! 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.
“mugabe stripped of his knighthood”
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/7473243.stm
ooh – that’ll make him quake in his boots.
in times past, we’d have imposed sanctions. but of course, we can’t do that now – thanks to the EU.
Well I came home tonight and read up the reviews and articles on the Germany and Turkish football. While I thought the coverage was very pro Turkey (I wonder why?) I let it be as that is what the BBC has become.
So I watch the match and Allah all mighty if the two f-ing BBC idiots commentating the match aren’t praying towards Mecca tonight I’ll be much surprised. The best thing that transpired was the power-cut. (Maybe somebody else noticed the pro-Turkish coverage) and Radio 5 took over.
Chuffed to f-ck the Germans have scored and won the match. Now those two idiots are doing a match synopsis predicting the Germans will lose in the final. Yup nothing like sour grapes.
Please accept my appologies for my last post. I should have finished with ‘Sour dates’ not sour grapes.
Slap head Nick Robinson on BBC 10PM news. He makes it VERY clear that Balls and his squeeze have done nothing wrong.
Shame he didn’t point out that Caroline Spelman didn’t think she’d done anything wrong either.
Oh and I notice the BBC still failed to mention Wendy Alexander again.
Oh and Peter Hain? The BBC keep mentioning Tories but not Nu Lab garbage.
I note that tonight “the BBC 10 O’Clock News has learnt that” (don’t you love that phrase they’ve started to use) the Government is to bring in new anti-age discrimination legislation.
Well how did they happen to learn this? Perhaps the Government told them. So they act as Government announcer and add in an article of how bad all discrimination is just to show that this is a good move by the Government.
Hmm. Typical of pro China bias on the BBC 10PM news (well the Olympics are fast approaching and all those big fat camp liberal beeboids are keen to make sure their fat bums are in those club class airline seat for their 4 yearly freebie holiday at our expense) talking about the “state run capitalist economy”
Hmm. They talked of the capitalist system having lifted millions out of poverty (well yes nice to see the BBC admitting Communism just creates poverty and capitalism creates wealth) but the BBC didn’t seem to have a go at all those evil western Countries that exploit child workers in China.
Why not beeboids? Could it be because the Chinese Government exploits children as well and the BBC doesn’t want to rock the “freebie boat?”
http://www.rferl.org/featuresarticle/2007/06/8FC0430E-EC67-48AB-9F82-659CF27BA992.html
http://ihscslnews.org/view_article.php?id=57
Will there be a Panorama special? I think not!
How come NO mention of “climate change?” Are we to believe driving a car in China creates less CO2 that a car driven in the UK?
What about all those coal powered power stations being built?
Why is it that when China comes up, climate change goes missing?
Dunno if anyone has had a look at the World Have Your Say blog lately. It’s the website version of the World Service WHYS that is broadcast every weekday at 17:00 GMT. I hadn’t contributed to the blog for some time and when I did a week or two back I thought I had stumbled on a typical lefty site with people slapping each other on the back over how withering they could be about all the lefty obsessions, like George W. Bush and the innocent Palestinians versus the wicked Israelis. (Of course it is a typical lefty site, it just happens to be run by our impartial and balanced public broadcaster, the BBC.) Your comment gets an “awaiting moderation” message in red underneath it while the moderators consider whether it’s OK to post. Nobody else can see it till then. Only after I got into a debate with one guy over his typical brain dead lefty stance on Israel did I realise that the moderators are also commenters on the blog and I was arguing with a moderator. The poor dear got upset and punished me by leaving my post hanging while he went off to bed. I realised that he was a moderator because he came up with a snotty reply to my hanging post that nobody except the moderators could see. The hanging comment had to wait several hours before it was rescued by another moderator, who evidently found nothing wrong with it, took it out of quarantine and posted it on the blog.
Most of the moderators are fairly relaxed about what they will allow through and some of the debates are quite interesting:
Here’s the one on Jewish refugees from Arab countries:
http://worldhaveyoursay.wordpress.com/2008/06/21/justice-for-jewish-refugees/#more-694
It was aired on Newshour on Saturday and can still be heard on Listen Again for a few more days:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/worldservice/programmes/000000_newshour_listen_again.shtml
Dunno how long this openness will last at the BBC.
Why is it that when China comes up, climate change goes missing?
Martin | 25.06.08 – 10:38 pm
I think it’s been missing since 1998!
Oops, Preview wasn’t working. Trying again:
Dunno if anyone has had a look at the World Have Your Say blog lately. It’s the website version of the World Service WHYS that is broadcast every weekday at 17:00 GMT. I hadn’t contributed to the blog for some time and when I did a week or two back I thought I had stumbled on a typical lefty site with people slapping each other on the back over how withering they could be about all the lefty obsessions, like George W. Bush and the innocent Palestinians versus the wicked Israelis. (Of course it is a typical lefty site, it just happens to be run by our impartial and balanced public broadcaster, the BBC.) Your comment gets an “awaiting moderation” message in red underneath it while the moderators consider whether it’s OK to post. Nobody else can see it till then. Only after I got into a debate with one guy over his typical brain dead lefty stance on Israel did I realise that the moderators are also commenters on the blog and I was arguing with a moderator. The poor dear got upset and punished me by leaving my post hanging while he went off to bed. I realised that he was a moderator because he came up with a snotty reply to my hanging post that nobody except the moderators could see. The hanging comment had to wait several hours before it was rescued by another moderator, who evidently found nothing wrong with it, took it out of quarantine and posted it on the blog.
Most of the moderators are fairly relaxed about what they will allow through and some of the debates are quite interesting:
Here’s the one on Jewish refugees from Arab countries:
http://worldhaveyoursay.wordpress.com/2008/06/21/justice-for-jewish-refugees/#more-694
It was aired on Newshour on Saturday and can still be heard on listen again for a few more days:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/worldservice/programmes/000000_newshour_listen_again.shtml
Dunno how long this openness will last at the BBC.
HEY!!! I’m good. I said earlier on that the BBC would go big on “climate change” to try to brainwash us as we’re all very naughty boys and girls for thinking that climate change is a load of bollocks.
So I turn into BBC Newsnight and guess what? No Michael Prick investigating Wendy Alexander or Ed Balls and his bint.
Nope Climate change and evil Americans.
Funny the BBC didn’t mention climate change when talking about China.
The BBC and its Islam-centric emphasis in reporting Salman Rushdie’s knighthood.
I’m not sure which is the worse BBC report: 1.)June 2007, or 2.) June 2008. A positive about 1.) is that one does get an indication of the wide spread of his writing, and his move away from Islam; but negatively, that BBC report drags in an uncritical reference to the Islamic invented word, ‘Islamophobia’,which is an propagandist epithet simply used to threaten people and to end free speech. And the BBC does not speak up for free speech:
1.) BBC report,June 2007:-
“Salman Rushdie’s controversial career”
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/6769187.stm
About 2.) today, this revised update on hours earlier, does now include a cryptic video of Rushdie, but the text emphasises only one of his books, ‘Satanic Verses’, and emphasises global Muslim opposition to him.
BBC Report 2.) June 2008
“Knighthood goes to author Rushdie”
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/entertainment/7473506.stm
The BBC could have quoted from any of Rushdie’s journalistic articles about the Islamic fatwa; but it chose not to:
[ Extract from Rushdie article 2005]:-
“When Sir Iqbal Sacranie, head of the Muslim Council of Britain, admitted that ‘our own children’ had perpetrated the July 7 London bombings, it was the first time in my memory that a British Muslim had accepted his community’s responsibility for outrages committed by its members. Instead of blaming U.S. foreign policy or
‘Islamophobia,’ Sacranie described the bombings as a ‘profound challenge’ for the Muslim community. However, this is the same Sacranie who, in 1989, said that ‘Death is perhaps too easy for the author of ‘The Satanic Verses.’ Tony Blair’s decision to knight him and treat him as the acceptable face of ‘moderate,’ ‘traditional’ Islam is either a sign of his government’s penchant for religious appeasement or a demonstration of how limited Blair’s options really are.” (Rushdie, August 7, 2005).
‘The Right Time for an Islamic Reformation’
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2005/08/05/AR2005080501483.html
‘Dhimmiwatch’ reports Salman Rushdie’s knighthood like this today:
” A Victory for Anti-Dhimmitude?”
http://www.jihadwatch.org/dhimmiwatch/archives/021526.php
Bryan, I assume you are fully grown. Well if you are, then it’s safe for me to give you the bad bad news.
Liberals have NO INTENTION of being fair in any way.
They are not honest.
They are not bright.
But above all, they would eat your children, if it gave them power.
To allow moderators to participate in a liberal government run news media site is completely unethical, unfair and ridiculous. But libs don’t believe in honour nor fairness.
The BBC, their Labour chums and anti-age discrimination: bring back Moira Stuart!
Newsnight’s 1st year report on Broon ignored many of the failures, no mention of the government:
1. Being responsible for Foot & Mouth at Pirbright.
2. Blocking a takeover of Northern Rock that would have stopped the crisis.
3. Signing the Lisbon treaty on his own, in stealth.
Instead we got: “narrowed the poll gap”, “unpredictability of politics”, “Brown may be rescued”, “Brown did quite well at PMQs today”
BBC Newsnight (again) Michael Prick actually mentions a bit of Nu Labour sleaze (Ed Balls again), but Prick EMPHASISES that they’ve done nothing wrong. Well shame he diddn’t offer the same benefit of doubt to Caroline Spelman.
He also failed to mention other Nu Labour sleaze, like Alexander, Hain and so on.
Now they are doing a piece about Broon the great leader. He’s turned things around coz he did well at PMQ’s today (Christ he can’t get much worse can he?)
Luckily that fat slob Hattersley (a man of no talent or ability) thinks Gordon is great (he and Gordon will be breaking out the vaseline later then) and that he’s a man of substance.
“You see the real Gordon when he’s talking about child povery” spat (literally) Hattersley.
Oh yes, the REAL Gordon is when he’s spending my frigging hard earned money on Chavs and slags.
The BBC line seems to be that Gordon has done nothing wrong and it’s all the fault of someone else.
Oh and the BBC claim he did well over the floods, Foot and Mouth and the failed bombings. Who is the BBC kidding?????
Those three events were handled by the emergency services. When the Government tried to sort out Foot and Mouth the first time round without the military, they screwed it up.
moonbat nibbler: You thought it was a pile of shite as well!
Here’s a rather trivial but incredibly revealing alteration I noticed to a bbc story.
Yesterday i clicked on an article which discussed how a female driver had diven her SUV on top of two sports cars in a supermarket car park.
The article was later changed to have the driver’s gender removed!
They have now added a video which does indeed confirm from mulitple sources that the driver was female – yet the main text which most people read still has references to her gender removed.
Thus there was neve any question of her gender – the bbc just are trying to censor stories on how crap some women are at driving.
Can someone tell me that site which shows teh histroy of a news story – that should confirm what they’ve done here
thats the link to the story – sorry
here:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/northern_ireland/7472490.stm
Gus. As an astronomer I have to know many Arabic words. They discovered and mapped half the heavens. Modern mathematical and astronomical science owes much to Arab civilisation – though doubtless not as much as they would now like us to believe, but certainly far more than someone like you would want us to know. Islam has not enabled Arabs to maintain their former levels of high achievement, alas, as we know.
If the purpose of this site is to look for BBC bias that is one thing, but if it becomes a forum for people to pose questions about whether an entire race of people are worthwhile or not, then intelligent contributors like Hugh and Roland will find themselves in the minority. You’re entirely mistaken if you think that anything you’ve ever contributed here qualifies you to call either of them “stupid”.
Many Liberals are indeed retards, as you say; but they don’t have a monopoly on it, as is obvious to anyone who reads your frequent “contributions” to the slow death of this site.
John,
The BBC did delete the references to a woman driver check out this discussion:
http://groups.google.co.uk/group/uk.rec.motorcycles/browse_thread/thread/1a8851ab6de4a358/
Unfortunately Newssniffer has missed the initial version.
This is all Newssniffer caught:
http://www.newssniffer.co.uk/articles/132506/diff/0/1
Here’s another discussion:
http://www.wehrmacht-awards.com/forums/showthread.php?t=296868&mode=linear
No direct quote this time but “Our newspaper would have gotten into trouble for saying “female.”” infers it.
Henryflower, could you possibly be a bigger bloviating sissy. Go stand in the corner son.
The Daily Mail’s front page headline:
“Women To Be More Equal Than Men”
ditto exposure from the Daily Express:
“White Men To Face Jobs Ban”
The BBC bury this news in the 28th paragraph of its story on the legislation!:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/business/7473568.stm
Lets see if the ZanuLab/BBC run this story:
Gurkha, 87, who won the VC returns war medals to Downing Street after being refused free hospital care
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1029303/Gurkha-87-won-VC-returns-war-medals-Downing-Street-refused-free-hospital-care.html
Doubt it. Too far off message for social cohesion. Meanwhile at the celebrations for the ANC terrorist……
Henry writes;
“As an astronomer I have to know many Arabic words. They discovered and mapped half the heavens. Modern mathematical and astronomical science owes much to Arab civilisation”
Before we get carried away have a butchers at how many ancient civilisations mapped the stars;
Egyptians
Mayans
Khmer empire
Why even the good old druids all mapped the stars before Islam came on the scene. The last I looked Telescopes don’t work from inside a cave. Yes Islam did contribute to the fields you point out. However their contribution wasn’t as great as people like you (and the BBC) make out. Islam rather than been innovative in the field of science was more of a conduit for it. Their grasp of Mathematics came not from Arabia but rather from India, their grasp of the human body owes more to the foundation laid down by Alexandria the great . You will find that a lot of so called Islamic scientific discoveries were actually from Non Muslims living in Islamic lands. I mean if as you say Islam mapped the stars how come it was the west which used the stars to navigate around the seven seas rather than the moors? (Please no comments about a Chinese Muslim finding America.)
Lastly the greatest scientific discovery from the Islamic world was actually the distillation of alcohol. (Look up Arak)
A senior Asian figure at the BBC claimed last night there are too many ethnic minority faces on TV.
Dr Samir Shah, a non- executive director, accused the corporation and others of rampant tokenism in their programming.
He claimed a ‘tick-box approach’ to showing non-whites had left minority viewers feeling embarrassed and irritated.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1029544/There-ethnics-TV-says-Asian-BBC-chief.html
gus, please explain, am I a “sissy” for
a) having some knowledge of an Arab contribution to knowledge and culture, in answer to your stupid question?
b) agreeing with the majority – that Hugh and Roland manage to say more of worth in one phrase than you manage in an entire ranting paragraph? (But at least that problem with your Caps Lock key seems to have been fixed.)
c) for noticing as others have done that attacks on Arabs as a whole, devoid of reference to the BBC, are not what this site is about, and moreover discredit this site and yourself?
or
d) because when you make some dumb comment and people call you on it, personal insult is the only option left to you?
I don’t expect anything like a reasoned or intelligent answer from you. You are a foolish little jerk with a big mouth and a closed mind. If David Vance really knew what was good for this site he’d have pulled the plug on your embarrassing stupidity weeks ago.
The day I take orders from a jumped-up ignorant runt like yourself I’ll be sure to inform you. Until that time I’ll stand where I like, “son”, and continue to find you an embarrassment, as several others here clearly also do.
… find you an embarrassment, as several others here clearly also do.
henryflower | 26.06.08 – 1:21 am
Hear hear!
Pounce, Gus did not ask for Islamic achievements, he asked for Arab achievements, and in my answer I explicitly stated that Islam has had a negating effect on these aspects of Arab culture in recent times. I also stated that modern Islamic spokesmen tend to overstate the extent of earlier Arab and Islamic innovation in these fields.
Your response is thus correct but entirely unnecessary. It’s as though, in reading my answer to a stupid question about Arabs, you sensed that someone might be at risk of having a single positive thought about one aspect of Islamic culture that thrived centuries ago, and felt the need to step in and nip that in the bud.
If you think I’m being rude, I rather object to the formulation “people like you (and the BBC)” when discussing the overestimation of Arab astronomical advancements, when I explicitly stated that these achievements are indeed overstated today by vested interests.
Sorry Henryflower, you’re the one with a closed mind and a mouth full of egotistic resentment (automatic answers to certain cultural stimuli) if I may say so.
In answer to your points:
Islam is not a race.
There is no such thing as “Arab Science” anymore than there is a “Muslim” science.
(It follows from the above that there is no such thing as a “Universal Science” and it is pure intellectual hubris to suggest there is.)
Modern mathematical and astronomical science owes much to “Arab” civilisation, the influence of Sharia law on “modern” civilisation, by comparison, is non-existent.
“Lastly the greatest scientific discovery from the Islamic world was actually the distillation of alcohol”
This is true. And etymologically “Alcohol” is an Arabic word. Along with names like Alioth, Dubhe, Altair, Achernar, Formalhaut (as you are probably aware of being an Astronomer)
Finally it is my opinion that the contributors to this site are generally not meat-heads. Though Vance’s writing can be irritatingly Tabloid.
I hate socialist vermin
One of the things I used to really like about this blog was the fact that we (the commenters) seemed to come from across the political spectrum united in our common cause of exposing and discussing BBC bias in all its varied shapes and forms.
Am I the only one who feels that this blog is now increasingly frequented by raving right-wing hate-mongers, BNP trolls, homophobes, xenophobes and sundry semi-illiterate, anally retentive knuckle-draggers?
An Arab achievement: The Spanish language (Castillian)
Biodegradable – no, you are not the only one.
I love the nuance in this story from Al-Beeb’s pro-islamic Pakistan “reporter”..
“Pakistan Taleban kill 22 rivals
Taleban in tribal area of South Waziristan
The Pakistani Taliban have killed 22 tribesmen captured this week when they seized a town in the north-west.
Locals found the bodies by the roadside outside the town of Jandola in South Waziristan tribal region – some shot dead, others with their throats slit. ”
The headline says the Taleban “killed” their rivals but killing would indicate the rivals died in battle. The rivals were actually slaughtered by the Taleban while they were defenceless captives. Would Al-BBC use such a neutral phrase as “killed” if US Marines shot 22 Taleban prisoners dead ? Like hell. The real headline should either read “Taleban MURDER 22 rivals” or “Taleban EXECUTE 22 rivals IN COLD BLOOD ” but , of course, Al-Beeb have a soft spot for islamo-fascists and don’t want to dirty their image.
When lefties get their asses handed to them they reply with “get out of jail free cards”.
For example.
Biodegradeable said…”Am I the only one who feels that this blog is now increasingly frequented by raving right-wing hate-mongers, BNP trolls, homophobes, xenophobes and sundry semi-illiterate, anally retentive knuckle-draggers?”
I’m laughing so hard my ribs are going to hurt.
It’s priceless.
Henry writes;
“If you think I’m being rude, I rather object to the formulation “people like you (and the BBC)” when discussing the overestimation of Arab astronomical advancements, when I explicitly stated that these achievements are indeed overstated today by vested interests.”
Sorry can’t stay too long henry but here’s one postive arabic achivement;
My first name.
It’s Eygptian.
And sorry I won’t be passing it onto the intenet.
If you think I’m just picking straws for the sake of it,then you’d think I would have changed my name by now.
(I actually like it as it is just so different)
No Mohammed.Mustafa for me.
The BBC reports blandly, but with bias, Labour’s stealth dilution of UK national control over UK immigration:
“Immigrant cash bond plan dropped”
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/7472835.stm
Only the views of Liberal Democrats and immigrant lobby groups, via the BBC Asian Network, are regarded by the BBC (and Labour) as relevant on this important UK immigration issue.
There are no comments from, e.g., Conservatives, nor from non-Asians, nor from UK non-immigrants in this BBC report.
How goes the BBC Asian Network, so goes UK society.
If there was real poverty in our country they wouldnt be a bunch of fatties.
adam | 25.06.08 – 9:05 pm
That comic genius, Jackie Mason, exploded the PC myth of fat people being discriminated against by pointing out that these days if you are fat you can get a job as a flight attendant and nobody can stop you unless they want their pants sued off. Then he said:
“It didn’t always used to be like that. Fat people couldn’t get jobs. They were starving to death in America.”
Then he turned to someone in the audience who wasn’t laughng and said:
“Is that too complicated for you, mister?”
An inconceivable BBC statement:-
“There are too many ethnics on TV, says Asian BBC chief”
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1029544/There-ethnics-TV-says-Asian-BBC-chief.html
Gus, this is the wrong site for you. There are plenty of sites where you can join like-minded people and rant and rave unimpeded.
You are obscuring the message here and damaging the site. Why don’t you leave?
At the end of last night’s edition of BBC 2’s ‘Newsnight’, Mr. PAXMAN, in cryptic condescending mode, held up the front-page of today’s ‘Daily Mail’ looked at the headline, which was something like this:
“How women will be more equal than men”,
and Paxman’s dismissive, ignorant
comment was:
“I don’t know what that’s all about”.
For Paxman, and the BBC (which appears to largely ignore the story on its site so far today), the story is about some oxymoron called ‘POSITIVE DISCRIMINATION’ which Labour,(Brown, and Equality (!) Minister Harman in particular), the BBC, many immigrants all lobby for, but which cannot exist in reality:
“There is no such thing as Positive Discrimination”
http://rantingkraut.wordpress.com/2007/04/19/there-is-no-such-thing-as-positive-discrimination/
So a more impressive, knowledgeable insouciant Paxmanism on the ‘Daily Mail’ report could have been: ‘ Well yes, but “positive discrimination” is contradictory in its effects, of course’.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1029526/How-women-equal-men-Firms-reveal-gender-pay-gap-CAN-discriminate-men.html
Positive discrimination A favourite Nu Lab/BBC thing (BBC is horribly white if you remember)
Harriet Harpie is a totally useless waste of skin and bone. When she capmaigned for Deputy leader her ONLY campaign message was vote for me coz I is woman.
Wow.
OK if we’re going to have to vote for politicians simply because they are female, how about having some hot looking mini skirt wearing noes with big chests?
Get my vote. But not some of Socialist workers party dyke.
BBC Starts the Week with claim that Israel is like the Nazis
Seems our government is thrashing about again, and our national broadcaster is well on board. To summarise a piece on ‘positive discrimination’ that simply seems yet another amazing attempt at sticking oars in the almost unworkable, on Breakfast News we have suggested in conclusion:
‘Labour wants to craft a fairer society’.
Quite a statement. Which is how it came across. A statement. I have written to ask if that was drafted elsewhere and just read out, or generated from within the BBC, who doubtless already have the necessary officers in place to comply, be seen to comply and tell all and sundry that the are complying? Although, looking at a post above, maybe with no intention of actually complying themselves.
Simply by definition, positive discrimination of one group over another can hardly be ‘fairer’, surely?
Especially with what appears yet another piece of misguided, intrusive, and ultimately pointless and doomed policy floating more for spin than substance, by an increasingly desperate, meddle-addicted government. And their tame mouthpiece with a 3 minute slot to fill.
Why do I sense the only thing that will happen is a ton more jobsworths are created, a few relative innocents hung out to dry (doubtless highlighted cheerfully by you know who) and the vast majority of actual abusers sail on by simply working around the system?
—-
Spartacus moment…
Biodegradable – no, you are not the only one.
I lurk, and infrequently post here, because I see value in learning of and/or helping highlight downright slopping reporting and editorial agenda by our funded national broadcaster. There are some here who find and share things that I would not discover easily in the normal course of events, and need bringing to the fore. There are also some thoughtful and worthy discussions on the merits of many topics posted.
However there is also now way too much plain nasty stuff flying around, and being allowed to. It is not comfortable being amongst it all.
A shame if it has been the spoilers intention to provoke such a reaction, but if things continue in this way it may be time to seek pastures new. Pity.
Am I the only one who feels that this blog is now increasingly frequented by raving right-wing hate-mongers, BNP trolls, homophobes, xenophobes and sundry semi-illiterate, anally retentive knuckle-draggers?
Biodegradable | 26.06.08 – 1:45 am |
No, you’re not. You echo my feelings exactly. There seem to be a number of people here who cannot take a different viewpoint to others without resorting to insults. If you have a strong opinion on something you should be prepared to argue it rationally and not call the other person ignorant, stupid or retarded.
In the BBC’s long, partial report, largely putting the personal career case of an ‘ASIAN’ police officer (BBC word), there is no criticism of this man’s special pleading:
“Top Asian officer in race claim”
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/7473821.stm
But this is some criticism at Lawrence Auster’s blog:
“It’s been a theme of mine since 1994 that the more a white society seeks to overcome racial discrimination by deliberately including nonwhites, the more it will be accused of racial discrimination. When nonwhites are admitted into a university, a police department, or a country, that doesn’t END the problem of ‘discriminatory treatment’ (as naive whites imagine), it BEGINS it, because now that the nonwhites have been included, their failure to fit in culturally with the whites or to have equal outcomes with whites will be blamed on the very institution or country that admitted them. There is no end to this problem, other than either giving up diversity, or giving up equality.”
http://www.amnation.com/vfr/archives/010879.html
Phew. It seems there may well be a few posters who make it still worth wading through the dross to find the nuggets.
Though not strictly ‘bias’ (the lack of which once before got a post of mine edited if not removed, which did not impress – I try again on what I deem ‘sufficiently-related’ grounds as many other ‘rules’ seem relaxed now), I have just written to the BBC for something I believe they should be held to account on, and their various procedures (the laughable Newswatch, derisory complaints ‘procedure’ and, ultimately, the ‘Trust’) are simply bottomless pits whereas this forum can and does get noticed.
To the BBC:
‘I today on BBC Breakfast News watched a possibly sincere but lightweight attempt at dealing with a serious issue: fuel costs and mitigating actions.
In the course of my morning viewing I saw two of the slots devoted to this.
In one a ‘reader’s tip’ was read out to suggest I ran my car with a half-empty tank on the possibly rational explanation that one is lugging less weight.
Later on, another read out flatly contradicted this, saying the void left encouraged evaporation.
To be fair, the hapless reporter and studio reporters did rather lose it and suggest that ‘maybe they need to find out’.
Much as I know the BBC is addicted to viewers’ input, may I suggest that on matters of subjective fact, as a supposed news programme you blooming well find out what is the correct information FIRST before broadcasting it?
Or at least have informed, educated moderators to hand to put things in context?
Any commuter who left without seeing any clarification at the end of the programme (if there was I missed it) will now be either ill-informed or totally confused.
Which is about right for the state of green-related reporting and editorial on the BBC these days.
It’s serious. Treat it so. And hire guys who know what they are on about.’
My two-penneth worth about topics here.
1. I am absolutely against profane and expletive INCLUDED attacks on other posters, no matter how inane their comments are. Calling them four letter words is just so left-wing bloggish, and counter-productive.
For instance, I asked other posters a while back not to use a vile word to change the name Hillhunt.
2. As so much BBC bias is the sin of OMISSION, I think it is perfectly acceptable for people on this website to incorporate ideas that the BBC may not have directly mentioned in today’s BetteBC noir.
For instance, because the BBC never challenges the Jordanian Arab narrative and fake history about the entity they call “Palestine,” it is more than reasonable for posters here to bring in facts and figures that may not be a specific part of ANY item the BBC produces.
And that cover many topics which divide us politically. The BBC is Institutionally Leftist, it has a set mindset on EVERY issue which infects everything it reports or produces. Part of that bias is to “disappear” the counter view. Such as in the global warming scam.
3. Err, that’s it.
Am I the only one who feels that this blog is now increasingly frequented by raving right-wing hate-mongers, BNP trolls, homophobes, xenophobes and sundry semi-illiterate, anally retentive knuckle-draggers?
Biodegradable | 26.06.08 – 1:45 am |
No, you’re not. You echo my feelings exactly. There seem to be a number of people here who cannot take a different viewpoint to others without resorting to insults.
Roland Deschain | 26.06.08 – 9:06 am | #
Gosh – I hope I’m not around if either of you two ever resort to personal insults.