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.
Tuvalu
“Islanders fear that the island could disappear if action isn’t taken against climate change.”
“It really does run the risk of becoming the first country to fall victim to the way our climate is now changing.”
“Please Help us. You caused climate change. You must set up a global fund.”
Not once does the report mention the most likely factors, such as:
1. Over-population of such small islands
2. Sand being excavated for building material, eroding the beach
3. Chopping down of too many coconut trees
4. “borrow pits”, large holes filled with trash
But I guess providing a balanced report would undermine the climate change agenda at the BBC.
Jittery about getting too close to Hamasland after Alan Johnston’s experience, the BBC is probably relying on Hamas-friendly stringers that Al Jazeera wont touch, and believing every lie they utter.
Bryan | 22.01.08 – 10:50 pm |
As if on cue, one of the “reliable sources” from Gaza, now has a diary on BBC pages:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/7203458.stm
Notice the 2nd heart wrenching picture: “Palestinian women and children tried to cross the border into Egypt”
http://newsimg.bbc.co.uk/media/images/44373000/jpg/_44373915_kids_afp203b.jpg
This is a picture from the event we saw on the Al-Jazeera footage! A dangerous PR stunt by the Hams.
When going through the BBC, 1 picture is worth a 1000 lies.
The Giant’s Causeway in NI under threat due to global warming (gasp!)…
“Rising sea ‘a threat to Causeway'”
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/northern_ireland/7201501.stm
“Rising sea levels and stormy weather may damage the Giant’s Causeway and other coastal areas of Northern Ireland, the National Trust has warned.”
(insert your usual disaster scenarios, all conveniently far away to be falsified)…
“The report, Shifting Shores: Living with a Changing Coastline, predicted sea level rises of between 85 and 100cm by 2100.
Hilary McGrady, National Trust director for Northern Ireland, said it was essential for more detailed coastal data.
“Our planning system, and in particular development plans and planning policy statements, must take predicted coastal change into account,” she said.”
More money required, perchance?
Al-Jazeera footage of the Hamas vs. Egypt incident http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3pWS3DM9Z-U,
and the BBC’s cheap posting of the image of children behind a wire fence from the same event
http://newsimg.bbc.co.uk/media/images/44373000/jpg/_44373915_kids_afp203b.jpg
while blaming it on Israel, is as clear proof of demonization as possible.
I will continue to visit this board, but for me it is now obvious that BBC has totally lost any pretense of impartiality. Demonization, not bias is what they do at this point.
I’ve seen this beast before in Serbia and Croatia. State media constantly demonizing the other side. It ended with 300,000 dead.
Is BBC pushing Britain towards war with Israel, while Islamists are blowing up people in both places?
How about this for a headline…
‘BBC centre under threat from global warming’.
Because if they mention it again I’ll bulldoze the bloody place down!!!
Can anyone please explain to me why the BBC uses the pro-abortion movemement’s self-applied euphemism to describe itself – i.e. “pro-choice”, but also uses the pro-abortion movement’s term for pro-lifer’s – i.e. “anti-abortion”?
Anyone?
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/americas/7203769.stm
Steve Edwards | 22.01.08 – 11:50 pm |
Because their use of “terms that do not convey judgment” is reserved only for causes they support, such as terrorists and pro-choice groups.
“Steve Edwards | 22.01.08 – 11:50 pm |”
Isn’t it obvious? Beeb are pro-choice.
“The report, Shifting Shores: Living with a Changing Coastline, predicted sea level rises of between 85 and 100cm by 2100”
Even those being born at this very moment will be 92 years old in 2100,most of us won’t even be!
A really genius scam to get money for something very few will be able to verify
Today and elsewhere:
Heath Ledger is dead, but why is the BBC at pains to emphasise that it may have been due to an accidental overdose of prescription medicines? They don’t cut this sort of slack to other celebrities, so why Ledger?
How many 28-year old people do you know who die due to a straightforward accidental overdose of prescription medicines?
Instead, can it be that nothing bad or grubby is allowed to be thought about anyone who appeared in Beeboid film of the year “Brokeback Mountain”? Can it be that simple to the simpletons at the BBC?
Today 8.50am.
Don’t believe the BBC reports from the Egyptian border in Gaza this morning, I’m certain that they don’t reflect the real situation. Getting the local UNRWA mouthpiece on the programme to condemn Israel was a bit of a giveaway.
Gaza blockade: Your reaction:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/talking_point/7201304.stm
The BBC is still implying the blockade is all to do with Israel and nothing to do with Hamas-inspired violence.
But great to read plenty of views from the other side of the coin as well. A breath of fresh air.
The Giants Causeway scare story was just used by Al beeb to keep climate change in the news cos today Al Beebs allies in the EU release their “low-carbon energy path” nonesense report
Cost-cutting at the BBC?
‘£400,000 for new BBC 3 logos”
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/pages/live/articles/news/news.html?in_article_id=509860%20&in_page_id=1770
“BBC talent bill remains a mystery”
(Christopher Hope).
Is it still a mystery?
http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/politics/christopherhope/jan08/bbctalentbill.htm
This is a typically undemocratic BBC decision; in this case, to force non-Welsh UK licence-payers to have more BBC Wales programmes:-
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/wales/7202790.stm
This is a really good one compare :-
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/manchester/4470187.stm
“Kalvinder ‘Bob’ Singh was attacked at a curry house in Cheetham Hill on 10 April 2004.”
and the national front supporting (?)
http://www.theasiannews.co.uk/news/s/506/506634_beaten_to_death_for_having_white_friends.html
“Beaten to death for having white friends”
This should be a main article.
The BBC attack “dog” Victoria Derbyshire was at it again this morning. Discussing Police pay on the phone in, she savaged anyone that dare think the Government were up to anything dodgy.
Oh and when the question came up of why Scottish Police had received the full amount, she simply mumbled “devolution” and moved on.
What a mostly Scottish senior cabinet making sure THEIR homes and THEIR friends in Scotland get looked after whilst stuffing the English?
Re Giants Causway. An Irishwoman interviewed on Sky said clearly it wasn’t going to be washed away as the BBC were claiming. It’s been there for hundreds of millions of years, so a few Roger Harrabins won’t make any difference.
Anyway what if it did? Who cares? Who cares if Polar bears die out?
The history of this planet tells us that as the climate changes animal and plant life either adapts or dies out and new life comes along.
That’s called evolution.
Tony Blair: The BBC article is short because at that point the case was active so nothing more could really be said. If you search the BBC website you’ll find much longer articles. The case was also featured on Crimewatch.
Here’s a follow-up comment on Channel 4’s/ Martin Bright’s ‘Dispatches’ on Livingstone :
“Ken Livingstone’s court: Dispatches investigation” ( by Ed Howker ).
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?view=DETAILS&grid=&xml=/news/2008/01/22/nken122.xml
It’s not quite ‘Dispatches’ but this BBC report today seems to take the hint:
“BBC investigation prompts Ken Livingstone aide to quit”
http://blogs.pressgazette.co.uk/wire/1794
dave t | 22.01.08 – 9:09 pm
Yes but we never got any hard and fast replies or rebuttals from JR about the facts concerning Rafah and its location and who actually controls it.
That’s not fair davet, I set out all the facts and gave links to further details.
To recap in brief:
*Under the Agreement on Movement and Access of November 2005 the Rafah crossing is operated by an EU outfit called EU BAM.
*EU BAM say they will only open the crossing when Israel says they can. They say this is because, under the AMA, Israel’s permission is needed for the crossing to be open. They also say they can’t physically operate the crossing without Israel’s say-so because the Israelis control access • the EU monitors live in Israel and need to pass through Kerem Shalom to get to their posts..
*Egypt can physically open the gate • and did so to allow pilgrims to go to Mecca. When they did so, Israel complained this was a breach of the agreement.
*The US is threatening to hold back $100 m in aid to Egypt unless it sharpens up its act in relation to border security/arms etc. So Egypt is trying to be on its best behaviour.
http://www.haloscan.com/comments/patrickcrozier/2655299103329493632/#379766
http://www.haloscan.com/comments/patrickcrozier/2655299103329493632/#379853
There seems to be a bit of hypocrisy going on here. When Egypt
DID open the crossing for the pilgrims in December, people here at Biased-BBC were indignant that this was breaking existing agreements with Israel.
http://biased-bbc.blogspot.com/2007/12/mini-classic-israellycool-doesnt-so_09.html
“……. plenty of views from the other side of the coin as well. A breath of fresh air.
Andy | 23.01.08 – 9:31 am | #”
Yes, and a commenter from Sderot wonders why the BBC never asks them about their experiences under missile attack.
What, and jeopardise all that empathy with the poor Palestinians? That’s how it is, and the BBC are damn well going to keep it that way. Couldn’t risk the worldwide audience catching a glimpse of those bad Israelis without their horns and jackboots on. No, we’ll keep on keeping our distance, thanks all the same.
As Pounce would say – The BBC and half a story.
Simon | 22.01.08 – 11:00 pm
No, this ‘clash between forces’ idea is an invention of yours to further a wholly untrue suggestion that the BBC reported this as fight between opposing armies.
The original article reported (quite correctly) that Two off-duty soldiers were involved in a shootout with Palestiniann gunmen (in the body copy) and Palestinian attackers (in the picture caption. The word clash only appears in the headline as West bank clash leaves three dead – which is perfectly reasonable.
Besides, I think it’s a bit much of you to have a go at the BBC for being ‘biased’ on the grounds it left out of a story written almost a month ago certain details that only surfaced in the Israeli media yesterday!
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/7162878.stm
Sue | 23.01.08 – 11:25 am
a commenter from Sderot wonders why the BBC never asks them about their experiences under missile attack.
What are these stories then?
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/middle_east/7203040.stm
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/middle_east/6977346.stm
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/middle_east/5097926.stm
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/middle_east/6152266.stm
Sue: News 24 was live all day yesterday (or it may have been Monday, apologies for not being able to check right now) in Sderot. Touching on many of the issues raised here, including the psychological damage done by a continual stream of missiles raining down on residents.
Andrew Neil giving evidence to Lord’s Media Committee, asked if he agreed with Marr that bias existed at the BBC. Neil replied that he was the balance, “the cuckoo in the nest”.
John Reith,
Surely you didn’t need to trawl back as far as 2006 for your examples? If so, I rest my case.
However, I admit the recent ones were reasonable examples, the one from last September even seemed sympathetic. Let’s have more in the same vein, you still have a long way to go to redress the imbalance, but don’t spoil the spirit of these reports by emphasising that the rockets are “home made” and “inaccurate” which implies that they’re making a lot of fuss about nothing; and I also think it is disingenuous to emphasise individual calls for revenge without at least asking the obvious question, what else are the Israelis to do?
My point, as usual, is that I can’t understand why the BBC is far more understanding and sympathetic towards followers of a backward Islamic style regime than towards people who live in western style democratic country, just like the one that allows them the freedom to do what it does, and me the freedom to say what I say. But I’m not asking for partiality, just the opposite. I want them to see it, admit it, and stop it.
David Gregory
Good. Glad to hear it.
Sue | 23.01.08 – 11:25 am
If David Gregory is right and BBC tv have just done a day live from Sderot, and it looks like JR has found a number of print stories too, your post seems rather badly timed.
My husband (who is pro-Israel and has family there) left a supporting message about a year ago on an Israel media monitoring web site. Soon after he was asked to join something called a ‘battalion’ and his battalion leader would constantly e-mail suggestions for him to write letters or leave posts on blogs and message boards. My husband eventually decided that he was no longer prepared to do this after being asked to say things that weren’t true. We still get e-mail newsletters listing the themes the battalion is supposed to raise and by coincidence a lot of them are topics that crop up on biased bbc, slightly adapted to look like criticism of bbc news items. I mention this because the latest order is to say the media aren’t covering the townspeople of Sderot.
Woman rips off mans testicle: You gotta love the BBC here. Notice the quote the bBC put in highlight
“I am in no way a violent person” of course not love.
Why didn’t the BBC highlight what she did to the man?
Can you imagine the BBC putting that up if it had been the other way round?
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/4253849.stm
I assume it was an article written by one of the fat dumpy “sisterhood” that works at the BBC.
perdita
Not good. This happens on both sides though.
The BBC have been woefully short of coverage on Sderot over the last few years. However, the report on Today yesterday morning (I think) was a good one and for once didn’t qualify any of the coverage with Palestinian victimhood context. A refreshing change.
This is more typical of BBC output:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/middle_east/7203458.stm
“Gaza diary 1: Rana Elhindi
In the first instalment of her diary for the BBC News website, Rana Elhindi, a Save the Children worker in Gaza, describes the impact of Israel’s blockade on daily life and the aid effort in the territory.”
Note the expression “describes the impact of Israel’s blockade”. i.e. all that follows can be blamed on Israel, including stuff that happened begore the blockade.
But funny how Israel’s vice-like grip on Gaza doesn’t seem to prevent certain things from getting through…….
http://www.mfa.gov.il/MFA/Terrorism-+Obstacle+to+Peace/Terrorism+and+Islamic+Fundamentalism-/Potassium+nitrate+discovered+in+sugar+bags+marked+as+EU+assistance+29-Dec-2007.htm
Incidentally, the Gaza/potassium nitrate in EU aid sugar bags does not appear on the BBC news site.
I have just seen a very silly BBC report from the WEF(world economic forum) where the ‘reporter’ said “well its 10degrees here and that is far warmer than it should be” Er what IS the ‘right temperature’ then brainiac Eh? do tell us purleese! Souldnt you tell us taxslaves the facts and figures? I mean why not tell us about the fact that the area is seeing record snowfall and low temperatures? I guess not. Or how about the fact that on a sunny day and inside a built up area its going to be slightly warmer than outside in the countryside. If the BBC reporter has to stoop to such pathetic tricks to push the global warming theory, then I for one do not buy it for a second.
But the follow on story was even worse, if thats possible, it was about the tiny island of tuvaloo in the south pacific and according to the BBC it will soon drown under fast rising sea levels(its only 4metres above sea level). sounds dramatic doesnt it? only thing is though over the last century actual sea levels have not risen enough to cover your shoes! and the IPCC has been proved wrong on EVERY forecast about supposed sea level rises. Time and time again we hear the words ‘could and might and maybe’ and every other fuzzy and dishonest language from the BBC in its pathetic attempt to ‘big up’ its AGW fairytales.
All we want is fair balance and truthful reporting, is that too much to ask?
We can smell b******t a mile away so why cant the BBC trust see it?
My point, as usual, is that I can’t understand why the BBC is far more understanding and sympathetic towards followers of a backward Islamic style regime than towards people who live in western style democratic country, just like the one that allows them the freedom to do what it does, and me the freedom to say what I say. But I’m not asking for partiality, just the opposite. I want them to see it, admit it, and stop it.
Sue | 23.01.08 – 12:44 pm |
You contrast the Beeb’s attitudes towards “followers of a backward Islamic style regime” and “people who live in western style democratic country”. False contrast, surely: it’s “people who live in . . ” in both cases. And I’d have thought that the people who live in the occupied territories and palestine administerd areas have a lot more to complain about. They are living under foreign occupation or under the rule of an incompetent palestine authority whose ability to do anything is constantly undermined by Isael intervention – and whether or not they support palestine resistance to Israel they are subject to a vicious – and almost certainly illegal – policy of Israeli reprisal that routinely manages to notch up massively disproportionate numbers of palestine civilian victims.
cassandra i saw the a tuvaloo scare story as well. AL Beeb confusing natural events (high tide) with the catastrophic effects of dangerous human induced global warming lol
wonder how big the beeboids carbon foot print was for that news item.
“wonder how big the beeboids carbon foot print was for that news item.”
Being an English graduate, I doubt that Archbishop Harrabin, the BBC’s “Environment Analyst” will be able to calculate it.
Tim Franks was the Beeboid who reported from Sderot. Here is his online report, which again is a refreshing change from the usual BBC fare. Jeremy Bowen on holiday?
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/middle_east/7203040.stm
perdita | 23.01.08 – 12:47 pm | #
No, you’re making it up aren’t you?
And there I was thinking all the commentators on B-BBC were genuinely people obligated to pay the license-fee who were fed up with us.
So some of the people who post here, may be people, golly gosh non-residents even, who dont really give a fig about the license-fee but have an overt political agenda and are trying to influence the BBC in pursuit of their political goals?
Well, I never 😉
Sarah Jane wrote;
“So some of the people who post here, may be people, golly gosh non-residents even, who dont really give a fig about the license-fee but have an overt political agenda and are trying to influence the BBC in pursuit of their political goals?”
With that in mind care to explain the difference between the BBC and Al Jazeera coverage of the incident at the border crossing yesterday. According to the BBC only the pals were victims. The Al J video and coverage tells a different story.
I think it’s more the case that the BBC’s agenda affects them, in the Israeli’s case, peddling the people who live for no other reason than to destroy them’s propaganda via that guy who looks like a child molestor or a date rapist or something without the moustache that he used to wear. Jeremy something. And so, they’re perfectly entitled to criticise the BBC, and to highlight its bias.
Anyway, I’m a BBC Tax payer and I loathe the BBC just like any other person who’s forced to pay for something they don’t want or need.
But, like the other Beeboid on the thread from the other day was saying, we ought to occasionally highlight the positives of the BBC, so here’s my contribution. Fawlty Towers was awesome. And…nah, that’s all I got. Oh, thankyou BBC.
Sue
Taking into account JRs protestations, I think there is still an imbalance with regard to the BBC Middle East coverage.
The implication still very much being Israel = bad guys, Palestinians = plucky underdogs. Jeremy Bowen pouring piss over the Israelis at every opportunity doesn’t help.
John Reith
Given you can excavate BBC web pages with astonishing dexterity and have loads of spare time why not try this piece of analysis, just out of interest:
For all BBC Middle East stories that ever lived, divide those sympathetic to Israelis by those sympathetic to the Palestinians, leaving aside don’t knows.
What was that? I/P is much much less than one?
We still get e-mail newsletters listing the themes the battalion is supposed to raise and by coincidence a lot of them are topics that crop up on biased bbc, slightly adapted to look like criticism of bbc news items. I mention this because the latest order is to say the media aren’t covering the townspeople of Sderot.
perdita | 23.01.08 – 12:47 pm |
There has been a marked improvement in BBC’s coverage.
What I have seen, are boards and newsletters by the Muslim Student organizations a Canadian campus. I’m sure they have emailing lists too. They too are urging people to write…
pounce I will give you that one, the shots definitely worth a mention IMO
Now I must get back to my master’s bidding inshallah.
Alan – thank you for commenting on our ‘improvements’. License-fee payers country-wide will be overjoyed at the news of your approval.
Besides, I think it’s a bit much of you to have a go at the BBC for being ‘biased’ on the grounds it left out of a story written almost a month ago certain details that only surfaced in the Israeli media yesterday!
JR,
It is about the presumption of guilt, and you know it.
By default Israel is guilty, by default Palestinians are not.
This is true in 90% of the cases on BBC.
We have a rare opportunity to glimpse into it with that Al-Jazeera footage.
Maybe, because no Israelis were involved, they provided the full picture of events.
If a picture of that woman in Sderot with a respirator was fake and taken from a car accident, you would want your viewer to know that it has nothing to do with rocket attacks? Right?
The same goes for the heart wrenching picture of children behind the fence from the same PR event we saw on Al-Jazeera footage. Right?
That is just responsible journalism. Right?
Alan – thank you for commenting on our ‘improvements’. License-fee payers country-wide will be overjoyed at the news of your approval.
Sarah-Jane | 23.01.08 – 2:16 pm |
People were complaining that there is never a good word. When I mention the improvement, your response is sarcasm.
How come?
Sue | 23.01.08 – 12:44 pm |
John Reith,
Surely you didn’t need to trawl back as far as 2006 for your examples? If so, I rest my case.
You talk as if 2006 were the dark ages. C’mon Sue, it was only 13 months ago.
And no… I didn’t HAVE to trawl back even that short distance. The first of the examples I gave is datestamped 22nd January 2008…..i.e. yesterday.
Still it was worth including the 2006 example to take account of the sudden fashion manifest in this thread for claiming the BBC’s ME coverage has become much less biased in the past week or so.
One commenter even suggested it was ‘cos I’d put in a word.
Bless.
No • the time range in my examples shows very nicely that the BBC wasn’t biased yesterday, and it wasn’t biased in 2006 or any time in between – whatever they teach you in hasbara school.
“No • the time range in my examples shows very nicely that the BBC wasn’t biased yesterday, and it wasn’t biased in 2006 or any time in between – whatever they teach you in hasbara school.”
So let’s have the Balen report published then…..
JR,
If you want to nitpick, since Hamas took over Gaza, there were no EU monitors. The whole deal about Rafah was off. Smuggling of weapons and funds for Hamas and Islamic Jihad was daily occurrence.
But I see some good developments this morning. The border is non-existent. Gaza can now become part of Egypt as it was before 67′ and should be in the future.