Tim Blair).
UPDATE – I think this is what’s called disingenuous.
“However, yesterday we used the phrase “have you seen any troop movements” in this request for information. The Telegraph and some others wrongly interpreted this as an attempt on our part to seek out military detail.”
What on earth could give that impression ? How could anyone think that asking about troop movements is an attempt to seek out military detail ?
“We phrased it badly, and as soon as we realised what we had done – a couple of hours – we removed the form.”
Four hours and 10 minutes according to Revisionista. Is Vicky Taylor not even capable of putting the corporate hand up honestly over the timing, is Revisionista wrong, or has she been inaccurately briefed ? Alas, I can’t ask her, because I’m banned from commenting – at least that’s how I translate “you are not allowed to comment”.
And off topic, but kudos to Nick Reynolds for his continuing ‘mission to explain’ and David Gregory for his contributions to an interesting discussion on the reporting of climate change in the comments to this post.
Maybe the BBC is repsonsible for everything bad thats ever happened? A bit like Muslims really…the bubonic plague, 911, the fall of the last Conservative government?
BBCBias – careinthecommunity.com
Maybe the BBC is repsonsible for everything bad thats ever happened?
BBC is responsible for Promoting Evil –
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/in_depth/europe/2005/muslims_in_europe/default.stm
BBC’s dilemma over cartoons
http://news.bbc.co.uk/newswatch/ifs/hi/newsid_4670000/newsid_4678100/4678186.stm
“When we cover any sensitive issue we have to balance our duty to report the story faithfully with our responsibility not to unnecessarily shock or offend our audience.
“It is not always an easy balance to strike, and much discussion and thought goes into decisions like these, but in making such judgements it is the interests, needs and expectations of our audience as a whole which are our guiding principle.”
Bullshit Detective, But the BBC did offend some section of people with Jerry Springer etc.
See the bullshit double-standards.
The British Broadcasting Corporation has admitted to a marked bias against Christianity and a strong inclination to pro-Muslim reporting among the network’s executives and key anchors, in a leaked account of an “impartiality summit.”
secret London meeting of key executives, called by BBC chairman Michael Grade and hosted by veteran broadcaster Sue Lawley. The report revealed that many senior executives are deeply frustrated with the corporation’s commitment to “political correctness” and liberal policies at the expense of journalistic integrity and objectivity.
BBC executives admitted the corporation is dominated by homosexuals. They acknowledged that ethnic minorities held a disproportionate number of positions and said the BBC deliberately encourages multiculturalism and is more careful to avoid offending the Muslim community than Christians, .
Tossing the Bible into a garbage can on a comedy show would be acceptable, they said, but not the Koran, and if possible they would broadcast an interview with Osama Bin Laden, giving him the opportunity to explain his views.
Bullshit detective, see the shit..
williams:
As a man with a trillion-pound debt, is your time best spent posting dreary and repetitive stuff about Muslims on a blog already groaning with such stuff?
Shouldn’t you be out cleaning windows or pumping gas, waiting tables, like any other multiple-debtor?
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/pages/live/articles/news/news.html?in_article_id=411846&in_page_id=1770
What do you say BS Detective? Isn’t it BS standards?
I propose a new name for BBC== BBS.
Arbeit Matt Frei, behind the curve:
NY mayor denies presidential bid
New York Mayor Michael Bloomberg has denied rumours he intends to run as an independent for the 2008 US presidency.
He was speaking a day after he left the Republican Party and changed his political status to unaffiliated, fuelling speculation over his plans.
“I think they are wasting their time. I am not a candidate,” Mr Bloomberg said, asked about his showing in presidential opinion polls for New York state.
But Matt Frei knows better, a day after Bloomberg’s unambiguous announcement:
MATT FREI’S WASHINGTON DIARY
Bloomberg gamble
Why NY’s mayor may fancy a run for the White House.
Frei’s gamble: put out an article based on a refuted rumour and see if anybody notices.
Hello hillhunt, The debt is BS.
According to BBC,
” Tossing the Bible into a garbage can on a comedy show would be acceptable, they said, but not the Koran, and if possible they would broadcast an interview with Osama Bin Laden, giving him the opportunity to explain his views. ”
If this isn’t Double standards, may Ballah help you!
While the trolls continue spinning their wheels BiasedBBC gains more and more readers. Al-BBC and it’s pro-islamic supporters obviously are worried about BiasedBBC – just look at how much effort they are putting into trying to derail threads on the site.
Meanwhile , as a follow-up to the strangely titled “US Crowd Kills Man” story I mentioned a ways above , I see Al-BBC have finally got round to mentioning the race of the killers in the story..
“Police said that although Mr Morales was Hispanic and his attackers were black, they were not treating the assault as racially-motivated.”
Of course, Al-BBC make the Police’s rather dubious comments a major part of the new updated story (US police are almost as PC in their official statements as Al-BBC themselves. An Egyptian muslim murdered several people at an El-Al check-in at Los Angeles International Airport a few years back and the police claimed it was nothing to do with terrorism !!)
. But the whole thing proves , once again, that when it comes to reporting news that doesn’t fit into Al-BBC’s leftist-islamist world-view they either ignore the story or only report it in such a way as to hide the whole truth. Cowards.
hillhunt,
BBC is afraid of Muslims.
BBC published a vague image of mohammed Cartoons. The next day, Posters saying “Death to BBC”, “We’ll Kill those Insult Islam/Puppet” etc. appeared before BBC’s head office.
And BBC/BBS -is- under submission to the Religion of Pieces
williams:
BBC is afraid of Muslims.
I suspect it’s you who is afriad, really. Can we help in any way?
I usually just lurk here, but I really have to make a plea to the B-BBC regulars:
Please will you stop feeding the troll?
The purpose of the B-BBC blog is to expose BBC bias. Many of the regular contributors here normally do so, day out, day in, very successfully – as well as interestingly. As a result, the BBC has clearly become worried enough to put in place counter-measures. This is a good thing, and a sign of recognition.
However, you really, really mustn’t allow yourselves to be derailed by clever trolling tactics. Can you not see that all this provocation only has the effect of shifting your focus from where it should be – on the BBC’s biased output – to where it shouldn’t – on taking the poisoned troll-bait?
As a result of trolling, the B-BBC discussion is now both less effective at exposing BBC bias AND less compelling reading – exactly what the troll(s) was/were hoping for.
Please ignore the troll and keep up the good work!
cassander:
The purpose of the B-BBC blog is to expose BBC bias.
And mine is to show how much of the blog is bloggocks…
Nice to meet you…
A cartoon for Al Beeb:
“Six of one…”
http://www.coxandforkum.com
(18 June; scroll down.)
———————————–
1.)
“Brotherhood Broadcasting
Corporation again” (21 June)
2.)”The Iranian pincer” (21 June)
http://www.melaniephillips.com
PM today and the British position is described as “pooped the party”.
Yes the BBC must try to trivialise and negatise a very important time for Britain.
They really can’t help themselves, can they?
“the late Iraqi leader Saddam Hussein, whose execution opened a Sunni-Shia faultline”
Obviously nothng to do with Saddam slaughtering Shia in their millions, or Al-Qaida blowing up Shia holy sites whenever the mood takes them.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/middle_east/6221694.stm
Yes cassander, we should all put our fingers in our ears and sing ‘mmmmmmmmm, I’m not listening…mmmmm’.
And Williams, Id like fries with that.
Cassander:
Good one. Don’t disappoint by breaking your own rule.
What cassander said.
cassander | 21.06.07 – 5:09 pm |
Second that.
MisterMinit:
I don’t know the answer to this, but who actually informed the BBC about the Argentine bombs?
MisterMinit | 20.06.07 – 11:45 pm |
Forces on the ground in Falklands to embedded reporters. The military didn’t think the reporters would be so f**king stupid as to then tell the world and hence Argies.
Various works published in 80’s by other reporters there make reference to this.
@Cassander:
Hillhunt started posting today at around 10:44am. I have looked at three or four Biased-BBC threads and he has posted about 28 times in 6 hours. That’s about 1 in every 13 minutes. Busy little bee isn’t he? Does quite a bit of research too, when it suits him.
So either he is a complete nut that seriously needs to get a life, or he is being paid by the BBC to troll this site.
Engaging with the BBC’s paid PR stooges is good fun.
Ryan
Good catch. We have had doubts about the near superhero ability of HH the Mighty Troll for some time. Either he/she/it doesn’t have a normal life or she/he/it is a multiple organism….paid for by our licence fees! Perhaps we could write a Dr Who episode about this creature!
Chutzpah (Yiddish) noun – unbelievable gall. See BBC.
Ryan,
I don’t disagree with you – but let’s not engage with them on this site – it has a more important mission (well, at least I think so – wouldn’t want to put words in the mouths of the site owners).
Don’t want to be a spoilsport but it does seem as if the understanding of BBC bias is growing at the moment – so it is vital to keep the pressure up, until something serious is done about it. If we are to have a broadcaster paid for by the public (and yes, that is certainly a big if) then at least let’s make sure it is unbiased. I think the campaign of B-BBC is being noticed, so let’s not waste energy and focus on games with trolls.
Once the campaign for fair reporting is won (or the BBC is privatised and no longer a cause for public concern), then we can play with the trolls, perhaps on the BBC’s own HYS or similar pages – which by then might accept critical comment…
I can’t speak for the BBC or to its motives in asking for this information, but it is rather suspect. I believe “journalists” to be both incredibly stupid and incredibly arrogant when it comes to the military and how it operates. A few years ago at the beginning of the war in Iraq, an embedded, well known American “celebrity journalist,” decided to kneel in the sand and draw a map of where his unit was and where it was going. Of course, none of the enemy was watching the report were they?
Watching the report, the viewer could see the soldiers arrayed behind the journalist becoming agitated and uncomfortable as if saying “what the hell is this idiot doing?”
A few days later Mr. celebrity journalist was dumped back at FOX NEWS, but to his credit he did issue a complete apology for his boneheadedness and not the weasel words such as coming from the BBC.
There is a tremendous difference between the “journalists” that we have today and the reporters of yesterday. Unfortunately, reporters have morphed into journalists who want “to make a difference.” Ask anyone of them what is your career ambition and they all parrot the same thing: “I want to make a difference.” Handing the enemy a victory would certainly “make a difference.”
During the first Gulf War, another celebrity journalist was asked the question, “If you knew that an American patrol was heading for an ambush would you as an American journalist warn the soldiers?” He said, “No, because then I would be taking sides and that is not the job of a journalist.” Breathtaking, but no different or worse than what the beeb did.
The media is the same everywhere. There is a template that they all follow. They are on no side because they feel and think so far above the boundaries of any country. They believe they have a much higher calling, certainly not religious in the usual sense, but definitely divine in relation to what they worship.
Give me an oldtime “reporter” who is knowledgeable about his subject and not interested in “celebrity” any day of the week. Reporters in WWII knew who the enemy was and wasn’t afraid to name it. They could also be relied upon to defend themselves and knew which end of a rifle was the serious side and which was the friendly side. Today’s “journalists” are not fit to wipe the shoes of those who have gone before them.
BBC anti-Americanism exposed.
More and more people are startibg to notice.
http://no-pasaran.blogspot.com/2007/06/what-were-third-sixth-ninth-and.html
First video is excellent.
Ryan
Which beggs many additional quite scary questions. Because it is clear to me at least that he is not a nut, but is a man/women who has been sent on a mission.
Letts face it why would an intelligent sane person post 28 posts some quite long, on 4 threads on ONE SITE in six hours?
These people dont give a sod about what we think about the BBC, because they have no intention of changing or charging anything but us.
Bullshit Detective @ 21.06.07 – 4:10 pm
“Maybe the BBC is repsonsible for everything bad thats ever happened? A bit like Muslims really…the bubonic plague, 911, the fall of the last Conservative government?”
Muslims were responsible for 911. I get the joke if you leave that bit out, but you didn’t, did you? Looks like you’ve been reading CBBC again.
So, do you acknowledge that Muslims were, in fact, entirely responsible for the mass murders of 11 September?
Also, care to point out any actual instances where Muslims are used as scapegoats, as the Jews were in reality during the era of The Plague? Or are you just talking nonsense for fun?
David,
please….
Now I know where the nickname “auntie” comes from. It’s actually the “Anti British Broadcasting Corporation”. And for years there I was thinking it was some affectionate nickname relating to my mothers lovely sister.
http://www.guardian.co.uk/prisons/story/0,,1812788,00.html
The story above proves conclusively that ITV is biased in favour of prisoners. Some of these prisoners would have been murderers and paedophiles which makes ITV biased in favour of paedophiles. They want to bring about the collapse of civilised society.
Something should be done about this, can we take legal action? Either that or a protest outside their HQ.
Do you see what I’ve done there, the clarity of my logic?
BBCBias: Crazy like a bijan daneshmand.
Cassander is 100% right….DON’T FEED THE TROLLS !!! Let them stew in their own juices.
For all fans of Ted Nugent – he was on Dennis Miller yesterday (Wednesday 20 June – interview begins @ 1:21:50.)
http://dennismillerradio.com/programhighlights
He’s the sort of environmentalist you tend not to hear much about on the BBC: “You will not be able to find a guest or an interviewee who has planted more trees than I have. I started in 1969 planting roughly a thousand trees a year, not because it was hip or it was cool or because I was a greenie. It’s because I was a hunter.”
The Today programme prefers a different vibe, hence the interviews from Glastonbury this week. Yesterday it was a cosy chat with Bjork about her song sympathising with a pregnant suicide bomber (Lyric: “What’s the lesser of two evils/ If she kills them/ Or dies in vain?”) and today it was former Bay City Roller Eric Faulkner discussing his re-birth as a lefty protest singer. Can’t wait to hear which right-on muso they’ll be interviewing tomorrow. My money is on Billy Bragg.
BBCBias: Crazy like a bijan daneshmand.
Bullshit Detective | Homepage | 21.06.07 – 7:08 pm |
You’ll be the same bullshit detective I caught out lying the other day over to motoon issue.
It used to be my job once to catch liars out — I was a real detective.
As it is now established that you are a liar I see no point in conversing with you again.
Pity that the site owners allow a proven liar to post here.
http://no-pasaran.blogspot.com/2…-ninth- and.html
I watched your videos Max. I love this bit ‘If you repeat a distortion long enough…it can become a reality’. Sounds like you have your work cut out.
BBCBias: Trust no one…except Fox.
There’s nothing wrong with debate, including with hh, as long as it’s on topic.
For example, people’s views on whether Islam is a religion of peace are not really relevant to this blog. Whether Islam is treated differently to Christianity by the BBC is relevant.
(Although we must remember that the BBC is obliged by law (or its Charter, I forget which) to carry a certain amount of religious programming which is Christian. This is a remainder of the days when Britain WAS actually a Christian country. It still is, in law. We have an Established Church and our Head of State is obliged to uphold God’s laws.
Similarly state schools are legally bound to provide a daily act of Christian worship, a law honoured more in the breach than the observance. They don’t, of course.)
TPO,
I think I know what your talking about but I dont think you proved any such thing.
Maybe your talkin about the article which people can make up their own minds about. I saw no point in continuing the debate given that we could not agree with what was stated in the article in black and white.
I think the trolls are excellent. Hillhunt, for instance – 15 posts on this thread alone today, and all in office hours. What a forgiving boss he has.
I think we all deserve to pat ourselves on the back that so many Beeboids get the urge (or the instruction) to come here and defend their beloved BBC. It’s interesting to note that their favourite tactic is not to disagree with the main postings, but to snipe and sneer, and go for the comments which – if we’re all honest – sometimes deserve a bit of knock-down.
But it’s hugely entertaining to see them studiously avoiding the really big’n’obvious bits of Bias.
The BBC, shoddy reporting and half a story
New Orleans ‘still a flood risk’
Large parts of the US city of New Orleans are still at risk of flooding in a major storm, a report has found. Nearly two years after Hurricane Katrina lashed the US Gulf Coast, $1bn (£502m) has been spent to fix hurricane-protection systems.
But many areas of the city would still be vulnerable in a storm much weaker than Katrina, the US Army Corps of Engineers study found. Nearly 1,700 people were killed in the wake of the devastating hurricane.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/americas/6226974.stm
Nice little story from the BBC showing how little progress the yanks are making in sorting out the mess that is New Orleans. (Just for the info I’ve visited)
Here is a little something which the BBC left out of that story. A little something which kind of explains in 1 second flat just why parts of New Orleans will always be a flood risk.
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/e/e5/New_Orleans_Levee_System.svg
The BBC, shoddy reporting and half a story
Mid East T*t War 2006/7
Following Boobs For Lebanese Democracy (see belolw) the IDF Hit Back hard
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/middle_east/6221714.stm
Not to be out done Hezbollah has now got in on the act
http://joshualandis.com/blog/?p=110
Wonder what the Girls of Hamas spread will look like
http://www.snappedshot.com/archives/844-The-Terrorist-Media-Complex.html
Babs in Politics
http://www.willisms.com/archives/2005/03/more_on_the_bab_1.html
Nick Reynolds (BBC):
Laban – you are not “banned from commenting” from the Editors Blog.
I’ve asked and the reason you can’t comment might be you’re having network problems, your message have been blocked by a spam attack or you haven’t filled in the form properly.
I don’t know Laban’s problem but I have submitted comments to the Editor’s blog and have NEVER seen them published.
.
Anonymous | 21.06.07 – 8:02 pm | #
——————————————————————————–
Well the ‘Jihadibabes’ are going to have to get a shave, take a bath and lose some weight for starters.
.
max | 21.06.07 – 6:49 pm:
BBC anti-Americanism exposed.
More and more people are starting to notice.
http://no-pasaran.blogspot.com/2007/06/what-were-third-sixth-ninth-and.html
Some Brit from Manchester was among the first to warn the Americans about the danger that the BBC presents their nation’s interests. His first effort was published in the Wall Street Journal in December 2003 How the Partial Auntie Tilts Its News Leftwards. He then followed up with this hefty job in April last year for Washington-based Accuracy in Media:British Media Invade the U.S. and then came up with another for AIM a few months later in July:“Impartial News” With a British Accent?
Max – if you enjoyed watching those CBN videos you might enjoy a read of that little lot.
Hillhunt:
Following your recommendation, I recently downloaded and watched an episode of ‘Coast’, expecting sixty minutes of soothing panoramic views of the Orkney and Shetland isles at your expense.
Imagine my horror when, in the opening few minutes of the show, without warning or apology, the presenter, in a thick Scottish brogue, turned the air blue when he casually emitted the words “Muckle Flugga” directly into the camera.
Has the BBC lost its bleep machine?
Please ignore the troll and keep up the good work!
cassander | 21.06.07 – 5:09 pm
My feelings exactly. Who knows, the troll may even make the occasional good point, but I have no intention of wading through his endless, self-important, sneering sarcasm to get to it.
Time is short and there are much better things to do.
Off Topic
The (D)HYS on the trusted impartiality of the BBC – Where’s it gone?
I looked around but couldn’t seem to find it anywhere.
“Insurgents in Iraq kill 14 US soldiers in two days, US military officials say, as a truck bomb kills 15 Iraqis.”
More Al-BBC bias. Who killed the 15 Iraqis ? Al-BBC implies that a truck bomb acting of it’s own accord killed the Iraqis. Note that Al-Beeb can’t bring itself to say “Insurgents kill Iraqis” or “Islamic Extremists kill 15 Iraqis BUT if the US , Nato or Israeli armed forces ever kill civilians the Korporation has no problem saying “US Marines kill civilians” or “Nato airstrike kills civilians”. Why the double standard, Al-BBC ?
Is Islamofascist violence seen by AL-Beeb as a force of nature ? If not, why not describe any killing done by British, US, Israeli or Nato as “Missile kills 3 Iraqis” or “Machine Gun kills Palestinians” ?
AL-BBC – Dhimmis-R-Us
Blatant lie from Paxman.
He blithely states that one of the reasons we invaded Afghanistan was to fight the drug trade. This is not true, in fact it is one falsehood and one dishonest assumption.
To assume we invaded Afghanistan is not really very honest. We formed an alliance with and gave military support to Afghans who opposed the Taleban/Al-Qaida government. Incidentally we were also obliged under the NATO pact to act, as a faction of that government had attacked the USA, and it is a a mutual defence pact.
It is simply not true to say that fighting drug producation was a reason for invading. No-one denied that the right-wing Islamists were effective in reducing poppy growing. It was part of their religious views. Paxman lying, or more likely simply assuming that anything he could say against the British alliance with the USA must be true. He is a real idiot.
Yes Terry ‘small’ johnson I read that a thought it was another of those spontaneously connusting trucks, thank for clearing that up for me.
Random: You are wrong.