Please use this thread for comments about the BBC’s current programming and activities. This post will remain at or near the top of the blog – scroll down for new topic-specific posts. N.B. this is not an invitation for general off-topic comments, rants or chit-chat. Thoughtful comments are encouraged. Comments may be moderated.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/7116291.stm
A small complaintlet about the opening para:
“Gordon Brown faces fresh questions over the Labour donation row after the man at its heart said he had received a letter from Labour’s chief fundraiser.”
Jon Mendelsohn – the sender of this alleged letter – is not “Labour’s chief fundraiser”: he was – and is – a seasoned lobbyist and was appointed as Gordon Brown’s chief fundraiser.
The difference is significant because, well, you don’t need me to tell you.
Anonymous:
“I find I can knock off a B-BBC comment in, on average, 20 secs without links”
That would explain a lot. Slow down a little and you might remember to type your name in too.
BBC’s blatant anti American and anti Christian bias.
Those mad American Christians pray for rain
http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/thereporters/justinwebb/2007/11/the_obsessive_and_the_dotty.html
The Greek Orthodox Christians pray for rain in Cyprus, not mad but a little strange
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/europe/7114722.stm
But Africans aren’t mad who pray for rain
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/low/programmes/from_our_own_correspondent/1753665.stm
It is certainly not so for muslim countries like malaysia
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/asia-pacific/4144242.stm
When the muslim world prayed for rain it was not only sensible but their prayers were answered
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/middle_east/540207.stm
When muslims pray for rain in California (USA) do we hear ridicule? No.
When Jews pray for rain in largely islamic Morocco there is no ridicule from the BBC.
So is it to be ridiculed or not?
The BBC – indefensible bias
Further to discussions on the bias and uninformative BBC reporting of the history of the Palestinian and Jewish problems, the article below gives a detailed and very informative background of the history with dates and numbers.
Well worth reading for those who may be surprised at some comments on this blog indicating the constant omission of cause and effect by sloppy BBC reporters and “Experts”. If you know the background at least you can add your own context when the BBC talks trash.
http://www.frontpagemag.com/Articles/Read.aspx?GUID=E79BD4EE-5950-461A-8707-9F05131A9370
Christian killers are Nationalists, not muslims. ask the BBC. They know
http://monkeytenniscentre.blogspot.com/2007/11/bbc-turks-who-killed-christians-are.html
Classic BBC anti-Blair position soon upset on Newsnight last night. The Reporter on the funding scam gives us one of those typical final telling sentences, saying that an insider has told him that this scam is all to do with the ancien regime.
Then 15 minutes later Abrahams comes on the phone & reads out a letter from BROWN’s chief fundraiser looking to tap him for a donation. Unless he was known to be a major domor he wouldn’t have been approached bt Brown’s big cheese.
WATO are now the official voice of Brownite propaganda reading out in full Mendelsohn’s (Brown’s chief fundraiser) laughably mendacious statement.
John Redwood contrasts BBC coverage of Labour and Tory “sleaze”
http://www.johnredwoodsdiary.com/2007/11/28/sleaze-and-the-bbc/
Oscar | 28.11.07 – 1:20 pm
Why no mention here of Humphrys, Robinson, Osborne & Hoon on Today this morning?
Didn’t fit your bias narrative, perhaps?
OK now let’s imagine that serious racial and religious rioting erupted in the USA. How do posters here imagine the BBC would cover it?
One can almost hear Matt Frei pompously relishing every molotov cocktail and injured policeman. One can feel the prickling of tears as Feargal Keane encounters the diginified stand of the morally perfect black freedom fighters of the ghetto as they fight the white imperialist machine. We might even get John Simpson telling us how he single-handedly beat the south and introduced civil rights to the confederacy.
At the very least – sarcasm aside – we would get detailed nightly bulletins on the morally impoverished state of the Union and the fragiity of American democracy and civil rights. I am sure even the Platonic Beeboid John Reid would accept this.
And what do we get on TV or radio when this rioting breaks out in France?
Errr, practically nothing.
Now why is this, do you think?
“And what do we get on TV or radio when this rioting breaks out in France?
Errr, practically nothing.
Now why is this, do you think?
Dr R | 28.11.07 – 2:30 pm | #”
Because the government is in crisis perhaps?
Ben
Perfect Beeboid deflection. There was room for a lot of other news Ben, wasn’t there?
But what do you think Ben? Do you really feel there is no validity in what I have just written. Do you really feel there would not be much greater interest in this story if the riots were breaking out in the USA?
Just picked up on news24 that the Welsh are (not unreasonably) suggesting that their country is represented on the union flag.
I was astonished to hear the presenter ask “what`s going to happen when we have devolution in the north east or north west?”
I`m a bit fuzzy on the details but didn`t the last attempt at regionalisation fail miserably after attracting virtually no support from the voters?
Aunties hatred of the English needs no emphasis on this post it`s as our cousins across the pond would say “a given”
Still it`s nice to know what the beebernment have got planned for us.
Q: Why is the £3.2 billion funded BBC is therefore FAR too busy to cover the riots in France.
A: Ben | 28.11.07 – 2:43 pm |
“Because the government is in crisis perhaps?”
Classic answer.
Hang on though. Not too busy to make room on the front page for this…
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/7116956.stm
or this…
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/entertainment/7117152.stm
or this…
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/business/7116770.stm
or this…
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/technology/7116599.stm
This is presently the top Europe story on the news site, as it is on many.
“One can almost hear Matt Frei pompously relishing every molotov cocktail and injured policeman. One can feel the prickling of tears as Feargal Keane encounters the diginified stand of the morally perfect black freedom fighters of the ghetto as they fight the white imperialist machine. We might even get John Simpson telling us how he single-handedly beat the south and introduced civil rights to the confederacy.”
First of all, I’d recommend you lay off the cheese before bed.
I do think there would be more interest actually – worldwide interest, not just the BBC. Let’s face it, anything that happens in America is going to have greater repercussions on the world and so deserves more coverage. France isn’t really in the same league (per capita GDP 17th in the world). So your argument is a bit of a non-starter.
Stuck-record – So it’s not exactly high-brow, hardly the same as bias is it?
‘Madeleine’ is ranked above ‘World News’ on the Sky News website, so even on this charge I think the BBC is far from the worst offender.
I’d mention the fact that the government in crisis story is top, but I’m sure you’ll then say the article gives him an easy time etc etc..
Ben
Frankly my consumption or not of cheese before bedtime is none of your bloody business (what is it about Beeboids that they think they have the right to tell people what to think and how to behave…)
Yes Ben, I do not disagree that what happens in the States is important (Duh!) but would you perhaps accept that the repeated rioting of a whole generation of alienated Muslim Arab “Frenchmen” in the current climate is not as unimportant as the Beeboid mind would choose to make it? That in fact it is very, very important for Europe generally. Ah, but of course, Beeboid chooses not to mention that the rioters are mostly – dare one say it – muslim?
Aren’t you even a little ashamed at the disingenuousness of your last post? I would be.
Dr R | 28.11.07 – 3:46 pm
As I write one of the 3 main stories on the world front page is: Sarko issues warning to rioters.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/default.stm
That said, of course there would be more coverage if the riots were in the US. People in the UK are more interested in US news than in French news. The BBC has a much bigger audience in the US across all platforms.
A small illustration:
Since 8.02 today 205, 886 people have read an ‘also in the news’ story from the Americas page about a judge jailing everyone in court. 140 743 of those were in the UK.
Meanwhile, since 11.57 only 54,028 have read the Sarko story • a mere 16,557 in the UK.
Even allowing for the extra 4 hours….. audience preferences are clear.
Wow! audience preferences.
How can that ever have anything to do with a feather-bedded tax funded supposedly impartial news organisation?
what have audience preferences got to do with news?
Not that beeb isn`t good, just nowhere near good enough.
John Reid
Thanks for this. I think you’re too modest in measuring the vile and pernicious influence of the BBC. I recall a recent UK poll which basically found that America was one of the most hated and least democratic countries in the world. My question is, how comne people believe such crap (as a worldy, urbane, travelled man, you will of course agree with my conclusion, except – naturally when you are in a BBC meeting..)?
You see, my view is that the BBC – with its completely undeserved power – actually influences what people think. So this breakdown of yours actually reinforces my loathing for the BBC and advances the argument for its demolition (though I have to say, the Melvin Bragg In Our Time programme last week was truly excellent!)
First time poster here.
Just wanted to say ‘take it easy on John Reith’. I always look forward to reading his funny posts, but he seems to be going through some kind of breakdown at the moment.
Must be global warmin’ or something!
Anyway, cut the poor chap some slack.
Because there is very little evidence that they’re rioting because they are muslim!
That bastion of lefty political correctness The Economist states that “The problem, rather, is that two central issues remain unresolved: the failure of the French economy to create enough jobs, and the tense relationship between the police and local youths.”
Now it mentions the heavily Muslim and ethnic population of the banlieues but nowhere does it cite this as a cause. And of course it’s going to mention the demographic aspect, as it was one of the logical routes for analysis. For simple non-analytical reporting like that on BBC News, there’s no need to mention it.
I know you find this hard to stomach, but they’re just reporting the relevent facts.
Ben
So the Muslim element is completely irrelevant?
Go on Ben, say it just so I have it on record. A perfect example of the beeboid imagination (sic).
FYI John Reith,
Biased BBC does not have a narrative, as you are well aware, the B-BBC is a platform that gathers evidence of bias from ordinary people all around the world.
You may well dislike this and many of us have felt the sharp edge of your tongue for daring to express our opinions BUT perhaps you might want to cut out the sneering and the smearing and the insults and try to open your ears a little?
Who knows, you might learn something.
Hey guys..
Did any one see spooks yesterday, do you not think that this YALTA organisation is something out of a beeboids wet dream.
At this point no. I’m completely open to the idea that it could be, but not interested unless it’s from a decent source and shows evidence. Not just knee-jerk simplistic assumptions.
I should add I mean ‘not relevent’ 🙂
Ben
Hilarious!!! Many thanks – best Beeboid comedy I’ve heard in a while!
What a shame, you can’t just refer me to a blog..
Ben,
Sure, the US would get more coverage than France, percentage-wise. I bet the narrative would be different, though. We aren’t hearing too much about how the racist policies and attitudes have caused the unemployment and anger, and have created these enclaves of young men who are ready to burst into violent rage at a moment’s notice. We know they are unemployed and not enough tax-payer money has been showered on them. Yet the narrative is not a tale of ethnic strife. That part is played down, even though the BBC could seriously bust the French on being a bunch of racist bastards who discriminate against immigrants, and keep the boot on the back of their necks. I don’t mean there has never been a whisper of that ever from the BBC; I’m sure you can find a report somewhere discussing discrimination and racism in France. I mean the current round of reporting doesn’t mention it, never mind make a big deal out of it.
Contrast that with even the briefest discussion of a similar event in the US. Well, never mind something as obvious as that, what about something like the presidential elections in the US? Without fail, a BBC talking head will ask if we are too racist to elect a black man. So naturally when there are protests (non-violent, even) involving racial tensions (which the current issue in France most certainly does), a spotlight is shown on the ethnic divisions, and we get a discussion of the history of white racism in the US. I actually think that’s how it should be with these protests, albeit not with election coverage. But there is no question that, in the BBC world view, the US is more racist than France, and the narrative is quite different.
What I find most peculiar is that you and your colleagues feel the rioting in France is somehow not definable as an ethnic or Muslim issue. Equally strange is how an issue that is not so far from home (in content or geography) is not as important as an American equivalent, as you seem to suggest. I’m not the only one questioning your priorities.
Aside from that, I ask one simple question: What is the ethnic (and religious, if that is even more of a unifying factor) composition of these rioting youths, and why are they so enraged about this particular incident?
The BBC coverage of the French riots consisted mainly of portraying the rioters as the victims and even showed the relatives of the two bikers who died and tried to give the impression that they were just two innocent children who were assaulted by the heavyhanded French Police and even accused the Police of running away after the accident. All the usual appologist excuses came out, ie lack of jobs/social exclusion/alienation Etc. The BBC line seemed to consist of justifying the actions of the criminal thugs/rioters while laying as much blame as possible onto the French government(I wonder why?).
Well, whoever these ‘youths’ are (High Anglicans, Zoroastrians, Mormons, Amish, Scientologists &c.), I think we can all agree that France has got a sizeable problem on its hands. And it’s far too close to home for comfort.
Also, now that these ‘youths’ are using firearms with live ammunition, it’s time for the CRS to do away with niceties like watercannons, rubber bullets, CS gas and trying to reason with them.
Maybe they can take a note from how the OSNAZ dealt with those people of no particular ethnic extraction and no identifiable religious conviction in the Beslan School Crisis and the Moscow Theater Siege. Though to be honest, CRS has got a pretty ruthless reputation already. If you’re going to be accused of something, you may aswell do it, right?
thank you for an illuminating blog.
Strangely thanks to the BBC responders as well.
Debate and discussions are acerbic but entertaining.
Could the website owners perhaps tell me why the comments are in latest last order? Is it possible for me to change it from my end to latest first ?
thanks again
Gibby Haynes | 28.11.07 – 5:33 pm
Spot on.
When we (many countries) shed the PC straight jacket, that sort of problem is sortable. For the benefit of the MAJORITY population.
Dr R
Beeboid chooses not to mention that the rioters are mostly – dare one say it – muslim?
No parallel enthusiasm I note for the BBC to foreground the religious/ethnic background of the main players in the Labour funding scandal.
And quite right too, I say.
Guido, however, being no beeboid slave to political correctness, homes straight in on the ‘Labour Friends of Israel’ angle.
Mendelsohn is a friend and protege of Sleazy Lord Levy. After he cashed in his LLM stock his days at the office were spent on the phone on behalf of Labour Friends of Israel, plotting with Levy, using all the same hustling tricks as Levy.
Then after another brief mention of Labour Friends of Israel, we get a grainy illustration that could have come straight out of the Syrian Education Ministry’s edition of the Protocols of the Elders of Zion. Subscript:
Here he is pictured with Sir Sigmund Sternberg….It was Sir Sigmund who sponsored Abrahams’ induction into the London Rotary Club last year.
Are you really sure you want the BBC to follow bloggers down the primrose path of innuendo?
Tell me it ain’t so Dr R.
http://www.order-order.com/
Mr Reith writes;
“Since 8.02 today 205, 886 people have read an ‘also in the news’ story from the Americas page about a judge jailing everyone in court. 140 743 of those were in the UK.
Meanwhile, since 11.57 only 54,028 have read the Sarko story – a mere 16,557 in the UK.
Even allowing for the extra 4 hours….. audience preferences are clear.”
and here is a screen dump of the top half of the International version of the BBC Web Front page.
http://imageshack.us/?x=my6&myref=http://www.imageshack.us/
Funny how the French riots don’t get as much prominence as the story of the American judge. In fact in that very important top half of the news the French riots are missing altogether. Yes the BBC does mention the French riots on that page. But as seen by the screen dump every instance of the riots is given a much lower pecking order than the story of the American judge. In fact the BBC even adds a thumbprint in which to promote that story. That anti-American bias is even exemplified further by how the BBC rates a mistake by CNN about its hero Chavez much higher than the French riots.
In other words Mr Reith the reason why the Judge story gets more hits than the French one is simply because the BBC has promoted it more. Human nature when presented with a funny story or a serious one will naturally gravitate towards the funny one. (May explain how the Sun sells so much print)
Well done John Reith and credit where credit is due, you do make some very interesting points and they are well worth looking into!
If there is a link between lobbyists like FOI and individuals who have been contributing to political parties then I wonder just what was gained by way of influence and/or favours?
I remember that the Labour party did receive finding from a Muslim group but there seems to be some linkage between party funding and special interest groups.
I wonder whether any other party has been funded in a similar way?
Now if only the BBC could do some real digging to find out what has been going on, who did what and when with what monies? Now that would be very revealing and would go a long way to explaining current and past foreign policies.
I will have a trawl through the web and see what I can faind out.
John Reith
At last, a little honesty. Good. That is exactly what most of here are after. I was actually beginning to believe you were atypically unprejudiced on the Jewish question, but your excellent and revealing post has disabused me of that silly notion. So now we know exactly where you stand – a Beeboid to the rotten core.
But enbough smal talk. Let’s examine this post of yours in detail. So you think the key players religion (Jewish) in the loans story is exactly comparable with the Muslims’ role in the French rioting? Hmmm. Johjn, by your usually high (if patronising, and sneering) standards, this is very, very poor. Have I misunderstood you, perhaps, or could you simply not contain elation at the opportunity of such a shallow parallel? Please explain – perhaps I have misunderstood you?
For one thing, I think it is quite clear that Mendelsohn and Abarahams are Jewish. I think with names like they have – not to mention their links with the Friends of Israel group – one would have to be a moron of JOnathan Ross-like proportions not to recognise that.
But the question I’d like to ask you is this: do you think the Jewishness of two Jews says much about Jews or Israel (grrrrr!) in the same way that thousands of Muslim rioters says something about Islam and its rather awkward relationship with the West and the European west in particular?
Well Little John? What do you think?
Here is the correct Url for the screen dump from my above post
http://img504.imageshack.us/img504/5952/image2lu4.jpg
JR does have a valid point about marking the BBC reluctance to make a big deal about ethnic background before all the facts are known. It would be bad journalism to put forward the race/religion angle too soon with regard to both stories.
Oh dear, I have just agreed with JR twice! I had better go down the local trattoria and drown my sorrows.
It now appears that the family of the journalist weren’t murdered.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/7117632.stm
But according to there original story the BBC had checked the story and a police officer confirmed the story.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/7113406.stm
“The police in Baghdad have not confirmed the attack, but one officer told the BBC the killings had occurred.”
So the conclusion must be that the BBC didn’t check the story lied about it or the BBC checks it’s story with very dubious persons in the iraqi police force.
In the case of the British woman schoolteacher in the Islamic Republic of Sudan, imprisoned, and threatened with 40 lashes, over the naming of a teddy bear, should we expect a British broadcasting authority to support the British schoolteacher or the Islamic Republic of Sudan?
Well, if the British broadcasting authority is Al Beeb, and the reporter is Frank Gardner (as on News 24 tonight) then it’s down to the schoolteacher who “made a silly mistake”. Really? Is Al Beeb unwilling or unable to criticise the inhumanity of Sharia law in the Islamic Republic of Sudan? In Al Beeb’s ‘multiculturalist’ mindset, our Western values are subservient to intolerant Islam.
It is Al Beeb which is mistaken in adopting a dhimmi attitude towards Islam in such matters.
chrisb | 28.11.07 – 3:30 pm | #
“beebernment”
Chrisb, another splendid term which I shall add to my Pub Philosopher lexicon!
I resent the suggestion that I am some kind of crypto-anti-semite.
The people concerned are the people concerned. That is it.
Sigmund Sternberg was mentioned by me because he gave £10,000 to Gordon Brown’s leadership campaign, not because he was Jewish.
So fuck off with your innuendo Reith.
Ben | 28.11.07 – 3:36 pm |
“I do think there would be more interest actually – worldwide interest, not just the BBC. Let’s face it, anything that happens in America is going to have greater repercussions on the world and so deserves more coverage. France isn’t really in the same league (per capita GDP 17th in the world). So your argument is a bit of a non-starter.”
Ben,
presumably, you believe that the prominence of any story depends on the GDP rating of the country concerned?
On that basis, we can safely ignore Myanmar.
They’ve got a fascinating HYS on Mohammed the teddy bear:
http://newsforums.bbc.co.uk/nol/thread.jspa?sortBy=1&forumID=3873&start=0&tstart=0&edition=2&ttl=20071128222738#paginator
Uncharacteristically for the BBC, they are allowing very un-PC comments. Like this one:
Added: Wednesday, 28 November, 2007, 20:12 GMT 20:12 UK
This is a test – choose the one who is the worst insult to Islam:
a) Mohammed Atta
b) Mohammed Ali Hamadi
c) Mohammed Mansour Jabarah
d) Khalid Sheik Mohammed
e) Mohammed the Teddy Bear
What will your score be?
Lesley, Tampa, Florida USA
Recommended by 73 people
Guido Fawkes | Homepage | 28.11.07 – 10:30 pm
No, you aren’t an snti-semite, Guido.
But you aren’t particularly careful about minding your Ps and Qs.
No reason why you should be: it’s a free country (well, ish); you’re your own boss; you don’t get a licence fee.
But if a BBC journalist wrote what you wrote, he’d definitely be branded an anti-semite by commenters here. No question.
Yet the same commenters would like the BBC to write about Muslims that way.
I think the BBC has responsibilities you don’t and that Auntie should walk as if on eggshells when it comes to both Jewish and Muslim sensitivities, even if she looks a bit ridiculous sometimes when doing so.
That said, there are limits. If the Sudanese whip that teacher, we should send a gunboat.
I see JR is not too strong on geography
I suppose we will have to send a gunboat that fits on the River Nile
Or maybe fly one in?
Just to show that there are no aberrations in Al Beeb’s official line
of dhimmitude towards the Islamic Republic of Sudan, BBC 2 ‘Newsnight’ tonight had a moral and legal discussion of the case of the imprisoned British woman schoolteacher, limited to TWO MUSLIMS ONLY: one from the Sudan Embassy, the second, Al Beeb’s Islamic stalwart, Mr. Bunglawala.
There was no speaker with a non-Islamic or anti-Islamic viewpoint.
Typical of Al Beeb’s impartiality.
The fate of British people should not, and cannot be entrusted to such Islamic people and Al Beeb.
Well on BBC 5 lite they do right at the moment have an anti Islamic interviewie on (Leo Macistry?? I think the name is).
However, what is most interesting is that EVERY Muslim caller that Bacon has had on have gone into massive anti Western rants, Palestine, Iraq hatred of Jews blah blah blah (you know the usual routine)
Poor old poncy Bacon, he is getting very flustered that no “liberal” Muslims are calling in. Perhaps because there is no such thing?
Of course Muslims who say WE westerners should obey Islamic laws don’t seem to think they have to obey our laws here.
Double standards in Islam? And a bunch of wet farts at the BBC.
Yes, I also saw Newsnight, where was the debate about Islam being intolerant?
Why not link this story to that of the Saudi girl who was gang raped but will also get whipped it would appear.
Oh and just an update. The Liberty website makes NO mention of either story.
Shame on them.