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
Hi folks – been away for a few days and just back on terra firma. Here’s a new General BBC-related comment thread for you and I shall return tomorrow !
Bookmark the permalink.
The BBC, those Racist Brits and half the story.
Arab warning after ‘racist death’
The uncle of a student who died after a suspected racially-motivated attack on the south coast has said Arabs should not send their children to England. Mohammed Al-Majed, 16, suffered a serious head injury outside a takeaway in Hastings and died two days later. Ghazi Abdullah al-Majed told the BBC his nephew had complained about hostility towards Arabs in the town.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/sussex/7586574.stm
First of all let me say I am sorry to hear about the death of yet another youth in the Uk by a pack of feral Youths.
However while the BBC is so quick to promote this vision of racist Britain to its Target audience.
(I wonder if the BBC will force the canteens to close for Ramadan)
It still refuses to classify any black on white, Asian on white, Asian on black killings as racist.
Yup according to the BBC only whites can be racist.
And Jules (yer shirt button) before you post a pro BBC retort. I’m as black as the ace of spades.
(well actually I’m brown)
The BBC, those Racist Brits and half the story.
10 Million for NO TV LICENCE group on facebook.
Statistics:
Day 1 – 22/08/2008 – Group Created
Day 2 – 23/08/2008 – 210 Members
Day 3 – 24/08/2008 – 623 Members
Day 4 – 25/08/2008 – 1387 Members
Day 5 – 26/08/2008 – 2417 Members
Day 6 – 27/08/2008 – 5089 Members
Day 7 – 28/08/2008 – 9473 Members
10,000 Members – 29/08/2008
20,000 Members –
50,000 Members –
100,000 Members –
200,000 Members –
500,000 Members –
1,000,000 Members –
2,000,000 Members –
5,000,000 Members –
10,000,000 Members –
“IN YOUR FACE LICENCE FEE – THE PEOPLE HAVE SPOKEN”
Anti-Pound bias
The BBC doesn’t allow people to use the £ symbol on its blogs, but it does allow the use of the $ symbol.
Paul McCartney plans to play in Israel and how do the BBC choose to headline it?
McCartney to play Tel Aviv, 43 years after Israel’s Beatles ban
This must have really pissed off the beeboids, Sir Paul it seems doesn’t swallow the BBC’s view of Israel:
“I’ve heard so many great things about Tel Aviv and Israel, but hearing is one thing and experiencing it for yourself is another,” he added.
“We are planning to have a great time and a great evening.”
MSNBC is pimping so hard for Obama that the BBC would blush. I’m switching channels but I’m comforted that I don’t have to pay them for their partisan and dishonest coverage.
I can barely imagine how frustrating it must be for those of you who have to put out your cash for an organization that fronts for any party.
Kind Regards
At the BBC, the positions of power are still largely held by big white chiefs just like Paxman and Buerk; fully paid-up members of the liberal, Left-leaning elite who glide from public school to Oxbridge without ever having to scour down the back of the sofa for sixpence. Or worry about getting stabbed to death over a bag of chips on the night bus home. Or, perhaps most importantly, ever having to do what a woman tells them.
Yet over the years, these faceless BBC chiefs have rammed an agenda of political correctness and positive discrimination down the throats of the public they are paid to entertain and inform, and even their own staff are affected.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1050400/The-real-problem-Paxo-hes-got-female-boss.html
Will Jones | 29.08.08 – 2:56 am |
MSNBC isn’t our official state broadcaster, either. Nor does it represent us worldwide. Thank heavens for small favors.
Even if the license fee ended tomorrow, the government would still find some other way to pay for it.
David: I’ve enjoyed your posts.
If the license fee ended don’t you think BBC would just switch to commercials and hope that the viewers would still want to see the programs that they obviously think are good?
I think they really do believe that their material would be successful.
“MSNBC is pimping so hard for Obama that the BBC would blush.”
CBS have been jizzing themselves all week over Obama. Has made for awful news. I imagine that the 9000 however many staff the BBC have sent to the convention are probably doing the same. Inflicting it upon those forced to pay for a service on pain of imprisonment.
McCartney to play Tel Aviv, 43 years after Israel’s Beatles ban
Biodegradable | 29.08.08 – 2:35 am |
BBC – wrong again. The Beatles were never banned from Israel. They were wildly popular and taught a generation of Israelis English. (Just try to bring rap music into the classroom for English teaching today).
What happened was that the Education Ministry refused to free up scarce foreign currency to pay them.
“There is some kind of fable that my father prevented The Beatles from entering Israel,” Schneider’s son, former Knesset Member Yossi Sarid, said Sunday. “I tried to look into it and didn’t find any evidence to support this. I decided, however, that it’s a nice legend, so who am I to destroy it?
“I assume that they told my father, who wasn’t a great Beatles expert, that the band members have long hair and take drugs, and will surely corrupt the Israeli youth.”
More details about the mythological ‘Beatle Ban’
Will Jones:
I can barely imagine how frustrating it must be for those of you who have to put out your cash for an organization that fronts for any party.
—–
Will, I’m guessing you’re in the US. Please spread the word about the BBC Licence Fee among your friends. If the US knew just what a bunch of socialist bastards the BBC are then viewing figures for BBC shows in the US would drop. Hurt the BBC where it counts – in their pocket book. Unfortunately, we on this side of the Atlantic can’t do that. If we don’t pay the Licence Fee we go to jail.
Will Jones: “If the license fee ended don’t you think BBC would just switch to commercials and hope that the viewers would still want to see the programs that they obviously think are good?”
(this post isn’t all dedicated to a direct response to Will, just the first bit)
That’s what people here are hoping for. That we shouldn’t be FORCED to pay for any broadcaster. Back when the Beeb first started it was accepted that the licence really was the best way to fund telly and radio programmes of sufficient quality to make the British people proud. If you didn’t want to watch you didn’t buy a telly. It also pioneered (not invented) many new technologies, without which modern telly wouldn’t exist in its current form — a good portion still goes into that today, with the digital switch-over. Now, though, TV is largely self-funding and they can’t use that excuse any more.
NOW, they say, the BBC provides a public good (like police or sewers) in that they provide programmes of superior quality, and such a wide range that prety much everyone in the land watches enough BBC-produced stuff to make the licence fee good value for money.
The point they make here on B-BBC is that the BBC should be balanced and fair to all areas of the media and the public. The “Right” perceive them as left wing nutters due to their positive coverage of all things multi-cultural, of their fear of denouncing anything with the word “Islam” in it, of their constant agreement with the vast majority of the world’s scientists about climate change, of their berating of Israel killing innocent Palestinians without mention of terrorism perpetrated against Israel, the absence of the “T”-word in reports relating to “T”, and of course their positive coverage of the Labour government… and breathe! Okay, I could go on, but my point is this:
The BBC was once a necessary tax if you wanted to watch TV. And while I do not always agree with this website that EVERYTHING the BBC does is unjustifiably biased, I do see too much pro-government news now, a lot of anti-Christian pro-Muslim output, and the pro-Obama stuff is just cringe-worthy.
For me, the positives that the BBC brings still (only just) outweigh the negatives. Awful drama like Shit-Kickers, tokenism in unfunny comedy like Little Miss Jocelyn, and of course the left-leaning news are starting to make me wonder, though. But its higher-quality programmes DO still set a certain standard – Life on Mars, for example, and the Office, and even (for me) Dragons’ Den. But where are the new ideas? Where’s the quality?
I can’t link to it at present, but there was a Beeb insider who gave an interview, talking about how drama is being produced these days. They (Beeb execs) think up a pigeonhole for part of their audience they are not currently representing (eg, muslims, or “urban yoof”), then pick a writer to bang out a couple of episodes (say, “Spooks: Code 9” – what a bag of shite). Time was a writer could send in a spec script and if it was of sufficient quality and there was room in the schedule it would get made. Now? “Hey, that Da Vinci Code was popular — how about we take the idea of finding relics, surrounding them with a modern conspiracy (no black, no Asian baddies of course), throw a bunch of licence fee cash at it, and shit it out of our arses and onto the screen?” “Great idea! I know just the guys…”
Sorry to rant on, but I have always been proud of the BBC. Now, though, my pride is starting to wane, and barely a day goes by without me being disappointed in its output.
I would prefer it to improve than lose it entirely, but that now seems inevitable. If the licence fee is not scrapped the next time around, it will probably be top-sliced… unless the people in charge change the direction this institution is heading. It’s not lost entirely, but it’s getting closer and closer.
Phew. Wonder if I said anything flame-worthy in there?
More Islamic propaganda set up by BBC in ‘Conspiracy Files’, which has one of Gaddafi’s sons calling the families of Lockerbie plane bombing ‘greedy and materialistic’.
“Lockerbie evidence not disclosed”
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/scotland/south_of_scotland/7573244.stm
The report below relates to the activities of another of Gaddafi’s sons, Hannibal:
“”Oil Shipments to Swiss frozen after Gaddafi’s son arrested”
http://worldnews.about.com/b/2008/07/25/oil-shipments-to-swiss-frozen-after-gaddafi-son-arrested.htm
I couldn’t find this story on the BBC web-site.
http://edition.cnn.com/2008/WORLD/asiapcf/08/28/afghanistan.civilian.deaths/index.html?iref=topnews
So the story which the BBC was promoting that 90 civilians died in a air strike in afghanistan is untrue.
But don’t expect a correction from the BBC.
More details about the mythological ‘Beatle Ban’
deegee | 29.08.08 – 6:14 am
Thanks for that deegee – I feel a complaint to the BBC coming on…
Devils Advocate,
Very well said and perhaps closer to the mainstream of anti BBC feeling than you may think!
One small point though, “Their constant agreement with the vast majority of scientists” I think you might find that there is no longer(probably never was)such a complete one sided support of the question of climate variation ie whether its natural or manmade.
There are many thousands of scientists who are sceptical(which is a jolly good thing)its just that anyone contradicting the AGW faith is not given airtime. If you want proof of the lack of ‘consensus’ then look up the Oregon petition where you will find 32000 scientists who signed a statement disageeing with the AGW theory.
More and more scientists are speaking out now and the IPCC is under close scrutiny at the moment for its anti scientific bias,censorship of sceptic comments and dishonest meddling with many of the contributing scientists work.
One of the central planks of the AGW/MMCC lobby has been pushing the illusion of ‘consensus’ among scientists, obviously without consensus governments would not be so keen on gambling the farm on a theory would they?
The AGW/MMC lobbyists/supporters have shown themselves to be dishonest(Al Gore),dishonest cheats(Hanson), arrogant bullies(FoE/GP) and many other political groups whose sole interest and concern with AGW/MMCC is how much it would help them destroy the hated capitalist western system!
By passing on the ‘consensus’ meme you do no favours for the truth.
Biodegradable | 29.08.08 – 11:24 am
deegee | 29.08.08 – 6:11 am
The competition was so bitter that when one of them, Yaakov Uri, was about to bring the Beatles to the Jewish state, the other, Giora Godik, used his official connections to torpedo the government approval his rival needed to get the foreign currency to pay for the gig.
http://www.suntimes.com/entertainment/music/1131732,CST-FTR-paul28.article
So do you think this makes Israel look better or worse than the supposed ‘myth?
Devils Advocate,
Nice post, however;
“For me, the positives that the BBC brings still (only just) outweigh the negatives.”
The one argument that we at this site can always fall back on is this; Whether you like the content or not, you should have a choice whether or not you pay for it. I do not like the content, yet, I am still forced to pay for it.
In modern Britain, is that fair?
if you want a real good ole proper conspiracy on the beatles, google “paul is dead”
corr blimey
Will Jones | 29.08.08 – 4:18 am |
If the license fee ended don’t you think BBC would just switch to commercials and hope that the viewers would still want to see the programs that they obviously think are good?
I think the British government will most likely follow the Canadian model and just allocate a chunk of cash every year, as well as allow the existence of a separate organization to support them (like the CTF in Canada, which also gets its own government funding!). Plus, like in Canada, they’ll probably allow commercials on top of it. You’ll all still be paying for it 100%. There will even be budget cuts, but that will affect mostly regional and arts broadcasting, which are just about the only thing the BBC does do that’s worth the name. And since people here already complain about poor local coverage, imagine how it will be then?
I think they really do believe that their material would be successful.
Most of them probably do. But it’s not up to them. It’s up to their friends and family in government.
The problem with all this is that you’ll still have the same biased people running the show, and it will still be your official national broadcaster. Ending the license fee won’t change a thing.
Epstein,
Better or worse doesn’t matter – it’s truth and honest reporting that’s at issue here.
Obviously the BBC feels that Israel (allegedly) banning the Beatles makes Israel look worse, which is why they choose to emphasise that aspect of the story.
I don’t want the BBC to only report what makes Israel look good, I do want them to stop reporting only what makes Israel look bad, because that’s what I call bias.
This is a good of example of the BBC being incapable of reporting something positive, or even neutral, about Israel without adding in a negative element. Usual practice is a bottom line, in this case they lead with it.
David Preiser (USA): I’m not so sure David. I don’t know about the USA, but something like 50-60% of homes here now have pay TV of one sort or another.
People don’t see why they are forced to pay for the BBC when much of the output is total shit and aimed at the unemployed chavs.
If you want to watch high qualtiy informative prgramming, you have to look to Channel 4 and occasionally Channel 5, but then in reality you have to look to Discovery, History National Georgraphic etc which are all pay TV channels on Sky or cable.
BBC arse lickers claim the BBC is good value for money compared to Sky, quoting the £140 a year for the BBC and the nearly £50 a month for Sky.
Of course the £50 is the full Sky monty with all the sports channels. I just have the basic Sky package which is around £21 a month. Sky do a starter pack for around £16 a month.
Those two are much more competative than the BBC would like to admit to.
I’m not a big footy fan so I don’t really care about the top end deal.
If the BBC launched a pay TV channel which only had quality programming, I might sign up to it.
But of course the beeboids don’t want that. The very idea that thier salaries and jobs might depend on the quality of their output would send them into a frenzy.
But the BBC as it now stands must go. There is no excuse once the switch to digital is complete not to make the BBC pay to view.
if you want a real good ole proper conspiracy on the beatles…
I don’t.
So I heard on the beeb this morning that a suspected threat on the life of Gordon Brown was foiled. The perpetrators were described only as ‘men’, so I knew what that meant.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/7587285.stm
Yeah, all 3 are Muslims. Funny that.
If the BBC commercially funded it wouldn’t have the scrutiny it does now. The top brass wouldn’t HAVE to be as idiotic as they are when it comes to multi-culturalism, and the T-word would be allowed back on telly. I don’t believe for one moment it’s a “group-think” mentality that forbids such transgretions but the fear of offending certain groups (you know what groups) that is driven from the top down.
In a commercial arena, the BBC would be forced to face reality. Perhaps it really IS time to review the licence.
Channel 4 are re-visiting thier “undercover mosque” programme. Funny that we dont see this kind of thing on the beeb.
http://www.secularism.org.uk/newundercovermosqueprogrammefind.html
Look Tomski if you like the BBC then great. YOU pay for it. DO NOT DEMAND that other do the same – which is what the Licence Fee is all about.
TheCuckoo: That’s because the BBC would rather fund the terrorists instead!!!!!
More jobs for ex-BBC staff: your
pro-Islam views welcome:
“Al Jazeera in Scotland?”
http://www.newenglishreview.org/blog_display.cfm/blog_id/16778
The BBC picks this out from recent Office of National Statistics:
“Divorce rate lowest for 26 years”
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/7587641.stm
BUT, the BBC doesn’t pick this out. I wonder why?:
“More than a third of babies born in England and Wales are non-white”
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1050593/More-babies-born-England-Wales-non-white.html
A slight on the word ‘ASIAN’ by the BBC again. It seems that ‘MUSLIM’ would be more accurate:
“Prison for BNP activist’s killer”
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/staffordshire/7588105.stm
So do you think this makes Israel look better or worse than the supposed ‘myth?
Epstein | 29.08.08 – 12:12 pm |
Have to agree with Biodegradable | 29.08.08 – 12:32 pm |
it’s truth and honest reporting that’s at issue here and journalists checking a story before broadcasting it and not manipulating the language in a news/entertainment spot to show political preference.
A quick Google suggests that BBC ‘copy-pasted’, possibly even from Paul Cartney’s publicist: Paul Confirms ‘Friendship First Show’ in Israel without reading down to where the foreign currency story is explained.
Guess who’se on Radio 4’s Any Questions tonight?
Red Ken.
He must live at the BBC!
The BBC’s chum, Livingstone, Venezuela and Hezbollah:
“Ken Livingstone’s tacit support for Islamist terrorism” (Cranmer):
http://archbishop-cranmer.blogspot.com/2008/08/ken-livingstones-tacit-support-for.html
Shirley,
I think you misread my comment. I do NOT want to pay for the BBC, and I do NOT like it one bit.
I never demanded that other people pay for it. All I meant was that it should be a subscription based rather than forcing everyone to pay for this rubbish.
George R: Yes, the BBC ignored the MUSLIM word but made sure BNP got in there.
For BBC staff, Muslim and non-Muslim, thinking of applying for jobs at al-Jazeera, Scotland, some more information:
“Scottish Islamic Foundation pushes for al-Jazeera bureau in Scotland”
http://www.socialcohesion.co.uk/blog/2008/08/scottish_islamic_foundation_pu.html#more
Of course, the BBC already has a technical agreement with what the BBC descibes as “the independent station”, al-Jazeera:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/entertainment/tv_and_radio/2668007.stm
Al Jazeera TV is based in Qatar (but has its ‘English’ arm operating in London); it is owned by the Emir of Qatar, and a cousin is the day-to-day controller.
This is a spoof of al-Jazeera TV:
Is this a nexus?: al-Jazeera has strong links with Hezbollah (and Emir had conference for it in Qatar recently); Hezbollah has links with Chavez of Venezuela; Livingstone is adviser to Chavez; Livingstone is chum of BBC; BBC has technical agreement with al-Jazeera.
BNP activist stabbed….
The two men had been involved in a long-running dispute over land.
sorry hit enter by error
My point is who is the victim here? It seems to me that the BBc is mitigating the death by implying racism is something of a suitable justification for stabbing someone. However my extract (above) seems to imply the bad blood was financial/territorial
Sharamik:
So I heard on the beeb this morning that a suspected threat on the life of Gordon Brown was foiled. The perpetrators were described only as ‘men’, so I knew what that meant.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/75…/uk/ 7587285.stm
Yeah, all 3 are Muslims. Funny that.
Sharamik | 29.08.08 – 12:51 pm | #
Good point!
Compare and contrast with the 3 “men” caught plotting to kill Obama.
We are left in no doubt of there white supremesist background or motive>
It seems to me that the BBc is mitigating the death by implying racism is something of a suitable justification for stabbing someone
It’s all too much | 29.08.08 – 5:33 pm |
Well, of course. It’s Bobbit all over again. The Socialist credo is that hate is good, just so long as it is the right hate ….
Totally agree with Devil’s posting(s) and others above. Yes, I would hate to see the BBC disappear completely, but it does need to change. A move to a subscription based format is a good idea. The BBC has that basic problem – no competition for its yearly government ‘grant’.
Regarding some of the high quality stuff the BBC airs, alot of it is ‘commissioned’, actually not ‘made’ by the BBC? Perhaps the ‘grant’ should be sent their way!!
In canada, CBC gets (some) money from the government and is regulated by the CRTC. The output is not great, but certainly better than most of the pay-channels. The radio (CBC radio) is 100% gov’t funded with no commercials.
Nelson: Problem is Socialists don’t like the idea of earning money by hard work. They prefer to take it from those that do work.
You are also right that much of the BBC’s half decent output is commissioned.
But for example The Sky at Night makes no apology to being anything other than a pure science programme. It’s cost nothing to make, but the BBC get away with pointing to it as part of their “quality” output.
In which case what are they pissing the rest of their 3.5 billion a year on?
Top Gear? That makes more in foreign sales and DVD sales that it costs to make.
“BNP activist stabbed….
The two men had been involved in a long-running dispute over land.”
Over land? A dispute over several square miles of prime farmland perhaps? Not really. They were neighbours in a street of terraced houses. I may have to visit the BNP’s website to get at the truth. It’s actually quite bizarre that I would have to visit the website of a political party reviled by the BBC in order to get what the BBC doesn’t report.
And this is what the BBC is NOT showing! This is a full-scale riot. I note however that the rest of the MSM is not reporting it either.
http://www.bnp.org.uk/2008/08/black-riots-at-notting-hill-%e2%80%9ccarnival%e2%80%9d%e2%80%93-first-amateur-video-emerges/
BBC 2 ‘Newsnight’ for last three nights gave over 3 programmes on ILLEGAL IMMIGRATION, at licence-payers’ expense, to one Mr. Sorious Samura, from Sierra Leone, who, apparently is an ex-illegal immigrant himself.
So dedicated is the BBC to transforming the UK into a non-white majority society that ‘Newsnight’ gives over programmes to a Sierra Leone man to discuss WHAT POLICIES A BRITISH GOVERNMENT SHOULD HAVE TOWARDS
ILLEGAL IMMIGRANTS! (And not surprisingly, he’s sympathetic to illegal immigrants.)
It is the ultimate stage of the BBC’s ‘multiculturalist’ project: give priority in BBC programming to immigrants. Give preferential treatment to minorities:
“Multiculturalism, when viewed through the conservative prism of racial reality rather than the liberal prism of a multiracial and multi-religious utopia can draw only one logical conclusion, to whit, Western countries are in the process of unopposed invasion and are submitting in their entirety. Multiculturalism as practiced in the West today is an ideology of territorial and political aggression by the anti-Western invader and the submissive ideology of state sanctioned white European appeasement.” (Paul Weston).
http://my.telegraph.co.uk/british_renaissance/blog/2007/05/28/multiculturalism__merits__debits
What astonishes me isn’t so much what Mr Weston has to say but that the Telegraph is willing to host it!
I hope the miserable Barclay Brothers never get to see it – it might disturb their dreams of turning the paper into yet another ZaNuLabour supporting rag.
At least the BBC does report this:
“Morocco ‘breaks terror network”
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/africa/7588853.stm
But given that the group named here: ‘Fath al-Andalous’ [Conquest of Andalusia] refers to an Islamic jihad aim to conquer SPAIN, the BBC reporter, James Copnall, misses out a vital reference, and linkage:
“Police ‘identify’ Madrid bombers”
[Extract]:
“Spanish police are reported to have identified six Moroccans who they believe carried out the Madrid bomb attacks that have killed 201 people.”
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/europe/3515138.stm
BBC’s LIVINGSTONE addiction:
another injection on Radio 4 ‘Today’ this morning; note the preferences of the two contributors, 1.) pro-Islamic Ken:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/today/hi/listen_again/default.stm
2.) Ghaffur representative.
BBC preview of that item:
[08:30 am, this morning, ‘Today’]:
“The country’s most senior ethnic minority police officer, Tarique Ghaffur, launched a legal action this week against the Met chief Sir Ian Blair accusing him of racism. Home affairs correspondent Danny Shaw tries to shed light on the real reasons behind the row and Tarique Ghaffur’s solicitor, Dr Shahrokh Mireskandari, discusses his client’s action and London’s former mayor Ken Livingstone examines the dispute.”
http://news.bbc.co.uk/today/hi/listen_again/default.stm
(Audio available here later, apparently.)