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 also be moderated. Any suggestions for stories that you might like covered would be appreciated! It’s your space, use it wisely.
General BBC-related comment thread!
Bookmark the permalink.
Bryan,
Thank you to you, too.
I’m really glad you enjoy my musings. Much appreciated and reciprocated. Do you ever wonder if people just read their own posts? I often think about that.
What we’re trying to do here seems rather impossible, though.
First, we don’t really know if we’re talking amongst ourselves. Banging our heads against a brick wall.
Then I fear that certain factors undermine our credibility.
Sometimes a glimmer of light can be observed on a far horizon. Then it disappears. You think you’re getting somewhere, then back to square one.
What do you imagine John Reith looks Like? I imagine the body of John Simpson combined with the head of………….not quite sure. With a moustache, maybe?
And an unhealthy interest in our private life.
Sue: Yes your point that perhaps there is a tendancy to see bias where none exists is quite valid.
However, Hillhunt couldn’t give a good reason WHY his religion was mentioned and why it was relevant in this case but not in others?
You are also correct is saying that the BBC tries ot deflect attention away from people who have committed crimes who are Muslims. The BBC happily uses ther term Asian, even when their crimes are related to their religion (such as terrorism or honour killings)
The fact is we can’t believe a single word the BBC prints these days. And who is to blame for that? The BBC itself.
Re my previous post.
If Hannah Goff had cut a few McGarr quotes she might’ve found room to report on some of the other votes:
Conference believes that teachers and schools should not be conduits for either the dissemination of MoD propaganda or the recruitment of military personnel.
Conference therefore:
(i) Congratulates colleagues in the Educational Institute of Scotland for their decision in 2007 to oppose military recruitment in Scottish schools;
(ii) Agrees to actively oppose military recruitment activities in schools across England and Wales.
Conference therefore instructs the Executive to:
a. By all means support Union members who face victimisation or other professional difficulties in the course of implementing this policy of opposition to military recruitment in schools;
b. Support those students and parents who may also campaign against military recruitment in schools, locally and nationally;
c. Co-sponsor with the Stop the War Coalition and its other affiliated trade unions, mindful of existing legal guidelines, curriculum learning materials on peace and militarisation. In addition, the Union agrees to purchase and circulate the most recent education pack produced by the Palestine Solidarity Campaign, which promotes an understanding of the history of this most protracted dispute in the Middle East.
Amendments –
Insert after “militarisation” in point (c):
“and circulate CND’s education pack on the same topics”
http://www.teachers.org.uk/resources/pdf/3837-Final%20Agenda.pdf (p90)
I’d like to know how the votes went on all of these points. Will the BBC tell us? Will any BBC journalists challenge NUT reps why “propaganda” from the MoD is unfit for our children, but “materials” and “education packs” from Stop the War coalition, Palestine Solidarity Campaign and CND are OK?
What do you imagine John Reith looks Like?
A Rhinoceros.
(hat tip Eugene Ionesco).
I see Ms Goff is a union activist herself:
“It’s always the case that management protect themselves,” said Hannah Goff, a journalist on the BBC’s website and the treasurer of the News Interactive chapel [NUJ] . “The foot soldiers are the ones left without their jobs.”
http://www.guardian.co.uk/media/2005/may/23/broadcasting.bbc4
I see China nows sees the BBC as its “Friend”. Hardly surprising the way the BBC has taken the side of the Chinese Government over the protests in Tibet.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/asia-pacific/7312240.stm
Chinese Communist Party sees nothing to be concerned about at the Beeb:-
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/asia-pacific/7312240.stm
(previously they had considered it too left wing….)
The Beeb appears to be up to its old trick of presenting radicals as normals again. This time its the NUT conference motion about excluding the armed forces from schools (http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/education/7311917.stm).
Paul McGarr is quoted giving the usual leftie rant about imperialism. The Beeb fails to mention that Mr McGarr ‘has form’ as they say (Try wikipedia) and cannot just be described as “a teacher”. My comment to the editors asking them to do a bit of research has, of course, gone unpublished and unacknoledged.
FoI me? No hypocrisy says Robinson
Good thread on BBC cover up of expenses on Guido.
http://www.order-order.com/
BBC front page:
“Schools reject ‘Army propaganda'”
http://www.bbc.co.uk/go/homepage/d/int/news/uk/2/-/news/1/hi/education/7311917.stm
To be fair it mutates into:
“Teachers reject ‘Army propaganda'”
when you click the link.
Since when did the NUT conference become schools?
Dunno. It’s a little self-absorbed to just read one’s own posts.
Sometimes a glimmer of light can be observed on a far horizon.
When it comes to the BBC, if you can see light at the end of the tunnel, you’re facing the wrong way.
What do you imagine John Reith looks Like?
Tall, thin, blue eyes, a little jaded looking. Moustache, yes, but neatly trimmed. Drinks a lot. Doesn’t post drunk, but sometimes a bit under the influence and a bit over-energised, angry and reckless. Gets a bit remorseful the next day and almost apologises. Regards the BBC as family whose honour must be defended at all costs. Engages in furious battle with those who question its motives and insult it. Regards winning these battles as far more important than fighting fair. Can fight very dirty indeed.
Bright and knowledgeable but with serious blind spots and an unfortunate tendency to cherry pick facts and propagandise. A committed member of a club where membership is based on strict criteria but once you are in you are warmly welcomed.
Would most probably be a fine journalist if he could shed the bias. Getting on a little though, and probably a bit too old and set in his ways to learn new tricks. Politics pretty much set in stone. A typical BBC man. Goes with the flow.
(Ask a simple question and look at the answer you get.)
Sue, that was in response to your 1:31 pm post.
Bryan
Did you see Oscar’s response?
The image lingers.
Sue | 26.03.08 – 1:09 pm
Dunno. He’s not thick-skinned enough to be a rhino.