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.
Here’s one for the cards.
On the London news last night was the story of the woman who sued a hairdresser who wouldnt hire her because she wouldnt take her scarf off for work.
The employment tribunal found she had been INDIRECTLY discriminated against so awarded her £4k in damages.
BUT…the tone of the news article was anything BUT sympathetic to the scarf wearer. They showed an interview with her and she was a self righteous little twat so far stuck up her own arse she couldnt see the sun light. Not only that but before airing the interview with the scarf wearer Al beeb pointed out her laywers had told her not to make any comments.
And to end it all, Al Beeb even advertised the fact the poor hairdresser was holding a fund raising concert to pay off the fine!
Honestly, I have never seen a report thats tone was against a member of the scarf wearers religion being aired before.
It was anything but sympathetic to the pathetic woman who didnt get the job because she wasnt good enough to get it (a finding the employment tribunal actually agreed with!).
Then again, maybe the report was put together by the one moron not blinded by hatred for the West?
Mailman
Supplement to Mailman (above):
“UK: Hair salon must pay £40,000 to hijabbed hairstylist for refusing to hire her”
This is a ‘Dhimmiwatch’ comment on a BBC report:
http://www.jihadwatch.org/dhimmiwatch/archives/021426.php
When does the BBC use quotation marks and what are they supposed to mean? I am sure this is a point that has been much discussed and the answer is generally that it is a way of maintaining neutrality by suggesting that we the BBC are not saying this but it is said by somebody; hence ‘terrorist’ or ‘unprovoked attack’ and such. Lately I have noticed this usage taking on absurd proportions. See for example today’s headline: Taleban ‘capture Afghan villages’. Is the BBC reporting that the Taleban saying that they actually captured the villages, in which case why the quotarion marks. Is the BBC saying that these are unsubstantiated claims in which case why not use the headline, “Taleban claim to have captured villages.” But if this is the case why does the body of the article assume that the villages have in fact being captured.
The BBC also reports on research on differences in the brains of homosexual people. The headline again uses the quotation marks: Scans see ‘gay brain differences’. Is the BBC intending to suggest that the research is not to be taken seriously as having discovered something which can be considered a fact. Is all scientific research to be reported in this way: “Galileo research shows ‘earth goes round sun’?
mjg,
I agree with your observation – the use of quotation marks by the BBC is now surreal.
Presumably the BBC is aware that it can ask critical questions about false statements made by Labour PM, Gordon Brown.
For example, in his recent statement on Afghanistan, Brown is reported as saying:
“We have resolved, first of all, as we did some years ago, that it is in the British national interest to confront the Taleban in Afghanistan or Afghanistan would come to us.”
‘Extra UK troops for Afghanistan’
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/7456551.stm
Brown’s words:
…”OR AFGHANISTAN WOULD COME TO US”
are unchallenged by the BBC. The fact is, of course, that through Labour’s 11 years stealth ‘policy’ of MASS IMMIGRATION, Afghanistan HAS come to us, in the UK, as this ‘Daily Express’ report indicates:-
“Just three months ago Home Secretary Jacqui Smith revealed she wanted to give every immigrant looking to settle in the UK a passport.
“Afghan immigrants saw the largest increase last year, up 211 per cent on 2006 to 10,555, making them the third most common nationality last year.
“Indians accounted for the most approvals at 14,490, and Filipinos were second at 10,840. ”
http://www.express.co.uk/posts/view/45165/Immigration-soars-to-new-record
The massive Islamic Jihad threat which exists in the UK can be related to Labour’s mass immigration policy of over a decade, allowing in Islamic jihad sympathisers/activists from countries such as Afghanistan, Pakistan, Bangladesh, Somalia and Algeria.
George R,
What’s with
the big gaps?
A comment on last night’s Channel 4
‘Dispatches’ programme,
“From Jail to Jihad”, relating to BBC:
[Extract]-
“The BBC should be educating the British (and non-British through its World Service) about the dangers of Islam, but, as is well known, it does the opposite. With some notable exceptions, the BBC is a vehicle for Islamic propaganda. Channel 4, makers of the excellent Undercover Mosque documentary, must do the job the BBC fails to do.” (Mary Jackson):-
‘Re-Dispatches: From Jail to Jihad (Channel 4)’
http://www.newenglishreview.org/blog_direct_link.cfm/blog_id/15413
GeorgeR,
This is one of the things that greatly upsets me about this Government.
I am a kiwi, I work for a major financial institution where I do some quite specialised tasks that relate to security.
I contribute to the economy (too much sometimes on a Friday night:), I am involved with my local community (sports teams, daughters school activities etc), I also celebrate my own cultural heritage…BUT I would NEVER EVER condone or solicit people from my country or my culture to go out and spontaneously detonate on public transport.
Quite frankly, its people like me and my fellow countrymen (including aussies and jarpies) that are the kinds of people you actually want here. We share a common heritage and we all have the same values.
However, the Home Office is actively pursueing a policy of restricting access to the UK from the former colonies (NZ, Australia and SA, to a certain extent).
I came here on a 4 year ancestral VISA. Last year this was changed to 5 years (costing nearly £1000 for the extra year!) and there are plans to scrap this kind of access altoghether!
On the other hand, I could be a jihadi and Ill be welcome with open arms, given a house, benefits and access to all sorts of help!
Now tell me…what exactly do people like these jihadi’s bring to this country apart from hatred and contempt for the local population and its culture?
These people ring fence themselves off and contribute sweet f9ck all to society…YET its these kinds of people that are being welcome with open arms to this country?
Ok, rant mode off.
Regards
Mailman
Chuffer:
What’s with
you lack of content?
Reasons to loath the BBC’s favourite corrupt organization, the UN.
#183
UN Watch’s Hillel Neuer confronts the 9/11 Troofer who is now the “Special Rapporteur on the situation of human rights in the Palestinian territories occupied since 1967,” Richard Falk.
This is a glimpse into a world of sheer obsessive derangement.
http://www.unwatch.org/site/apps/nlnet/content2.aspx?c=bdKKISNqEmG&b=1313923&ct=5484419
He was great as Det. Columbo though.
This morning BBC Breakfast discussed a proposal to make offenders doing community service wear distinctive clothing. Is this a good idea? In the no corner was Frances Crook, ‘prison reformer’ and in the other no corner, a youth worker. Astonishingly, the verdict was ‘no’!
Mailman:
Yes, Labour’s, BBC approved, open-door, mass immigration policy has had dire consequences for the UK. A sane immigration policy would undoubtedly be as you indicate.
If you haven’t seen the following, this essay is excellent refutation of the implicit ‘multiculturalism’ which underwrites the nationally self-destructive mass immigration consequenes of that ideology:
“The Path to National Suicide: An Essay on Immigration and Multiculturalism” (by Lawrence Auster); although his case relates to the USA, it has broader relevance:
http://www.jtl.org/auster/PNS/PNS_Contents.html
More propaganda commissioned by the BBC’s controller of fiction Jane Tranter. Coming soon • Burn Up:
This topical thriller sees oil executives, environmental activists and politicians collide in the battle between economic success and ecological responsibility. Rupert Penry-Jones stars as Tom, who, having been named the new head of Arrow Oil, finds his life unravelling as he’s pulled into a high-stakes game of power and international intrigue. (Sounds like the manuscript read by Kramer in an episode of Seinfeld – “Billy was a simple country boy, you might say a cock-eyed optimist, who got himself mixed up in the high stakes game of world diplomacy and international intrigue.”)
Neve Campbell plays his colleague Holly, whose covert collaboration with environmentalists puts her in great jeopardy, and Bradley Whitford plays Tom’s best friend Mack, a charismatic yet unscrupulous oil industry lobbyist.
Burn Up follows the trio’s lives and loves as they hurtle towards a global climate change summit.
The writer of Burn Up Simon Beaufoy explains:
“There isn’t a more important issue in the world than global warming. Even the Cold War and the Bay of Pigs crisis were a notional threat. A warming planet isn’t just a threat • it’s happening. The idea of concealing the potentially indigestible politics of climate change in the ‘Trojan horse’ of a thriller seemed a good way to engage an audience. Whether it works, we’re about to find out…”
2p:
This morning BBC Breakfast discussed a proposal to make offenders doing community service wear distinctive clothing.
Well duh!
Heaven forbid ANYONE should be made to feel shane in Scumbag Britain (formerly Great Britain).
It might harm the evil little scrote’s “self-esteem.”
CORRECTION:
They can feel up “Shane,” but not “shame.”
‘Lack of content’ as in being miserable, or ‘lack of content’ as in not got much to say at the moment?
Just listened to 5live – scottish bird interviewing some forsyth geezer about low funding and disgusting soldiers for our troops.
some classic beeboid goofy questions from her:-
1″so why should soldiers get to the front of the NHS and housing queus”
2″Isnt it the case that the armed forces are well funded and these are just isolated incidents?”[with regards to inhospitable housing for soldiers]
“why do you think then Gordon Brown would cut arm forces spending for over a decade?2
His answers:-
“because they fight for there queen and country and deserve it”
She did the typical beeboid “riiiight ok” to this one.
2″no im talking about entire barracks”[silence from her]
3 [you will love this!]
the question:-
“why do you think then Gordon Brown would cut arm forces spending for over a decade?”
The answer…………..
“because he’s a numptie”
BRILLIANT!
SPRRY ABOUT SPELLING!
Just watched the One O’Clock news for the first time in an age, with the lead story about inflation passing 3%.
Aside from the similarity to Newsround (good explanation of what inflation is: makes things more expensive, apparently) the other thing that was striking was the extent to which the government narrative was simply repeated. There really was nothing that we couldn’t have got straight from Labour’s press office (with more detail): It’s a problem all over the world and all we can do is be careful not to give in to excessive pay demands.
Getting bored of this I switched to Sky where the Conservative argument – that the government should be blamed in as much as excessive spending has left no room to ease the impact of rising prices – was being examined.
The Beeb’s news is very accessible, I’ll give it that. But it is also entirely pointless.
John Reith spins in his grave | Homepage | 16.06.08 – 11:12 pm
Apparently the only big political story worth covering this week is still whether Caroline Spelman paid her nanny a few quid ten years ago –
Martin pointed out on another thread the contrast between the BBC’s vigorous pursuit of Spelman and its kid-gloves treatment of the Peter Hain scandal.
Could the reason possibly be that Spelman is not married to a senior BBC executive in charge of Politics coverage, where the man at the centre of the Hain story is?
Another one for your collection, methinks.
Inglish, 54 this year, is married to the old Labour spin quack John Underwood • who happens to be a mate of Hain and was his treasurer. Inglish’s husband is now in the news for setting up the controversial thinktank at the heart of Hain’s problems • a thinktank without any thoughts but which masked the identity of donors to Hain’s campaign to be deputy Labour leader.
http://www.independent.co.uk/opinion/columnists/pandora/pandora-get-exclusives-unless-you-happen-to-be-a-bbc-boss-770896.html
To amplify Hugh’s complaint about the BBC’s News at One, I can add that R4’s World at One was little better, with a procession of Government liars being given the sort of inquisitorial going over that you’d expect from a kindly, if rather vague, aunt.
Sadly, Martha Kearney either isn’t up to the job of holding these verminous fools to account, or takes their side. I can think of no other satisfactory explanation for her kid gloves treatment of mendacious scum like Yvette Cooper.
Cameron:
scottish bird interviewing some forsyth geezer
Bird?
about low funding and disgusting soldiers for our troops.
It would be a scandal if she called British soldiers disgusting, but she didn’t, did she?
Never? Or, for appearance’s sake, once every six months or so?
some classic beeboid goofy questions from her
Asking politely for an explanation as to why other citizens should be elbowed aside in favour of troops sounds like she’s doing her job, surely.
Ditto the other questions.
I think we should agree a party line on this. When is it tolerable for the BBC to ask any questions at all about the British military?
Colin
i dashed straight to my laptop whilst getting my eldest ready whilst trying to remember exactly what was said. My spelling is atrocious,and i have 4 kids to juggle so sorry for my mistake. Im off to work in a bit also -help Labours tax machine.
Ill clear up a bit for you.
bird – yes,bird,us working class scum still use terms like this – and thank god we do – PC hasnt muted our lips yet.Just like thwe middle classes use terms like “totty” in BBC interviews.
Anyway –
it was:-
“and what about low funding and disgusting conditions our troops have to live in, is this surley just minority cases being highlighted”
She was trying to make out[the BBC reporter/bird] [as the government do] that the military were over reacting,that everyone was making it all up and everything was fine. As the BEEB does when it wants to “help out” it’s Labour chums,by calling the people they are interviewing – liars, just like the Irish were called misguided last week??
You say:-
“Asking politely for an explanation as to why other citizens should be elbowed aside in favour of troops sounds like she’s doing her job, surely.”
Nope,wrong again – perhaps it’s my limited grammar – im serious.
It is exactly not this -if you replaced the word military with the words “asylum seeker” “immigrant” “militant” then the BBC wouldnt even ask if they should be at the front of the NHS queue. They would be asking why not – which is what i find disturbing – the guys in afghanistan dying for a noble cause have to come back and live in squalor in many cases – as forsyth is clearly pointing out.
Hope this makes it more clear – im not very good at arguing the toss – im just helping Dave Vance on this site by highlighting bias.
For instance,watch the flag carrying olymipcs torch thingy report today on news 24 –
“and today the torch went through the muslim area of xian ” the muslim angle again – no mention of buddhists,etc etc etc
dont you geddit yet?
Bryan and I, and maybe others here (?) complained to the BBC about Aleem Maqbool’s “From Our Own Correspondent” and received identical replies.
We weren’t convinced and neither is HonestReporting:
Questions Remain Over BBC Response
Jack Bauer
Nah, you’re thinking of Peter Falk.
That video is worth watching if only to understand the depravity of the UN. Would that the BBC showed some of the goings on. Oh, hang on they probably will when they watch it, fits right in with their agenda.
Cameron
The Forsyth geezer was probably Frederick Forsyth (pbuh)!
Afghanistan comes to Britain. Too right it did.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/4767463.stm
breaking news from Al Beeb
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/7459574.stm
“The radical Islamist preacher Abu Qatada is to be released on bail within 24 hours, officials have confirmed. ”
heres me thinking he’s a terrorist scumbag rather than a radical
Marcus Brigstocke Watch. Apologies if any of these have been mentioned elsewhere in the comments.
First this recent review in, of all places, the New Statesman:
Brigstocke was once content to come over as a person who had perpetually just left university; he wrote sketches for Radio 4’s The Now Show about a character called Giles Wemmbley-Hogg – a sort of piss-weak amalgam of Bertie Wooster and Peter Cook’s Sir Arthur Streeb-Greebling, pottering around the world on his year off recording naive observations on how similar Egypt is to life back in Budleigh Salterton. But these days he fancies himself a “professional cynic” and “political satirist” – and even attempted to make a citizen’s arrest of John Bolton late last month at the Hay Festival, waddling around in the mud behind George Monbiot. Brigstocke is truly the unfunniest arse in the universe…
All Brigstocke does is preach to the choir. He is the poster boy for an effete, obsolete, undergraduate, Meccano-set humour that can be snapped together in short order. Absolutely nobody, apart from BBC commissioning editors, thinks Brigstocke is funny. He is, in fact, the very opposite of funny. He is the new Jim Davidson.
Ouch! Then there’s this from Brendan O’Neill last week:
Marcus Brigstocke, a BBC Radio 4 ‘comedian’, writer and failed arrester of former US ambassador John Bolton at the Hay Literary Festival last month (Hay: the books-and-lattes get-together where evil dictators fear to tread!), likewise prefers Poles to proles. He admits to being middle class • which means ‘the only exposure I get to Eastern European migrants is when they come and build something lovely for me’ • and says he finds British workers too lazy and, well, disgusting, to deal with… Maybe it’s because two of my brothers are builders • and good ones • that Brigstocke’s rant makes me want to whack him with a spirit level. Fat twat.
(O’Neill also takes a swipe at Mark Steel)
And finally, from the Daily Mail’s review of the new Incredible Hulk film:
It’s thoroughly routine stuff, from the rooftop chase through to the two CGI-created monsters fighting on the streets of New York while extras run screaming as though Marcus Brigstocke is on the radio…
Love it!
Cameron: don’t worry about the spelling, we know exactly what you’re getting at.
Colin Chase: as soon as you pick him up on ‘bird’ in that repulsive, prissy manner we IMMEDIATELY know where you’re coming from
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/7459528.stm
Inglish, 54 this year, is married to the old Labour spin quack John Underwood • who happens to be a mate of Hain and was his treasurer. Inglish’s husband is now in the news for setting up the controversial thinktank at the heart of Hain’s problems • a thinktank without any thoughts but which masked the identity of donors to Hain’s campaign to be deputy Labour leader.
http://www.independent.co.uk/opi…oss- 770896.html
PaulS | 17.06.08 – 2:00 pm | #
That’s a good scoop Paul, thanks.
Andrew Marr’s dhimmitude on ‘Islamophobia’ with William Dalrymple, Radio 4 ‘Start the Week’, yesterday, should be seen in this context:
“Spencer: The Jihad against Free Speech”
http://www.jihadwatch.org/archives/021427.php#more
“I think we should agree a party line on this. When is it tolerable for the BBC to ask any questions at all about the British military?
ColinChase | 17.06.08 – 2:29 pm”
hillhunt,
You don’t get it still after all this time do you – there is no party line, there cannotbe, there is no party (apart from the BBC).
Are you truly this stupid or are you just being disingenuous?
John Reith Spins in his grave: Don’t expect Michael Prick to investigate it on Newsnight though.
I see the BBC are wanking on about Spelman again.
Lets get this right. THe nanny did two jobs and was paid out of expenses for one of them?
So if an MP pays his wife as his secretary then when he gets her home gives her one, is that on expenses as well?
And what about that vile blob of fat Prescott? He was banging that trollop during working hours but I don’t see that all over Newsnight? Did he have to pay back and money?
It’s only John after all.
Baggiejonathan: Re Hillhunt
“…Are you truly this stupid or are you just being disingenuous?…”
You really need to ask that? 🙂
Has the BBC mentioned this anywhere? I haven’t seen or heard anything anywhere yet. There must be an amusing existential internal struggle over how to deal with this one:
Britain should get rid of the monarchy, says UN
I mean, it’s perfect. The beloved UN Human Rights Council is giving the BBC a real test of whether they’re anti-royal or not. Best of all, the council includes such democratic republics as Saudia Arabia, Cuba, Egypt, China, and Jordan, and the idea was apparently instigated by the delegate from the human rights paradise of Sri Lanka.
Come on, BBC, why keep the public in the dark on this one?
Sign the petition!
http://petitions.pm.gov.uk/Abandon-Lisbon/
Hugh:
“Just watched the One O’Clock news for the first time in an age, with the lead story about inflation passing 3%.
Aside from the similarity to Newsround (good explanation of what inflation is: makes things more expensive, apparently)….”
I, too, watched it for the first time in ages; Newsround? Jackanory, more like. Astonishing aimed-at-idiots presentation.
Britain should get rid of the monarchy, says UN
Britain should get rid of UN, says Monarch & Me.
frosty the snowman:
breaking news from Al Beeb
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/74…/uk/ 7459574.stm
“The radical Islamist preacher Abu Qatada is to be released on bail within 24 hours, officials have confirmed. ”
heres me thinking he’s a terrorist scumbag rather than a radical
————————————————-
Yeah and can’t you almost smell the excitement in the beeboid journo’s prose there…
David (USA):
Yes, as Hugh Fitzgerald points out, the UN Human Rights Council “is dominated by Arab and other Muslim countries.”
“Defamation of Islam”
(Hugh Fitzgerald)
http://www.newenglishreview.org/blog_direct_link.cfm/blog_id/13937
The EUREferendum petition to 10 Downing Street asking Gordon Brown to honour the result of the Irish Referendum.
Re: Preacher to Terrorists Abu Qatada’s release,
I see the BBC editors still want to perpetuate the Palestinian mythos. In every report, they refer to Qatada as “Palestinian-Jordanian”. Given the context that he lived in Jordan, and may possibly be extradited there for other convictions, it would seem that he was born a Palestinian, but has this connection to Jordan.
In fact, he was born in Bethlehem in 1960, which was at that time part of Jordan. Qatada lived for a short time under the Israeli control of the area until he moved to Jordan. It was in Jordan that he became a jihadi preacher before he moved around, eventually coming to Londonistan in 1993.
He was never a Palestinian, never lived in “Palestine” or Palestine, was never involved in any “Palestinian” or Palestinian causes, and is, and always has been a Jordanian national.
By labeling him as “Palestinian”, the BBC is perpetuating a lie. The BBC is also lying to you all about Abu Qatada. It’s not confusion, it’s not an innocent mistake by a poorly paid sub-editor. This is a deliberate lie told to the public in order to achieve a desired result.
It’s an outright lie, one which is part of the official editorial policy of the BBC.
At least they called Abu Hamza a “hate preacher”, but without any scare quotes. Doesn’t really make up for the lie.
“A warming planet isn’t just a threat • it’s happening.”
It is the 17th of June,what used to be known as “Flaming June”,the sky is grey and heavily overcast,there is a cold wind blowing and I am considering putting ob the central heating.
If they are not too wet to burn can we use greens?
Peter:
“A warming planet isn’t just a threat • it’s happening.”
It was about May 10, and I caught a news item on BBC 24 about the fact that May was the hottest on record… I thought: huh?
Don’t you have to wait till the month ends before pontificating.
If I remember correctly was cold, wet and windy for the rest of the month.
Listening right now to Radio 4 report on Britishness. Margaret Hodge saying ‘we’ve still got some way to go in enjoying our cultural diversity’.
Navid Akhtar is talking about the creation of ‘digital ghettoes’ – worrying that mainstream news organisations don’t represent ethnic minorities enough!
“All Brigstocke does is preach to the choir. He is the poster boy for an effete, obsolete, undergraduate, Meccano-set humour that can be snapped together in short order.”
Meccano? How dare you sir,Meccano is one of the things that made us great.you are thinking of Leggo.Brigstocke is too girly for Meccano.
Mailman, I lived in NZ for thirteen years and have Kiwi relatives. Of course you’re pissed off – we should all be pissed off about what this govt. is doing to our own kith and kin. None of it upsets al-Beeb, though.
They’re more concerned about ethnic minorities being ‘under-represented’ in the mass media.
Sky News. Michael Wilson says that some of the blame for the current economic conditions have to be placed at the feet of Gordon Brown who when Chancellor failed to put aside anything for a rainy day. This is now excepted by most people he said.
Really? I don’t think the BBC does. In fact if you read the crap pumped out by the BBC Gordon Brown’s mess of running the economy isn’t mentioned. It’s all the fault of the yanks bleats the BBC.
There’s nothing that can be done bleats the BBC. Really? How about slashing Government spending and cutting fuel duty by 20 or 30p a litre?
The BBC are spouting about how much worse it was under the evil Tories in the 80’s. But people didn’t have a mortgage that was 6 or 7 times their salary like they do now. There wasn’t the stealth taxes that there is now.
Will the BBC tell the truth? No lets talk about Caroline Spelman instead.
Peter Hain anyone?
Regarding the bearded wankstain being released soon. Why didn’t the BBC point out it’s the Government who passed the very legislation that the judges have thrown back in their faces?
If they wanted rid of this piece of shit. They could do so quite easily.
McLiebour and the BBC two cheeks of the same rent boy arse.