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.
On Look North just now they said that the knife-wielding maniacs wanted ‘a more serious punishment’ for Ms. Gibbons.
Maybe they mean ten more days in prison or a hefty fine perhaps?
I saw the Mynott piece on 6 o’clock news – I was open-mouthed at how at odds his playing-it-down commentary was with the pictures of machete-wielding protestors and sullen savages with placards. And apparently the protest (which was “theatrical” i.e. not to be taken TOO seriously, Mrs Gibbons) “ended as quickly as it began”…after two hours.
From the video I saw there were clearly more than a couple of hundred protesters there which was what the prat Mynott reported at first.
Funny that Sky, C4 and ITV all reported that the protests were far more serious than the BBC did.
And if it was all good natured fun as the prat Mynott “claimed” why have they moved her to a “secret” location.
No doubt john Reith will have a nice excuse for yet another inaccurate piece of sh*t reporting by the BBC.
Dr R
You may be interested to note that Melanie Phillips has zeroed in on Guido’s Blog (no prizes for guessing which particular passage) and…er….the front page of the Daily Telegraph, claiming ‘it’s open season on Jews’.
Her analytical technique almost exactly as discussed.
http://www.spectator.co.uk/melaniephillips/
Roland Thompson-Gunner | 30.11.07 – 3:52 pm |
It’s like funding “if you have been affected by the issues in this programme” helplines. If you think you might be affected to the extent of needing a helpline,don’t watch!
Roland, the help lines are for those who are already affected not for those who ‘come over all queer’ during it! This is what the BBC should be doing, it’s called public service broadcasting.
JR tells us that “Melanie Phillips has zeroed in on Guido’s Blog”
I think we should remind ourselves that we do not have to pay for the highly predictable opinions of Melanie Phillips. OTOH we are forced to pay for the rubbish (and bias, for there is no other explanation for it) masquerading as impartial reporting spewed by Adam Mynott.
Latest on the HYS “Teddy Bear Scandal” comments:
Total comments: 14037
Published comments: 3589
Rejected comments: 698
Moderation queue: 9749
It has taken 6 hours for the BBC web clowns to moderate 589 comments, while another 3000 have backed up in the cue.
Clearly the HYS moderation team is understaffed. Why can’t John Reith help out? He seems to have plenty of free time in his day.
Did anyone catch the absurd attack on John Howard on “The Now Show”. Yes, I appreciate that middle aged men have more in common with sixth formers than at any time in history, and it’s a “comedy” programme, and the modern “comedian” has very little experience of the real world. And he managed to throw a pro “gay marriage” rant in!
I remember hearing a Beeboid, defending the BBC’s “impartiality”, and confronted with the question “would the BBC ever say that homosexuality was profoundly wrong” respond that “it wouldn’t be for the BBC to say that”.
But it is however for the BBC to say that it is right! So no bias there then.
I can’t stand being forced to pay for this crap. I really can’t.
In criticism of the BBC’s reporting of the Khartoum demonstrations, this alternative analysis even comments on what the racial composition and religion of the demonstators signifies about Sudanese society.
http://www.newenglishreview.org/blog_direct_link.cfm/blog_id/11596
CBS needs an environment correspondent…no knowledge required:
http://www.businessandmedia.org/articles/2007/20071130160308.aspx
One for Roger Harribin?
RE: CBC advert
Sound like a BBC reporter would be ideal? No useful qualifications, limp wristed and a true liberal.
Perfect.
I forget the exact verbiage, but the way the BBC World Service was headlining European/Iranian talks on Iran’s nuclear program struck me as extraordinary. It was something like:
“Iran & Europe start talks to head off American push for tougher sanctions”.
I would have thought the object of the talks was to keep Iran from going nuclear, not to keep the US from pushing for sanctions.
Did the BBC inadvertently tell the truth?
More Islamic propaganda dressed up as news.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/middle_east/7119474.stm
“Week after week, Iranian audiences have been pulling out their handkerchiefs as the tragically doomed romance unfolds between an Iranian diplomat and a French Jewish woman.”
Oh my heart melts.
More ‘shocking’ evidence of global warming…..
http://www.cbc.ca/canada/montreal/story/2007/11/30/winter-forecast.html
This Teddy Bear Thing
News 24 had a young muslim on this morning as a representative of some group. He made two points which I hadn’t heard before and which seemed to perplex the Beeboid interviewing.
They were
1. It is not against Sharia Law to name a Teddy Bear ‘Mohammed.’ The ruling requires there to be an intent to insult rather than a blanket ban on calling ‘things’ Mohammed.
2. There was no evidence that the crowd crying for the poor womans death had actually been told what she had done.
He said, and he seemed sincere, that the crowd had been worked up to believe that the teacher had deliberately insulted Mohammed as part of a plot by Westerners to destabalise Sudan. Stupid as this may sound to our ears, if you are told day in and day out that the West is an ‘enemy of Islam’ and provided with such ‘evidence’ it’s not suprising that the more simple souls believe what they are told. c.f the propaganda about Jews the ordinary Pally in the street is fed from birth. They want her head, not because she called the Teddy bear ‘Mohammed’ but because she has ‘commited a crime’ that requires, by their Medieval and barbaric standards, the death penalty.
Whatever, the muslims in Sudan don’t come out of this very well, do they?
>Did anyone catch the absurd attack on
>John Howard on “The Now Show”.
Yes Steve I heard this and it did present a new low even for that show. I listened to it after I was told Marcus Brigstocke wasn’t in it anymore and I quite like Punt & Dennis. Yet with all the opportunities for satire the present British government presents this show decided to waste time with a oh so PC attack on the now ex Prime Minister of a country thousands of miles away.
I used to put up with this rubbish knowing that the “News Quiz” would eventually return with the wonderful Alan Coren (PBUH). But now with him gone the BBC will no doubt be looking for another SWP’er to replace him. So the future doesn’t look good.
Gordon,
The French refer to the police as flic, only the new French use the Keuf, because it sounds the same as kuf, I checked this out with my French cousin who is very up to date with slang, he found your comment a great laugh by the way.
1. It is not against Sharia Law to name a Teddy Bear ‘Mohammed.’ The ruling requires there to be an intent to insult rather than a blanket ban on calling ‘things’ Mohammed.
Leaving aside the name, to the most orthodox of Muslims, all representations of animals or humans are forbidden, even those that are toys. The sharia is very clear on that. The Taliban even defaced wallpaper that had pictures of birds on it by painting out their heads. Some scholars make an allowance for toys though because Muhammad allowed his child-bride Aisha to have dolls.
Susan | 01.12.07 – 4:50 pm |
Good point. Maybe he was being disingenuous, after all if a Teddy bear cannot exist it can’t be called anything …
Hello All! Back from my hols did you miss me?
*scans posts*
Blimey. That was a bit bad tempered.
Still at least I can apply for that CBS Environment job!
PS Martin: This sort of stuff “Sound like a BBC reporter would be ideal? No useful qualifications, limp wristed and a true liberal”
The limp wristed… I find that really offensive. Just so you know.
Yes David, we missed you. Thought you’d left us all alone with that hideous Reith character.
Welcome back.
Now let’s return to disagreeing.
Good that you are back David Gregory. The BBC is poorly represented with only Reith here to sneer at us.
I thought perhaps you had become disillusioned with this site after I had scolded the BBC and you had felt personally insulted:
http://www.haloscan.com/comments/patrickcrozier/6952180055492664399/#375860
Well, as Reg said, there is serious debating ahead.
Actually, David, some of us feared you had been eased out of the front line for “dereliction of duty” in being reasonable and thoughtful in your responses. Good to see you are back in the fray: we might not agree with the Tax and Taxi Corporation but we prefer honest dialogue.