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.
Hugh: “…tax credits mean 40% of families pay no net tax…”
Which is, of course, steaming bollocks and typical Treasury obfuscation. The key word is ‘net’.
People pay tax but can claim back through the tax-credit system; claimants only make a ‘net’ contribution when they reach – off the top of me head – about £17k.
Moreover, those 40 per cent pay NICs and Council Tax, but they are not mentioned; other taxes (e.g. VAT, fuel tax, fag tax, booze tax, airport tax, Stamp Duty, CGT, Inheritance Tax, etc.) are not mentioned either.
And if you live in the South of England, it is likely that your Council Tax has doubled in the last eight years (in my case it has almost trebled).
Of course, 2002 is a crucial start-date because that was the year when Gordon’s spending spree started.
But hey, paying tax is FUN!
“Rare suicide bombing hits Israel”
BBC website.
No explanation of why it’s rare to the British public. Must be because the Palestinians have stopped sending them out of the goodness of their hearts, and only now do they rebel against the harsh blockade of West Bank and Gaza,(or so the British man in the street might think)
No mention of the fact that the security fence has prevented many bombers from infiltrating, or of the number of attempts of bombers to breach the fence.
Only the last sentence says “Israel argues ( implication that it’s only the Israeli point of view, but may not be true!!!) that the blockade of about 4m Palestinians in Gaza and large parts of the occupied West Bank is necessary to prevent such attacks.”
The BBC and its manipulation of British opinion.
Rare suicide bombing hits Israel
What does this mean? Does it mean that Palestinians rarely attempt suicide bombings or that they rarely produce an Israeli fatality?
Israel argues that its blockade of about 4m Palestinians in Gaza and large parts of the occupied West Bank is necessary to prevent such attacks.
No! Israel argues that constant vigilance; targeted assassination of bomb makers and terrorist high command; construction of a fence and multiple checkpoints which restrict Palestinian movement prevent such attacks. The blockade was (apparently unsuccessfully) designed to force an end to rocket and mortar attacks.
Edna | 04.02.08 – 11:20 am
SNAP 🙂
degee
LOL
If I wan’t decent news on Israel, I read the Jerusalem Post. For Palestinian propaganda, I go to the BBC.
John Reith | 04.02.08 – 10:21 am
Since the article makes clear the man was killed by Israeli security forces, I have no problem with that headline.
But if he had been killed by Kahane Chai, then ‘Israelis’ would be too broad a label. There is no double standard.
This headline has everything B-BBC objects to.
Lebanese man implies civilian although the article (claimed, saying) suggests the man was a drug smuggler and that there was an an exchange of fire. AND what’s with the ‘scare quotes’? Is there any doubt he was shot by an Israeli soldier operating in Israel?
Perhaps if the headline had been:
Rare exchange of fire hits Lebanon?
And once again the Hamas spokesman is mentioned by name,making it personal, but the Israelis are either’Israel says’ or ‘police say’ making the Israelis seem much more officious, impersonal and distant.
I can only think that it’s deliberate- it happens too often.
I wish the website articles would carry a byline; then we would know who writes these pieces of propaganda.
After the “crude, home-made rockets (that rarely cause casualties)”, we now have the “rare suicide bombing”!
Rare suicide bombing hits Israel
A violent offshoot of Palestinian leader Mahmoud Abbas’s Fatah party claimed responsibility for the attack.
That’s Mahmoud Abbas’s Fatah party, the moderate Mahmoud Abbas’s Fatah party, Israel’s partner for peace!
Get the real story:
Woman killed, 10 hurt, 1 critically in Dimona suicide attack
The Jerusalem Brigades of Islamic Jihad claimed responsibility for the attack, confirming in its statement that the attackers entered Israel through the Sinai, but several minutes later several organizations, including Hamas and Fatah, also claimed responsibility according to Channel 10.
They all lie and all fall over each other to claim “credit” for a monstrous act of mass murder.
To the Mohammedans who have begun to infect this blog: Please don’t waste your time and ours attempting to convince us that your primitive, blood-thirsty, medieval death-cult is about peace, instead convince your Islamic brothers that it is true. We in the civilized world simply cannot believe you any longer.
BBC bias at work again on 5 live: The story over the Winterton’s just now. The word CONSERVATIVE was used several times along with the word “again” highlighting Tory sleaze.
However, perhaps this is rather selective of the BBC? Have’nt numerous Labour MP’s been picked up for dodgy dealing with their expenses? Was there not a Channel 4 programe some time back indicating that Labour MP’s were at it as well?
I’m going to do some more trawling on this as this is clearly the BBC making afuss over this story as it involves the Conservatives.
http://www.mailonsunday.co.uk/pages/live/articles/news/news.html?in_article_id=457904&in_page_id=1770
http://politics.guardian.co.uk/commons/story/0,,2199574,00.html
Martin,
The Winterton’s actions obviously aren’t commendable, but it seems to me that they did clear the arrangement with the correct authorities. Conway, on the other hand, seems to have just lied about what people were up to in his office. There is a distinction the BBC are not drawing. They also haven’t got anywhere near either the Cruddas story you mentioned, or the story about Ed Balls and wife, which seems to be far more naughty.
BBC Online front page heading
“Rare suicide bombing hits Israel”
An attempt to minimise, which only draws attention to the implicit bias.
Imagine “rare” bombing on London underground.
Or “rare” conspiracy to kidnap a soldier and behead him.
Or “rare” outbreak of foot and mouth.
When in fact, is any major story described as “rare”.
Ann Winterton is one of the most diligent, persistent and best-briefed MPs in the House.
She has done more than anyone in exposing the government’s catastrophic military procurement policies, which have been responsible for the needless deaths of so many servicemen.
She is one of the few Members to shave shown any interest in saving what is left of the UK’s fishing industry, and she has also been one of the strongest critics of the government’s thoroughly dishonest Not-the-Constitutional Treaty shenanigans.
Naturally, the media have paid scant attention to the debates above but they have gone to town on the Mail on Sunday’s ‘sleaze’ story (which isn’t much of a sleaze story in truth).
Mrs Winterton is one of the ‘awkward squad’, for sure. So, is this payback for this and her ‘racist joke’?
Our media are great, aren’t they?
Does anyone know what routes are open to one to make a complaint to the authorities that be about the above mentioned ‘rare suicide bombing’ story. I can’t really see the point in complaining to the BBC if they can’t se how glaringly obvious the bias is in that headline.
“Rare” appearance of truth and honesty at the BBC –
http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport1/hi/rugby_union/7215056.stm
To paraphrase someone much smarter than me who once said – “If you want to discover the truth at the BBC the best place to start is with the sports results”.
Sproggett: Yes. As my previous post mentions there are plenty of Labour ministers and MP’s “bending the rules” on allowances.
However, the Winterton’s have NOT broken the law, unlike the allergations placed against many Labour ministers and MP’s.
Funny that the BBC doesn’t feel that the large dodgy cash donations to Labour require anything like the attention of anything by a Tory MP?
And why in the BBC report did they not mention that married Labour due who have also been alleged to “bend the rules” in regards to housing allowances?
Or is it the John Reith principle that Tory MP’s are held to a higher standard than Labour ones?
Last autumn the BBC and others could scarcely contain their excitement in reporting that the Arctic ice was melting so fast there would soon be none left. Sea ice cover had shrunk to the lowest level ever recorded. But for some reason the warmists are less keen on the latest satellite findings, reported by the US National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) on the website Cryosphere Today by the University of Illinois.
http://antigreen.blogspot.com/
of course one might ask WHY suicide murders are “rare” in Israel?
Perhaps that large concrete wall so hated by Mohammad Al Bowen and co might have something to do with it?
Perhaps the BBC would like more suicide murders to be committed?
Since no one wants to talk about the cult of bbc money-wasting, let’s look for the truth in the weather reports.How lucky if you listen to radio 4 and live in the sparsely populated regions of Scotland. You’ll hear pretty comprehensive details that take up more than half the allotted air time. But if you live in a crowded English city, about 50 million of us, you’ll get just a few rapid seconds of forecasting.
HEY, I THOUGHT THIS SITE WAS ALSO ABOUT SQUAWKING AND AGONISING OVER OUR MISSPENT LICENCE AND TAX POUNDS!
What! No scare quotes……….
UK’s first emissions zone begins
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/london/7225527.stm
……..any other story and you`d have “emissions zone” or “first emissions zone” or emissions “zone”.
The BBC. Not sure what a Terrorist is but quite sure that Authoritarian Socialism is no bad thing.
Infection wrote;
“Since no one wants to talk about the cult of bbc money-wasting, let’s look for the truth in the weather reports.How lucky if you listen to radio 4 and live in the sparsely populated regions of Scotland. You’ll hear pretty comprehensive details that take up more than half the allotted air time. But if you live in a crowded English city, about 50 million of us, you’ll get just a few rapid seconds of forecasting.”
Thank you for highlighting the disproportional reporting from the BBC ref the weather. Now without siding with the BBC could you please explain why people are stuck to Radio 4 for their weather reports? There are numerous radio stations on air, as there are TV stations, Newspapers and websites. However if you are as apathetic to the Weather reports as I am you could always do as I do. Look out of the window” But once again thank you for highlighting this biased BBC reporting. (Just for the info, the Weather on the BBC is brought to you by the MOD and not the BBC)
Cameron’s more influential than Brown, according to GQ’s 100 Most Powerful Men. Reuters, Sky News and the Press Association all reckon it’s news. Our BBC website says: Not news.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/7225556.stm
Police ‘took MP bugging decision’
A decision to bug a conversation between a Labour MP and his constituent was taken by a Thames Valley Police officer, the BBC understands.
I thought this pre-parliamentary briefing nonsense was supposed to have stopped under Brown? Funny that as of 1.55 today only the BBC’s Nick Robinson has this EXCLUSIVE
“All from London” eh? Cor blimey! Strike a light! Bloomin’ eck! No doubt born within the sound of Bow Bells:
“Muhedin Ali, 29, Wahbi Mohammed, 25, Ismail Abdurahman, 25, Siraj Ali, 32, and Abdul Sherif, 30, all from London, are to be sentenced within hours.”
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/7226425.stm
Looks like we’ll have to get the informatiuon we need from a reliable news source.
Thankyou Guardian:
“All five defendants were originally from Africa but had been living in London for some years.”
Abandon Ship
First posted here by anon on 21/01. time for a reminder:
Off topic, but anyway. . .
BBC ‘journalism’ is so predictably rank most of the time that it comes as a real shock, and pleasure, to come across journalistic excellence once in a while.
I think that’s what we got with Tom Heaps’ report on the utter mad mess and mad economics of the government’s wind-farm policies. His report was on Radio 4’s ‘Costing the Earth’, and I think it was an utterly exemplary piece of work. Astonishing, really, that one of the few places the BBC’s journalism comes up to scratch is on an obscure and – I’d have expected – repellently right-on radio programme.
If you have time, I’d recommend it, if only to show how effective journalism can be, if you’re prepared to do the work, and assume your audience can both listen and think.
But the question it raises is pretty crucial: if Tom Heaps can do it on (I assume) virtually no budget, how come the BBC’s prepared to put its name to the endless dross, dreck and drivel which routinely passes for its journalism?
And here’s another thought: if Tom Heaps can treat his audience as if it had a brain, why can’t Dimbleby, Humphreys and the BBC’s other panjandrams.
Hugh | 04.02.08 – 1:54 pm
Cameron’s more influential than Brown, according to GQ’s 100 Most Powerful Men. …. Our BBC website says: Not news.
Yeah and Ming Campbell is still the best dressed man in Britain according to the Savile Row Tailors Guild and if you believe Penis Extension International, Nick Clegg has a bigger tool than Jeremy Clarkson.
Not news. Thinly disguised PR.
http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/story/0,25197,23160648-12377,00.html
Probably not one for the BBC’s “Uncovering Iran” series.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/radio4/iran/
So Thames Valley ordered the bugging? Well that’s a change when last night the slimy garbage at the BBC were accusing the Americans of it based on NO EVIDENCE.
Martin
That was non-stop BBC meme yesterday, wasn’t it?
Every news report had it out there, loud and clear.
You could almost hear the gears grinding at BB HQ, “…can’t be Gordon…not McNulty…not Smith…not Straw…Ah Hah! Of course! The CIA!!!”
They should sue for slander.
The BBC is saying the govt had no role in the bugging. How does it know? Presumably the govt has told it so, and the Beeb happily reports it as fact.
Report on the latest expenses issue
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/7226069.stm
After setting out the response to complaint against Winterton, in which Winterton makes clear that everything he has done is above board. The BBC state
“However, Tory leader David Cameron said sticking to the rules was not enough in itself.
“Rules on their own are never enough; the whole point of transparency and accountability is that everyone should be comfortable defending the arrangements that they put in place,” he said.
Now, I can’t be absolutely certain and if anyone can assist I should be grateful…but the way the BBC reports it, suggests that Cameron’s quote was a direct response to the Winterton’s explanation.
I cannot belive that Cameron said that specifically in relation to the Wintertons. To me it looks like a piece of advocacy on the part of the BBC to help stick the knife it.
Especially the use of the word “however”.
Anonymous:
“Yeah and Ming Campbell is still the best dressed man in Britain according to the Savile Row Tailors Guild… Not news. Thinly disguised PR.”
Yes, I’m not entirely convinced that has stopped the BBC in the past. In any case, Nick Assinder has now come on to give a balanced commentary (complete with reminders of how useless Major was) to a story the BBC couldn’t bring itself to cover as hard news in the first case.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/politics/7225840.stm
Can anyone remember which Beeboid on here claimed that the BBC didn’t mention “Muslim” when reproting terrorists offences as it “didn’t bring any value to a news story?” This was usually in relation to terrorist offences, such as the recent British soldier beheading.
So why does the BBC keep referring to the Albour MP in the bugging row as a “Muslim MP?”
What does it matter he is a Muslim in this case?
Any Beeboid want to defend this?
Ah! Now the BBC are backtracking. looks like McBean has his sticky little fingers all over this bugging story. Looks like the bugging might be legit after all. Oh dear, poor Beeboids.
Look for the BBC to divert this back to the Wintertons then.
Can anyone remember which Beeboid on here claimed that the BBC didn’t mention “Muslim” when reproting terrorists offences as it “didn’t bring any value to a news story?”
I think it was the cappo di tutti cappi. The big man himself.
Anyone trying to follow the link in my above post will find the story has now been heavily amended and the Cameron comment removed
Ayayay | 04.02.08 – 4:46 pm
Good – because you were right about that ‘however’ turn. Very dodgy. Needed changing. Well spotted.
I have just seen this on BBC Views web page
“Family finances are being hit as bills and taxes rise faster than incomes, a centre-right think tank warns.”
Hey, lets add a value judgement into the story – again!
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/business/7225581.stm
Why does the BBC have to give the “health warning” to anything that is remotely conservative – I’m still fuming at the Toady coverage of this story. Petty, but significant management of the news.
John Reith,
Crikey
Is that really you?
Those interested in the story above, can see how the Cameron stitch up was inserted in the story on the Newssniffer site (between version 3 and 4)
http://www.newssniffer.co.uk/articles/94378/diff/3/4
I need assistance to find BBC links to important current new stories. For example, I can’t find links for:-
1.) “Muslim husbands with more than one wife to get extra benefits as ministers recognise polygamy” (James Slack).
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/pages/live/articles/news/news.html?in_article_id=512043&in_page_id=1770&ct=5
2.) “Female Muslim medics ‘disobey hygiene rules'”
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=/news/2008/02/03/nislam403.xml&CMP=ILC-mostviewedbox
As ‘It’s all too much’ has been saying all day:
could we have any comments from JR on the need to label any think-tank which is not overtly left-wing as ‘right wing’ or ‘right of centre’, while studiously avoiding labelling any left-leaning think-tank as such?
Will you ever, dear Mr Reith, admit that it must be more than sheer chance that the choice of label/headlines/adverbs is ALWAYS slanted one way, and one way only?—to pick some examples from today’s news, i.e. the ‘rare suicide bombing’, the ‘Israelis kill Lebanese man’, the ‘Cameron, however’, the centre-right think-tank, and so on, and so on, and so on…
5 convicted of 21-7 offences, but not a mention of Islam in the entire BBC report.
Obviously muslims can only be victims in BBC eyes, eg bugged MPs.
George R | 04.02.08 – 5:50 pm |
“Female Muslim medics ‘disobey hygiene rules'”
I’ve been wondering about this. What would the BBC do if this turns out to have something to do with the recent near epidemic of infections in hospitals? Heads would explode in cognitive dissonance. They’d have to cover it if it was a real story. I feel sorry for the senior producer or editor who has to tackle that one.
dear me. vicky derbyshire R5 9- 10 am today was appalling. the phone in was on the sadiq kahn incident.
several problems with this show.
1. she repeatedly stated that khan was bugged. many callers had to remind her that it was the terror suspect who was being bugged. she failed to understand the distinction.
2. she peppered the show with comments such as “not allowed” , “forbidden”.
but only at 9.45 – 45 mins into the show – did she ask the terrorism “expert”, from huddersfield university of all places, as to whether the bugging was illegal. he advised no which seemed to completely surprise her. some basic knowledge of the subject would take about 5 minutes work.
3. said expert ranted on at length about how damaging the bugging would be to good communtiy relations and showed that he was an abject dhimmi.
4. said expert was also asked a patsy type question by derbyshire whether mps noramlly visit people in prison. he stated is was “common”.
imho it is not at all common for a labour mp to visit a terror suspect. but then what do i know… i am clearly not a terror expert from huddersfild uni.
Yes Simon Mayo mentioned “right wing” think tank on his show today. Have you noticed that Liberty is never referred to as a “left wing organisation?
Jimbob: Check my posts on VD on the Khan thread. She really was awful (actually she’s awful every day)
You commented that 5 minutes research would sort this. Well according to “her” they meet at 08:00 to discuss the issue of the day, which from what I can gather is priorisited as the following.
1. Anything that makes Tory scum look bad
2. Anything that makes McBean and McLabour look good
3. Anything that makes the EU look good
4. Anything that makes the USA and George Bush look bad
5. Any other subject that can draw attention away from McLabour sleaze
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/americas/7225824.stm
If you read this article lightly you would form the opinion that though there are anti FARC protests in Colombia opinion onthem is hugely divided on the protests, as in the third sentance
“Some groups have opposed the march, including some relatives of hostages, who fear the demonstrations may provoke Farc into treating them more harshly.”
and the FARC are not so basd as in the fouth sentance
“Farc rebels pledged at the weekend to release three high-profile political hostages for health reasons.”
and more later quoting a relative of a hostage and a classic BBC toning down of its second favourite dictator (after Castro) namely Chavez.
Actually this is being supported by millions in Colombia and round the world, it is affecting every corner of life in Colombia and is endorsed by the vast majority of Colombians.
Do we pay extra for this sort of misleading stuff from the BBC?
Just who at the BBC decides on what adjectives to apply to people? The loser in the Serbian presidential election was described as a “hardline” Serbian nationalist”, the winner as pro-western. Why not “hardline pro-western” or ” extreme pro-western”?
Has anyone ever heard of a left-wing party being described as “extreme”, but this adjective is routinely used for right-wing or nationalist parties.