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.
BTW (I’m busy today, huh?)
The BBC Complaints process largely upheld a complaint that Panorama was exaggerating about the dangers of Wi-Fi.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/complaints/news/2007/11/30/51156.shtml
deegee | 06.12.07 – 7:58 am,
I’m fascinated by this last bit from the complaint ruling you linked to:
The finding against this edition of Panorama will be marked on the programme website in the appropriate place.
I recall that Nick Reynolds, prompted by Biodegradable on this very blog, got the BBC website to mark the weepy Barbara Plett’s infamous article on Arafat in a similar fashion. Up till then, of course, the BBC had been happy to avoid any mention of the fact that the article had been the subject of a (partially)-upheld complaint.
The BBC can change.
BBC ‘Today’ programme’s Pavlovian response:’ah, there’s a Parliamentary debate on whether to extend detention of terror suspects to beyond 28 days,- wheel out our old chum, Chakrabarti, of that democratic representation of the British people, the lobby group ‘Liberty”.
Now the Chakrabarti the BBC wheels out on these occasions is Shami Chakrabarti of ‘Liberty’, which seems to represent the Parliamentary constituency of the ‘Today’ programme at the BBC. The other Chakrabarti is Reeta, who works for the BBC full-time, as a political correspondent. I find it’s easy to confuse the two. I don’t know why.
Anyway, Mr. Stoughton’s breathless, gabbling interview with S. Chakrabarti this morning was totally uncritical, and full of helpful prompts for her. The case FOR an extension beyond 28 days, in the interests of the security of British people was not pursued, but dismissed.
I know the the BBC can’t get enough of S.Chakrabarti’s views; but I must have missed her defending Ms. Gibbons against the repressive, Islamic Republic of Sudan’s Government last week. Or is that a different sort of liberty at stake? For different sorts of people?
Roland Thompson-Gunner | 06.12.07 – 6:07 am,
I can see why you might have believed I’m British. I was born and educated in South Africa and lived there most of my life. South African English, virtually identical to British English of course, is my mother tongue.
Re your comment on my comment on the Labour government, I see the latter as engineering and maintaining the PC, multi-culti, pro-Islamist, leftist virus that has swept Britain and that is so ably propagated by the BBC. This is precisely the virus that endangers the very existence of Israel and I will challenge it wherever and whenever I can. However, I am interested in exposing all aspects of the BBC’s bias, not simply that which is directly aimed at Israel. No doubt if I concentrated on Israel exclusively, people would accuse me of lobbying for the country on a narrow, partisan basis.
I find your suggestion that I frequently “out” myself as Israeli quite ridiculous. Maybe I could save myself the trouble by simply calling myself Bryan from Israel. The internet is an arena where people do battle largely on an anonymous basis. People don’t have any obligation to reveal anything about themselves other than the opinions they hold on any issue. And frankly, I am insulted by your insinuation of my “intellectual dishonesty” as well as the implication that I am somehow misguided in perceiving the BBC as intellectually dishonest.
The BBC is guilty of far greater sins than mere intellectual dishonesty. Since you are such a frequent visitor to this blog, you should be aware of them.
Chakrabarti just popped her ugly mug onto 5 lite with Nu Labour attack dog Victoria Derbyshire spouting her usual dribble.
Funy that Ms Chakrabarti has been AWOL over Teddygate and the Saudi Arabia Gang rape.
Is she a Muslim that thinks only human rights in the west matters?
Expect her to pop up on the following
BBC News 24
BBC 6PM news
BBC 10PM news
Newsnight
Beeboids, if its Farming Today, it can reasonably be expected to reflect the views of the farming / rural community ?
Your line that badgers must be protected at all costs, from any form of sensible control, and that you are prepared to shamefully twist all points of view to this end, is a nonsense.
It merely reinforces the point that you are a totally urban organisation, with no understandng of nature – never mind if badgers eat all the ground nesting birds eggs and hedgehogs, they look cute on our token one hour programme on fluffy bunnies.
More positive news for Islam from the BBC:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/player/nol/newsid_7130000/newsid_7130000/7130029.stm?bw=bb&mp=rm&asb=1&news=1&bbcws=1
Yes, it’s our surfing Imam in Australia. Nicely on the front page of the BBC News web-site. Sometimes articles on here feel more like the old St Albion’s Church column in Private Eye…
I once wrote to the BBC, asking why Chakrabarti, whose organisation only has about 2000 members, gets the kind of podium that organisations with far larger constituencies only dream of. No reply.
Tricky I know for the small minded imbeciles that comment here, but give it a try.
korova | Homepage | 05.12.07 – 10:32 pm | #
You said it while commenting here. Hmm
bodo:
..
The BBC was forced to broadcast an on-air apology today after a local radio presenter in Nottingham joked that freed British schoolteacher Gillian Gibbons had a dog named Muhammad.
bodo | 05.12.07 – 8:38 pm | #
What I would like to know is WHO or WHAT FORCED the BBC to make an apology. Would it be the Labour Government, the radical islamists, the Muslim Council of Britain, a bomb threat?
SHAMI CHAKRABARTI spotting:
As predicted by Martin, 9:21 am, BBC
News 24 has trumpeted that SHE will be
on its programme within the hour.
David Preiser:
Korova,
With all the adverts I see from the China tourist bureau during BBC World News America broadcasts, it looks like a portion of your license fee supports the Communist government of China.
Thought you might enjoy that.
David Preiser | 05.12.07 – 6:09 pm | #
And you’re sure this is funded by the license fee?
From the BBC – Compare and contrast:
Up yours Christians!
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/entertainment/7128552.stm
We are most terribly terribly sorry about the slightest possible thing even if it isnt really offensive o muslims…
http://entertainment.uk.msn.com/news/article.aspx?cp-documentid=6917911
Brought to you courtesy of the British Bias Corporation
The difference between these two stories is unbelievable:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/7092401.stm
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/uk/crime/article2538090.ece
The BBC know what is happening but quite deliberately refuse to report the full picture. If ever someone were to ask you to explain bias at the BBC, point them to these two articles. Worthy of a slot on the BBBC homepage I think.
Bryan:
Ben | 05.12.07 – 11:51 am,
I take your point and I see that the issue is a little more complex than I at first imagined.
But the BBC is a public service broadcaster. And it seems a trifle unbalanced for it to be able to spread bias worldwide through distortion and omission of facts and then blithely ignore or dismiss complaints that arise from outside the UK as a result of its actions. The BBC has a tremendous amount of power and influence. And so often it uses it for evil, rather than for good. It needs to be continually reined in and challenged.
Bryan | 05.12.07 – 11:35 pm | #
Bryan, the BBC is a public service broadcaster, for those in the UK that pay the license fee. The services available to non-license fee payers such as yourself are commercial enterprises and they are funded in this manner (World Service aside, but that’s up to the FO).
As people on here rage about, unlike a commercial broadcaster, they have to pay even if they don’t watch it. You don’t have to pay for it. If the consumers don’t like what they see, they can all switch to a competitor and BBC World etc will cease to be (and you’ll miss out on all those ads for Emirates). It’s a free market.
You also have the opportunity to complain as you would with Fox, CNN, Sky et al
‘I for example strongly object to the likes of the BBC only advertising jobs in the Guardian newspaper. Why don’t the BBC advertise jobs in the Sun or the Daily Mail?’
Martin | 06.12.07 – 12:37 am |
***
That’s nothing, Martin. As a journalist I have to buy the blooming thing every Monday because it’s the only national newspaper that covers the media (in general) properly and where I can keep an eye on job movement etc
I can assure you that I never inhale, though. Everything except the media section goes straight into the bin…
Ben, my exposure to the BBC is through the World Service and the website.
The BBC seems to have been transformed remarkably quickly into a commercial organisation in your eyes. What happened to the trusted broadcaster of old?
More and more people noticing how the BBC has dispensed with ‘news’, preferring to ‘campaign’ instead:
Chief scientist attacks health reporting by Today and Daily Mail
http://www.guardian.co.uk/science/2007/dec/06/sciencenews.gmcrops
The government’s chief scientific adviser criticised the BBC’s Today programme and the Daily Mail yesterday over what he called their “campaigns” against GM food and the MMR vaccine. Sir David King said Britain’s failure to adopt GM crops had cost the economy between £2bn and £4bn and that falling measles vaccination rates as a result of negative publicity about MMR would lead to between 50 and 100 child deaths.
He singled out Today’s lead presenter, John Humphrys, over the current affairs programme’s editorial line on GM, saying: “What a massive shot in the foot that was for the UK economy.” Humphrys is known for his enthusiasm for organic farming.”
Ironic isn’t it that Sir David sees little difference between in campaigning style between the BBC and the Daily Mail, only one of which people are forced to buy and is supposedly is forced to be impartial?
Scrap the BBC poll tax.
Has anybody else noticed the remarkable similarity in the tone of the postings of Messrs Reith, Thompson-Gunner and Korova?
The general profile and ‘music’ in their snide, sneery postings leads me to believe that they are one and the same person. Or is it that the BBC, like many totalitarian regime often employs the use of doubles.
Ho, ho, ho
Jonathan Ross ‘worth 1,000 BBC journalists’
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/arts/main.jhtml?xml=/arts/2007/12/06/nross106.xml
“Shami Ch. answers your questions”
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=/news/2007/12/03/nosplit/view03c.xml
… except that she doesn’t!
A BBC Direcor General writes…..
Delicate balance between beliefs and liberty
By Mark Thompson, Director General of the BBC
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=/news/2007/12/05/njerry305.xml
“Editorial decisions such as that to broadcast Jerry Springer – The Opera typically turn on a delicate judgement between competing claims and rights. The claim of minorities to have their beliefs treated with respect; the claim of writers and directors to enjoy freedom of opinion and expression; the right of the public at large to decide for themselves whether to watch something they may find offensive. Such decisions are often difficult and contentious and should certainly be subject to challenge and review.
Hmmm. So, you’ll be publishing the Muhammud cartoons next week then? I don’t hold a candle for any religion, but the (unwritten) policy of the BBC appears to be it can offend all religions except Islam. Where is the impartiality in that?
The BBC – institutionally Christianophobic.
Question Time bias update. Following on from earlier commentators on the two Labour reps on last weeks QT:
Tories want Myners sacked for BBC attack
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/money/main.jhtml?view=DETAILS&grid=&xml=/money/2007/12/06/cnmyners106.xml
“The Conservatives have called for Paul Myners, the prominent businessman who is head of the Personal Accounts Delivery Authority (PADA), to be sacked after he attacked the party during an edition of BBC1’s Question Time last week.
The complaint comes after Mr Myners, former chairman of Marks and Spencer, accused David Cameron of being a “superior young toff” whose only job outside politics was to work at a TV company that “lost billions”.
However, last night it was reported that Mr Myners said in a statement that he appeared on Question Time in a personal capacity and no mention was made of his role at the government body.
So whilst the Conservatives are lucky if someone on the left of the party gets invited to the table, NuLab can have two reps on QT, one a minister, and one who works for the Government, so long as one appears ‘in a personal capacity’
Question Time – BBC bias in action.
Loadsamonaaaay!
MPs slate BBC move
http://www.manchestereveningnews.co.uk/news/s/1027193_mps_slate_bbc_move
“BBC bosses have been accused of inadequate planning for a planned `high risk’ £400m move to Salford.”
The cost of this relocation is staggering. How on earth does it cost £400million of licence fee money to move from London to Manchester?
Bryan:
Ben, my exposure to the BBC is through the World Service and the website.
The BBC seems to have been transformed remarkably quickly into a commercial organisation in your eyes. What happened to the trusted broadcaster of old?
Bryan | 06.12.07 – 11:09 am | #
I’ve never said the BBC is a commercial organisation – BBC Worldwide is. Whether it’s a trusted commercial broadcaster – well, that’s up to the viewer to decide.
If their commercial ventures are as anti-american as people here say the BBC as a whole is, I’m sure BBC America won’t last long – let’s leave the American public to show their verdict through the free market.
Martin | 06.12.07 – 9:21 am |
Is she a Muslim that thinks only human rights in the west matters?
Is she a muslim? ‘Chakrabarti’ sounds hindu to me, western Bengali perhaps?
See here
The BBC – institutionally Christianophobic.
Ritter | 06.12.07 – 12:26 pm
Thompson is to be found each Sunday morning in the church of St Aloysius Gonzaga on the Woodstock Road. With him will be his children, as it falls to him to raise them as Catholics, because his wife is Jewish.
Though Thompson inherited his religion from an Irish mother, he is not your usual kind of contemporary Catholic. St Aloysius Gonzaga is one of the three English oratories established by Cardinal John Henry Newman in the 19th century. Here, Mass is still said in Latin and there is no compromise with the happy-clappy modernism that has left many Catholic services elsewhere as banal as their C of E counterparts. Worship is wholly orthodox and utterly serious.
http://www.newstatesman.com/200405030021
Shami spotting on BBC…
Nick Robinson’s Newslog
6 Dec 07
Surprise announcement
http://blogs.bbc.co.uk/nickrobinson/2007/12/surprise_announ.html
There she is!!!
Douglas Alexander withdraws from QT..
BBC Question Time
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/programmes/question_time/default.stm
“Douglas Alexander has withdrawn from tonight’s programme. His replacement will be announced on the Question Time site later today.”
Err.. got something to hide Douglas?
Guess who the Tory rep is on tonight’s QT – Ken Clarke!
Others are:
Simon Sebag Montefiore
Allison Pearson
James Rubin
One guest TBC
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/programmes/question_time/7124733.stm
J
Bogusly talking about an indivdual’s beliefs and religion (even if he is the head) and juxtaposing it against a statement that an institution is christianophobic is entirely bogus and surely you know it.
Or do you accept there is no there’s no racism in the police if an individual chief constable is black or no homophobia in the law because a chief justice is gay.
The argument is utter nonsense.
An institution is not an individual.
Shami Chakrabarti is most certainly of Hindu background, not Muslim, though I think she styles herself as agnostic.
She does have an extraordinarily high media presence, but I don’t think this is something for which only the BBC is responsible. And the NCCL may be a small organisation, but it is comparable to the ACLU in the United States, which also gets ridiculous overexposure from all media organisations. One might question why she seems to be the sole spokesperson for the group, but then she is the director, so is best placed to represent it.
The trouble is that the organisation is the pre-eminent campaign body for civil liberties in the UK. If you want to critcise its high profile in the media, you would need to identify i) alternative organisations to the NCCL promoting civil liberties that should be consulted ii) anti-NCCL groups that ought to be consulted as a counterweight and iii) instances where the NCCL is being consulted on issues not involving questions of civil liberties.
J
…and the grossly offensive unfactually substantiated nature of the article does nothing for its credibility either.
Claiming that you inherit your religion, would all those here that dont follow their forebears religion care to disagree.
Having services in a language you dont understand is good, only if you are from this tiny minority or perhaps islam.
Claiming that mainstream sevices are banal without a shred of evidence, it makes a soundbite, no more.
The assertion of the superiority of orthodox seriousness, without evidence.
Somehow I dont expect similar disregard for say shia and sunni in their mainstream religious services.
The new statesman it seems in many ways is the BBC in another guise when its not being the guardian.
Woeful.
“Or do you accept there is no there’s no racism in the police if an individual chief constable is black or no homophobia in the law because a chief justice is gay.
The argument is utter nonsense.
An institution is not an individual.
BaggieJonathan | 06.12.07 – 2:58 pm | #”
Exactly. A well put riposte.
The New Statesman is the pre-eminent magazine of pseudo-liberals and disappointed Marxists. It has come close to bankruptcy a number of times following legal cases against its fabricated reporting (remember John Major’s ‘affair’ with his cook?).
In the case of Thompson, it is a fact that he worships at the Oratory in Oxford. It is false, however, to claim that every Mass is conducted in Latin. This observation, however, is merely circumstantial: in any case editors have much more input into News and programming than the DG, especially after the tenure of the appalling Greg Dyke.
I see the problem less as one of ‘Christianophobia’, which is as ridiculous a concept as its Islamic counterpart, but rather one of unbalanced exposure. In too many cases we find news stories whitewashing Islam in a way which never happens for other religions (look to the thread on the terrorist training scandal as evidence), and the exposure these stories receive are out of all proportion to the relative presence of Islam in the UK, which currently accounts for just 2.8% of the population.
“Tom:
The difference between these two stories is unbelievable:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_ne…ews/ 7092401.stm
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/ tol…icle2538090.ece
The BBC know what is happening but quite deliberately refuse to report the full picture. If ever someone were to ask you to explain bias at the BBC, point them to these two articles. Worthy of a slot on the BBBC homepage I think.”
The details of the cases alleged in the Times piece, and the indolence & cowardice (& collusion, arguably) of the authorities are shocking, like something I’d expect to read of happening in the Third World. On top of that UK-Tass’s selective presentation makes the whole thing positively Kafka-esque.
Strange to think back on the events of 18 years ago with the Eastern Bloc emerging from totalitarianism, events I followed avidly. Rather than Communism collapsing per se, stuff such as this brings home to me the extent to which the West has been being quietly absorbed into a kind of Communism V2.0
Unlike the BBC which fawns, I regard S.Chakrabartl and her Liberty organisation as over-indulged, unrepresentative of the British people, morally equivalent, UK-centric and non-critical of dictatorial governments outside the West.
S.Chakraparti must have campaigned on behalf of British citizen Ms. Gillian Gibbons’ loss of liberty to the Islamic Republic of Sudan, for example. But I still can’t find the reference. Remind me of the reference.
After all, ‘Liberty’s stated ‘Mission’, says:
“‘Liberty’ seeks to protect civil liberties and human rights for EVERYONE” (Capitals added). Look at ‘Liberty’s site: it doesn’t look that way to me. No mention of Saudi Arabia,etc.
Funny thing about Chakrabart is that she won’t go on Talksport with Jon Gaunt who as much as I despise him is gunning for her.
Can ANYONE think of an occasion where she refused to put her ugly mug in the media?
Perhaps because Mr Gaunt will ask her the sort of questions the BBC and Channel 4 won’t?
I was asking if she was a Muslim. She certainly likes to defend them which is surprising as the fanatics she defends would probably have her locked up at home if they got their way.
Perhaps a few months living under the Taliban might be an education for her?
I’m betting she’s on Question Time tonight. No doubt. After all we could do with an extra “liberal” view couldn’t we??????
Oh and Liberty has a membership of around 10,000 so why do they get such a high profile when the BNP has far more supporters but never gets BBC airtime? Fair and balanced? Er no that’s Fox News not Al BBC.
Martin: Re Panorma and Wifi. I did see one BBC journalist who said it was about as “scientifically literate as the famous Panorama on the Spagetti Harvest”
Well, alright it was me. I even made it into the Sunday Times!
Can someone tell me, is Liberty an official body which receives government backing regardless of which party is in power, or is it a more self-appointed body not unlike a pressure group?
I’ve looked at their website but still aren’t entirely certain. Could someone clarify its status for me?
Thanks.
Tonights Question Time panel:
This week’s panel
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/programmes/question_time/7131380.stm
The last minute shoe-in for Wee Douggie Alexander (who bottled it at the last minute) is Baroness Ashton, Labour Peer and wife of ex-BBC political commentator, and YouGov founder Peter Kellner.
No Libery are just a very small bunch of liberal lefties that seem to get the attention of politicians for some reason. They have no political mandate (I don’t think they put candidates up for election)
Politicians will always want to suck up to people who get media attention.
What’s interesting are the lies being put about. Yes we already have longer periods where people can be held without trial than many other European Countries, but in those Countries people have be charged, then held and still questioned. You never hear Liberty mention that do you?
GEORGE R. you are correct. liberals are COWARDS. Just like CND they were quick to jump over the fence at Greenham Common to protest, but none of them ever had the bottle ot go to the Soviet Union and protest there? Why not? Are they not prepared to die for the cause they believe in?
None of these Liberals are ever prepared to put their lives on the line to defend freedom. It’s always done to the working class to put on a uniform and get slaughtered on a battlefield, defending the freedom of these cowards.
That’s why I have no time for them. They are no better than used toilet roll in my view.
Maybe one of the beebers can explain why they have the steady flow of “fluffy muslim” stories?
The latest one is “Surf Imam changing Islam down under” – this has been on the news home page for over 24 hours now. Its not a news story. Human interest – maybe.
Then I skip to “the world in pictures” and somehow there’s always at least one muslim.
Odd that no other religion gets this “product placement”.
For John Reith:
(From my earlier post above)
Considering that Lord Ahmed is a Labour peer as they have been more than keen to show us recently, can we expect to see a story about Labour being split over policy on terrorism?
No. Lord Ahmed seems to me to be rather predictably ‘on-message’.
The closure of Gitmo has been a UK Government policy objective for some time now (see below) and Control Orders have replaced dentention without trial.
(Two links to Guantanamo stories)
—–
First off, both stories are the opinions of Lords, not policy statements of government, and while I appreciate that it’s all part of a diplomatic game, Lord Ahmeds point was aimed at contrasting the legal situation of the woman in the Teddy bear fiasco with Guantanamo Bay and Britain detaining terror suspects without trial.
His opinion, aired on the BBC, was that Sudan had acted in some way better than we do, now see;
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/7130072.stm
So it is still very much government policy to detain people for as long as possible without trial – which is exactly what was stated in Ahmed’s quote – so where are the BBC headlines telling us about a ‘rebel’ peer, or a split in the government?
How can the template file for the Question Time submission form be missing?
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/programmes/question_time/7124733.stm
Filling out the form and asking this question:
If someone has broken the law in respect of political donations, is it right that they continue in the position they hold while a police investigation is underway – shouldn’t they at the very least be suspended on full pay?
Which yields this result:
Error
No email was sent due to an error.
500 Could not open template – No such file or directory
/home/system/www/questiontime/form_qt.txt
cgiemail 1.6
If this file is missing, I am happy to state that it’s been removed to prevent people from submitting questions, unless you’re willing to believe that it’s decided to pop out for a latte since it’s so quiet tonight.
Not bias, but preventing a traceable pile of public opinion about what the topics on tonights show should be.
When reading this story I found the quote in the report highly relevant. I thought it was referring to the TV licence fee.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/business/7130529.stm
“Extortion hits low-income households with a regressive tax that saps scarce household resources,” the report said
shami c was on radio 5 today.
she had an easy ride from derbyshire who perhaps could read this…
http://www.prospect-magazine.co.uk/article_details.php?id=9928
time and again we are told that we have the most draconian laws of all the western democracies. actually usa hold “material witnesses ” for an indefinite period of time.
about time liberty’s research was challenged i think.
Asian paedo muslims are now just “group”
Al-Beeb getting more and more extreme.
Jimbob: Yes I made this point earlier. European law is very differnt to ours. People in many Eueopean Countries can be charged THEN held for long periods and still questioned.
What people forget is that Libery is politically driven, in particular with laws that “they” feel might be used against so called ethnic minorities.
I always thought that “Human rights” were menat ot be Universal? However, our own beloved John Reith makes it clear that the left in the BBC belive that only the USA nad ourselves should be attacked over human rights.
Where is the attack on Saudi Arabia from the BBC or Liberty over the Saudi gang rape case? It’s been totally ignored. As I said, the left are cowards. They act all big and tough cmaping outside Heathrow ariport but none of them have the balls to go to Saudi Arabia and protest do they?