Please use this thread for BBC related comments and analysis. Please keep comments on other threads to the topic at hand. N.B. this is not (and never has been) an invitation for general off-topic comments, rants or use as a chat forum. This post will remain at or near the top of the blog. Please scroll down to find new topic-specific posts.
BBC is biased and untrustworthy:
BBC suspends all phone-in quizzes after admitting Comic Relief con.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/pages/live/articles/news/news.html?in_article_id=469228&in_page_id=1770&ct=5
.
The revelations reveal utter contempt for the viewers. The bias and the deceit are just two symptoms of BBC arrogance.
The BBC. Deception – It’s what we do.
BBC to suspend phone competitions
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/entertainment/6904516.stm
“The programmes which breached standards
Comic Relief – Friday 16 March 2007 on BBC One
A caller was heard on air answering a question to win prizes belonging to a famous couple when in fact the caller was a member of the production team.
TMi – 16 September 2006 on BBC Two and CBBC
A member of the production team posed as a member of the audience who had won a competition which was open to the public.
Sport Relief – 15 July 2006 on BBC One
Viewers were led to believe that a member of the public had won a competition open to the public when it was a member of the crew.
Children in Need – 18 November 2005 on BBC One Scotland
A fictious competition winner was announced during a segment called Raven: The Island following technical problems.
The Liz Kershaw Show – 2005/6 on BBC 6 Music
During pre-recorded programmes presented as live, listeners were led to believe genuine competitions were held when in fact there were no contests or prizes and all callers were production staff or their friends.
White Label – World Service until April 2006
On more than once occasion a fake winner was announced when no winning entries had been received.”
And this is what we’re forced to pay £135+ a year for?
(from end of previous open thread)”K:
Apologies it this has already been mentioned but why is the BBC not giving prominent coverage to this story?
U.S.: Top Iraqi Al Qaeda Leader Arrested
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,289727,00.html
It should be on their front page but I guess good news is no news when it comes from Iraq.
K | 18.07.07 – 1:49 pm | #
——————————————————————————–
Because K, our ‘still on stupid’ BBC think that this story is the most important one in the World today, and is the No1 story on the BBC News website front page:
BBC to suspend phone competitions
http://news.bbc.co.uk/
Naval gazing is certainly what the BBC do best.
The BBC writes:
“Four men jailed over cartoon demo
Javed, Muhid, Saleem and Rahman had denied holding extremist views
Four men have been jailed for their part in protests outside the Danish embassy in London, against cartoons satirising the Prophet Muhammad.”
Surely they were jailed for inciting violence and racial hatred?
Everyone is entitled to free speech and to take part in protests, whether satirising someone’s religion or protesting against that.
It’s their explicit violent and racist language that landed them quite rightly in jail.
I have just posted this complaint to the BBC website:
“To illustrate a supposed “dead zone” in the Gulf of Mexico with pictures of dead fish from the coast of Germany and toxic algae from China, is to be seriously misleading.”
“Whilst I can accept that its difficult to illustrate something by reference to things that aren’t there, using pictures like that is a distortion. You could have tried using pictures of the “dead zone” taken from the scientific paper – you know, like journalists are supposed to abstract.”
The article referred to was: http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/science/nature/6904249.stm
The constant stream of BBC deceptions is building up to ‘Beebgate’.
Is this the thin end of the wedge?
This type of thinking can be endemic in an organisation.
There needs to be a full independant enquiry.
I am predicting it is highly likely that there is yet more to come out.
I suggest those that are still hiding their deceptions come out now before they are found out.
These ‘competitions’ (hard to see them as anything but lotteries) are not the only possible source of type of deception.
Are there problems with vox pop panels? Are studio audiences loaded for some programmes? Is the selection of ordinary people for programmes fair and above board?
The trust that the BBC continue to say is lost in politicians is being lost in them.
Who is to say whether this may be the tip of a large iceberg.
Could someone please explain to the BBC that Mohammed is more properly referred to as “The Islamic Prophet Mohammed” not as “The Prophet Mohammed?”
It is ridiculous and insulting to non-Muslims to presume that an illiterate slave – owning caravan raider who ripped off parts of 4,000 year old Jewish tradition to form a cult of booty seeking marauders should be enshrined as THE WORLD’S Prophet just because BBC represents the interests of European Arabists and the money they throw around.
After all, when was the last time you noticed BBC referring to Jesus as “The Lord and Savior Jesus Christ.” when carrying out its daily insults to Christianity, I mean reporting?
Why does BBC put Islam above other religions if it is an unbiased news organization?
Here’s a useful new site on Wiki:
http://mediamythbusters.com/index.php?title=Media_Myths
It’s plain infuriating that the BBC is taking my money and spending it on telling lies.
have you seen the headline re: the four islamists jailed for soliciting murder?
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/6903445.stm
“The angry young men jailed over protest”
Just heard a comment on the news that the BBC have said their staff will be sent on training courses in how to make honest programmes. I wonder if their journalists will be going on similar training on how to report honestly, objectively and without bias. eg The ITV 6.30 news reporting on those jailed for the cartoon protests started ‘Four Muslim extremists have been jailed…..’. Tell it how it is BBC.
The story about the four young men jailed for soliciting murder was reported on pm tonight. Equal air time was given to:
(1) The Chief Superintendant in charge of the case and
(2) a Muslim spokesman who said, “The judge was guilty, the jury were guilty, the witnesses were guilty, the only people who were not guilty were the defendants … they said nothing unIslamic or against Sharia.”
Needless to say, it was the policeman who was cross examined by the reporter: “Weren’t these just young men who got a bit carried away?”
When will the BBC understand that they are not required to be impartial as between criminals and the law?
Mark Thompson has just been on Channel 4 news claiming that ,as of now,he will have zero tolerance for any BBC employee shown to have breached the viewers’trust in any way.
I think we should all try to obtain his email address,then copy any posts to this site direct to him where they relate to deception or misrepresentation of the type chronicled here over the past few years.
There is no longer any doubt.
We are now at the end of the beginning.
Of that “No sun climate link” non-paper produced with slavish fawning by the BBC, here’s Dr David Whitehouse, former BBC Science editor:
“According to the headlines last week, the sun is not to blame for recent global warming: mankind and fossil fuels are. So Al Gore is correct when he said, “the scientific data is in. There is no more debate.”
Of that the evangelical BBC had no doubt. There was an air of triumphalism in its coverage of the report by the Royal Society.
It was perhaps a reaction to the BBC Trust’s recent criticism of the Corporation’s bias when reporting climate change: but sadly, it only proved the point made by the Trust.
advertisement
The BBC was enthusiastically one-sided, sloppy and confused on its website, using concepts such as the sun’s power, output and magnetic field incorrectly and interchangeably, as well as not including any criticism of the research.
But there is a deeper and more worrying issue. Last week’s research is a simple piece of science and fundamentally flawed. Nobody looked beyond the hype; if they had, they would have reached a different conclusion.”
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/opinion/main.jhtml?xml=/opinion/2007/07/15/do1508.xml
Today, I’m wondering whether the founders of this site ever contemplated naming it “Lying BBC”. I suppose that would then have been considered libellous. Today, we know it would have been accurate.
I’m also remembering all those programmes where the BBC inserts an undercover reporter, like the one on the Police and their training, which did uncover shocking goings on during routine police work and training. However, the BBC could just as well have put an undercover reporter in on their phone-in programmes, might have resulted in a really interesting programme! And so cheap to make, literally in-house in every way!!
We’ve been aware for years that the BBC is lying about much going on in Israel. But that was happening thousands of miles away. Now we see the lies actually happen much closer to home. When one lie actually involves HM the Queen, who is perfectly able to remember whether a piece of film shows her walking into or out of a meeting, then that lie immediately gets nailed. And I don’t believe that it was only caused by RDF Media, I think Peter Fincham did play a part and that’s why an ‘independent enquiry’ has been ordered up.
And please note the footnote “its findings will be made public”. Why not make the findings of the Balen Report public too.
Great post in the DYHS on the BBC phone-in frauds
http://newsforums.bbc.co.uk/nol/thread.jspa?sortBy=2&threadID=6863&edition=1&ttl=20070718203718&#paginator
The BBC is entering its death throws stage.
It’ll take several years for the agony to be over, but in the future the burden of this now twitching carcass of a once great broadcaster, will finally be lifted from the tax payer.
This communist-style compulsory license fee for an organisation hijacked by the left and protected by peeping toms in their detection vans looking for old ladies and students who can’t afford their license fee (tax), is destined for the scrapheap of history.
Tom smith
Recommended by 65 people
The wonderful Jeremy Bowen, analysing the Lebanon/Israel war tell us that Israelis are depressed because even the mighty Israeli army, with all its technology, was unable to stop Hizbollah firing rockets, and was unable to rescue its captured soldiers.
Why would that be ,Jeremy?
Could it be that Israel could have wiped out Hizbollah in about 10 minutes, if it wasn’t for the likes of you telling us that Israel’s spirited response was ‘disproportionate’?
John A, thank you for the Telegraph link. I posted about it waaay back here.
Notice how the story about the four protesters (AKA racist scum inciting murder and treason) has moved back up to the top of the BBC News website and the one about the lying cheating Beeb is quickly slipping down the page – quick! It’ll be gone tomorrow!
Lek
Balanced reporting would probably be:
“The prophet Mohammed”
“Jesus the Messiah”
Children in Need, phone ins. Surely this is the thin-end of the wedge. I’ve just heard on Radio 4s The World Tonight, somebody say that these programmes didnt receive the same scrutiny that news programmes received! As if they were somehow above suspicion!
How about the deception and manipulation carried on, week in week out by the BBC with their invited audiences and political screening? WYSIWYG not really. Its staged, phoney! Analogous to a phone in fraud.
How about the scandal of the BBC Panorama programme on the church of Scientology?
The deception and manipulation of the HAVE YOUR SAY.
The deception and manipulation of BBC cameramen, and the faces that they like to have close-ups of in mass crowds! The fradulent use of editing material in the News rooms…
The political manipulation corresponding to the infantile Leftism in the BBC when they expose The Police, The Prison Services, the BNP, etc. (The Secret Policemen tapes, etc.)
Lastly the deception in reporting the War on Terror! The phoney use of language, etc.
Thank goodness there is at last recognition of Auntie’s Lies and Lies.
(I have enjoyed B-BBC for some time now but the comments always seemed to be off. Now I notice that comments are powered by “HaloScan” and my Firefox browser has been disallowing them by default. Funny…it is the only blogger blog that seems to use HaloScan.)
In two weeks time, my TV will be disconnected and given away. My Licence will be cancelled.
I am doing this for two reasons. The first is that there is really little of interest to me on TV and secondly the biased news output.
As for lies and deceit, TV has always lied and always deceived; elephants are not really ten inches tall and odourless, cooks generally do not have one “I made earlier”, gardens don’t have five designers and a dozen unseen labourers working on them, etc, etc.
The present problem is down to young people, recruited by the BBC, but not trained to see what they do as “a drawn sword parting the darkness of ignorance”. To them, lyihng is merely a way to evade responsibility. They are pragmatists, not guardians of the truth. They believe in nothing but themselves, and when you believe in nothing the truth is the first casualty.
The BBC today merely reflects the zeitgeist. I can do without it.
They just don’t get it do they, News headlines about how “Phone -ins and interactive programmes have been suspended by the BBC” or some such lines.
In this same Radio 4 news programme, however, asking for people to contact them with their opinions on this!!! Doh!
The BBC is too afraid of what people have to say in reality. It is all staged managed. The manipulation and deception consists in not publishing or not reporting those things that they do not like (especially from the right spectrum of political views). The Have Your Say facility is a very good example. Whenever a theme is problematical, the brakes are put on and the majority of views are abandoned.
Apropos of News this is the same mechanism as saying we don’t need to take phone calls from the public we can do it amongst ourselves.
The BBC has lost its integrity big time! They treat the public with absolute contempt. And who will guard the guards? An independent inquiry? That wouldn’t be BBC now would it.
I deleted a few comments here tonight, including a few by “Indigenous”. Nothing wrong with the comments (sorry Indigenous), but space here is competitive, so the more OT comments get cut.
sky news – tommorows newspaper headlines are plastered with the bbc deception story…
is anyone else kind of feeling, even if ever so slightly, a berlin wall moment building up?
lets face it, the left dont like the bbc – campbell (definitely…),blair and i suspect brown as well
and neither do the right (obviously)
[Deleted]
another dave, thanks for the link to the “angry young men” news item – due to constant BBC radio adverts/trailers for upcoming programmes, the phrase “angry young men” is now linked in my mind with the adjective “sexy” – “angry,sexy and working class”. http://www.bbc.co.uk/radio2/musicclub/doc_sexy.shtml !
and here’s what I got when I entered the phrase “angry young men” in the search box on the same page as the news item : http://search.bbc.co.uk/cgi-bin/search/results.pl?scope=all&edition=d&q=angry+young+men+&go=Search
ewwwwww
john trenchard (archduke), that debate is over. Please email if you wish to discuss blog policy.
I’m afraid there’s no chance of the BBC coming to an end, none whatsoever. I wish it weren’t the case but it is.
The thing is, despite this fuss, most of the distortions they relate benefit the current government. They are statist to the core and do all they can to protect state activities. I can’t see El Gordo putting a stop to three billion quid of free political advertising of that nature, can you?
Did BBC executives make millions out of bogus phone-in competitions? Were production staff paid to keep quiet after fake winners were chosen?
http://the-daily-pundit.blogspot.com/2007/07/did-bbc-execs-make-millions-out-of.html
Gavin Esler last night talking to Mark Thompson on Newsnight –
“Well in the case of the BBC if it loses the trust of the viewers then people will simply vote with their feet and the money will disappear”
or something like that. It’s probably available online (about 25 minutes in)
Spluttered crisps all over the living room.
BBC World Service was advertising a comparison of attitudes to homosexualty in countries. I wondered which two. I didn’t find out but I did find a much racier BBC than I ever imagined.
Ever wondered how the weed or cocaine gets on the streets? Or who risked their life for it?
TX looks at the risks. Does that imply the risks may be worth it? Whatever happened to just say NO?
As part of Bare All 07 we look at the issue of playing away. Have you cheated – or been cheated on? Could you forgive someone if they did the dirty on you?
A lot spicier than your normal HYS
Your sex questions What is a blow job?
I know what it is. I just didn’t expect to ask Auntie.
And now from the BBC, news from America….
Cuban wives fight US jail visit ban
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/americas/6903228.stm
Sitting comfortably, now, sing-a-long with the beeboids – “Nasty, nasty USA”!
OT and for reference only but go to Harry’s Place and check out the comments thread on Balochistan. There you will see how an Iranian blogger demolishes an opponent and unmasks him as a Guardianista financed by FO-arabists. An example par excellence of what top-notch bloggers can do.
http://hurryupharry.bloghouse.net/
Should the World Bank wither away?
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/business/6904878.stm
“It began as a bit of a joke. The word “girlfriend” and “Paul Wolfowitz” did not seem to go naturally together.”
Geddit? I don’t. A joke in the BBC newsroom perhaps?
I do not pay the licence fee because I do not owe a TV. However, even though I told them so on a couple of occasions when they phoned me, they have completely ignore it and have been sending me letters demanding payment. The last one which I have received today adddressed to the Legal Owner, has become more threatening. here is the text:
OFFICIAL WARNING- THIS PROPERTY IS UNLINCENSED
You are hereby notifified that we have authorised officers from our Enforcement Division to visit your home and interview you under caution, as our records show there is still no TV licence at this address as yet we have receive no response to previous communications from you.
Your statement will be taken in compliance with the Police and Criminal Evidence Act 1984*, and is the first step in our action to prosecute if we find evidence that you watch or record television without a valid licence.
I feel it is my duty to inform you that if found guilty, you could receive a maximum fine of £1,000, and your name will be addedd to our National Enforcement Data Base. Er take this offence very seriously and last month alone we caught 32,965 people.
To avoid an appearance in court before a magistrate I would strongly advise you to call 0870 241 7204 or buy a TV licence on line at http://www.tvlicenseing.co.uk
Yours faitfully,
Michelle Tunstall
Is it legal for them to harrass and threat? If not, should they not be liable for prosecution?
BBC and their biased headlines:
You remember this?
BNP leader cleared of race hate
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/bradford/6135060.stm
The court found the BNP defendants not guilty.
So one would expect when Islamic extreemists are convicted of race hate the headline might be
Islamists convicted of race hate
?
no, of course not. This is the bias BBC here. The headlines are:
The angry young men jailed over protest
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/6903445.stm
and
Four men jailed over cartoon demo
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/6904622.stm
I would reasonably call those convicted of race hate as ‘racists’. So would the BBC if this was the BNP. But as its islamic extreemists, they are just ‘angry’. Strange, you don’t get send to jail in this country for being ‘angry’!
BBC. Bias – it’s what we do.
Hi Glauca, probably not, but threats and harrassment seem to be their main weapons. People who get prosecuted tend to be from poorer areas (closer together, more likely to have trouble affording the BBC tax etc.) and they almost always have given a statement or said something to the BBC’s appointed Gestapo that is used as the basis for prosecution. The extent to which it is the poorest among society who are targeted for non-payment of the telly-tax is a scandal in its own right.
I have heard of people in your situation who have TV licences even though they have no TV – simply to stop the BBC’s agents harrassing them.
Don’t let them grind you down. Take a look at http://www.tvlicensing.biz, where there is more info on how to deal with this issue and a sloooow-moving legal campaign or three against mandatory payment of the Tellytax. I hope this helps.
Related BBC Links
Don’t be in the dark when it come to law – gen up on some basic Legal Essentials here.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/dna/h2g2/A580312
Callers to the Jeremy Vine show are accusing the BBC of fraud. I thought “obtaining a pecuniary advantage” was nearer the mark but apparently this section of the Theft Act has been repealed. See link.
All it needs is for someone to discover the location of the studios where these alleged offences took place and then go into the local cop shop and make an allegation.
Megaflood ‘made Island Britain’
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/sci/tech/6904675.stm
“Britain became separated from mainland Europe after a catastrophic flood some time before 200,000 years ago, a sonar study of the English Channel confirms.”
Must be MMGW!
Errr – 200,000 years ago? What could have caused this climate change? Come on BBC why so shy?
Surely not a natural occurrence – was it? Strange silence from the BBC on that one…
Sorry for the interuption, now back to normal BBC climate change programming..
How to turn Gordon Brown green
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/sci/tech/6277596.stm
[Deleted – I have forwarded your message and one of my own to the Moderator responsible. Don’t let yourself be put off too easily. Andrew.]
All this fuss about the phone ins distracts us from the real harm the BBC does by producing hour upon hour of brain-rotting drivel every single day. Commercial channels are just as bad, but what on earth is the government doing guaranteeing the income of a TV station at all? What next, a government funded competitor to the existing commercial fast food chains?
Sometimes the BBC seems so sinister. There was a highly ranked comment (by a poster called First Name Last Name, I think) on the (D)HYS board which copied the following positive comment:
——————
Wow – I am impressed!
The BBC had no need to broadcast the results of an internal investigation.
Even so, they have done.
This shows an honesty not often seen in public corporations.
All praise to them.
The BBC has regained my esteem through their honesty.
————————–
And appended:
Now what about the Balen Report?
It has been removed. Why?
These ‘competitions’ (hard to see them as anything but lotteries) are not the only possible source of type of deception.
Are there problems with vox pop panels? Are studio audiences loaded for some programmes? Is the selection of ordinary people for programmes fair and above board?
BaggieJonathan | 18.07.07 – 5:18 pm | #
This all gets more and more like 1984 with every passing day. If my memory serves me correctly, it is an open secret in the Ministry of Truth (the BBC) that lotteries played by the plebs are fixed, and there are no actual winners…
The BBC really do see that novel as a training manual rather than a warning.
BBC bias in action. Even reactively moderated HYS is partially moderated (moderation queue currently 1088). The ‘moderation effect’ can be seen by comparing the points of view on the Most Recent page (moderators’ choice) with those of Most Recommended page(viewers’ choice):
As of 13:30
Most Recent
27% Pro-BBC
47% Anti-BBC
Readers Recommended
13% Pro-BBC
80% Anti-BBC
Can someone explain to me why (as a member of BBC (D)HYS) my comment is sent to moderation when the (D)HYS is supposed to be reactively moderated?
I thought only non-members were moderated when the forum was reactively moderated.
[Deleted – if you want to advertise another blog (partcularly after recent events) please have the manners to ask first, even if you are a two-faced hypocrite. Andrew.]
Andrew, thanks for the site. I have signed the petition.
Oh no,I won’t let them grind me down. That’s why I don’t reply to their threatning letters.
[Deleted. Send me an email at biasedbbc@gmail.com please.]
When will the BBC understand that they are not required to be impartial as between criminals and the law?
Trumpeter Lanfried | 18.07.07 – 6:58 pm
It’s this bland “impartiality” that I find most maddening about the BBC. Their eternal search for the “middle ground” is one of the most extreme journalistic cop outs imaginable, and in searching for it and triumphantly telling us that they have found it, BBC hacks, along with much of the MSM, are not simply indulging in an absurd distortion of the facts, they are leading people down a blind alley.
As an example, a CNN report on a demonstration in support of the kidnapped Israeli soldiers ended with the observation that the kidnappers have ignored the UN Security Council resolution requiring them to free the soldiers. But this was immediatiately qualified by the observation that it wasn’t the only UN resolution to be broken in the conflict – a reference, obviously, to Israel. Why does CNN feel that it has to “balance” a negative reference to Hizbollah with one to Israel? Do they imagine that this will somehow turn terrorists into ordinary, moral citizens, the kind you’d like to have next door? And do they ever “balance” a negative reference to Israel with a negative reference to Hezbollah or Hamas? Of course not.
BBC “editors” also like us to think that they are walking an imaginary fine line between the terrorists and the terrorised. That would be bad enough. But in fact they prove time and time again that their sympathies lie more with the terrorists.
Now we have Thompson and Byford jumping up and down and undertaking to clean house over the fraudulent phone-in competitions. Well and good. But until such time as we see them getting as least as excited over the gross bias that is rife within the BBC there is no hope for meaningful reform of the organisation.
Are any heads rolling over the phone-ins? Fraud aside, has the BBC ever fired anybody for bias – apart from Kilroy Silk for being a little too critical of Arabs for the BBC’s liking? Was the weepy Barabara Plett even reprimanded for her bias in favour of Arafat or was she just quietly offered a comfy little position as an apologist for Islamic terror in Pakistan?
Looks like a job with the BBC is a job for life – as long as you follow its narrow agenda, of course.
For those of you who speak German, enjoy this in-depth, and surprisingly blunt Zeit article about the BBC’s left-wing bias and the loss of their journalistic integrity.
The Zeit is a kind of Guardian type paper, just having more gravitas, due to the long history and tradition of the paper and the fact that Helmut Schmidt, Bundeskanzler a.D. is the publisher. To see this kind of strong critique from the ‘elder left’ is very refreshing.
I especially like the mentioning of George Orwell quipping about the BBC: ‘I am surrounded here by people who would rather steal from the parish collection tin than stand up to honour the national anthem.’
(I translated this on the fly, so he actual wording is bound to be different)
You can read the piece here: http://www.zeit.de/online/2007/30/bbc?page=all