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.
Even when Matt Frei gets something right, he can’t help displaying his bias:
Washington diary: Family ties
Frei’s main point is that it doesn’t look good to those in foreign countries who have bad histories with dynastic rule when it appears as if yet another Kennedy will be installed in the ruling class. He’s right that it doesn’t look good, but why should we care about what the outside world thinks? Once again he exhibits the arrogance with which he and the BBC started his BBC World News America. At least he’s right about some people in the US being concerned about it as well. Which actually matters.
But the real bias lies in the way he lists all the Democrat dynasties. He leaves out one very important one: the Gores. The BBC’s beloved Al Gore is the son of a Senator, and he rode the dynastic coat-tails into office just as much as any of them. He also leaves out another major US Democrat dynasty: the Daleys of Chicago. Of course, that might add a little taint to President-elect-You-Know-Who, so never mind. Frei also left out the other possible replacement for Hillary: Democrat Andrew Cuomo, son of a former NY governor. Caroline Kennedy is the shiny object this week, though, so maybe he just overlooked Cuomo.
Also, he totally ignores the fact that Hillary Clinton was elected as Senator solely on the strength of her status as the wife of a President. She didn’t run or win on her own accomplishments, because she didn’t have any. Chelsea won’t be the first Clinton to benefit from a relative’s political machine. But Matt is a major, admitted Clinton fan, so he’ll never say that.
To be honest, I don’t agree with his inclusion of Jesse Jackson, Jr. Rev. Jackson was never an elected official, even though he tried to run for President a couple of times. He’s never been a politician – just an extortionist of them. Junior may have ridden the family name into office, but it’s not the same thing. Although, he is alleged now to have attempted to follow in his father’s extortionist footsteps. Maybe that’s what Frei Boy meant.
Of course, just to make sure he’s being non-partisan, Frei brings up the Bush family. He’s right to do this, of course, although this seems to be the exception that proves the rule, rather than proof that this kind of thing isn’t a “freak of Democratic Party nature”. One thing Frei neglects to mention about the Bushes is that, unlike the Democrat dynasties, Jeb and George W. were elected in different states. Also, George W. was governor of Texas before anyone thought of him running for President, and didn’t just get the part handed to him out nowhere. Of course, that waters down the dynasty angle a little, so we won’t dwell on that.
But then at the end when he sums up, he lists all the dynastic families he’s just discussed – with the Bushes first.
(His comment about “dynastienphobie” is silly, too. As if putting a word in front of “-phobia” is unique to German. Yes, Matt, we know you majored in German in college.)
But I’ll give Frei credit for not bringing up the unpleasant political activities that Mrs. Thatcher’s son got up to in Africa.
Unlike BBC, Sky News uses ‘M’ word to describe al-Qaeda leader of Islamic jihadist group, convicted in Manchester today:
“Al-Qaeda Briton led Terror Group”
[Extract]:
“A British Muslim has been found guilty of being an al Qaeda member and directing a terror group – the first such conviction in the UK.”
http://news.sky.com/skynews/Home/UK-News/British-Muslim-Rangzieb-Ahmed-Found-Guilty-Of-Being-An-Al-Qaeda-Member-And-Directing-Terrorist-Group/Article/200812315186105?lpos=UK_News_First_Home_Article_Teaser_Region_1&lid=ARTICLE_15186105_British_Muslim_Rangzieb_Ahmed_Found_Guilty_Of_Being_An_Al_Qaeda_Member_And_Directing_Terrorist_Group
It is a big mistake to believe the BBC promotes or encourages Arab terrorism.
The BBC promotes and encourages all forms of terrorism who ever does it and for what ever cause.
Irish, Hindu, Arab, Muslim, British, Chinese, or American. You name it the BBC will encourage as much as possible of it.
If there was only one broadcaster in the world. All terrorists would simply love it to be The BBC.
In fact I would go as far as saying, that the BBC is itself a terrorist organization, and has been such since 1939 at least, if not longer. IMO The BBC should be the one of the first candidates for a full 90 day detention without trial.
After all think about this.
If the media did not report terrorism their would be NO TERRORISM, as there would be absolutely no sensible or understandable point in it.
If that does not convince you. Simply look at how the BBC collects its finance. If that is not terrorism, then I no not know what terrorism is.
Very much the same gos for the way our government currently frightens half to death HONEST benefit claimants, car tax evaders, motorists, and just about every body else with DELIBERATELY CREATED economic meltdown, knife and child sex crimes, social breakdown, and of course the old socialist chestnuts of pension and health care provision.
How about a campaign asking for the arrest of the entire cabinet and BBC top brass, under the anti-terrorism act?
If justice still existed, which it plainly never did, the BBC and the government would be in The Tower by now, having their finger nails removed.
DP (USA): “unpleasant political activities that Mrs. Thatcher’s son got up to in Africa”
Usually in agreement with your perceptive posts but I thought Mark Thatcher was one of the funders of a plot to rid of Equatoreal New Guinea’s despotic leader President Teodoro Obiang Nguema. No not exactly Sadaam but not that different. Why is that “unpleasant”? Sounds enterprising and a small step forward for humanity to me.
“Unpleasant activities” might be better term for your home-grown Bernie Maddoff and his economy destroying ponzi scheme. Thatcher’s never done any harm compared with this guy
AndrewSouthLondon | Homepage | 18.12.08 – 8:27 pm |
Yes, you’re right about about what Mark Thatcher was really doing. I just seem to recall the BBC not smiling so favorably on him back when he was arrested and all that (they did a whole TV show on it, IIRC). Also, I’m considering the fact that BBC editorial policy for everything south of the Mediterranean is that “It’s an African problem which requires an African solution”, meaning “no white people”, and “no coups d’etat may be suggested” by same.
But I admit that I overlooked the possibility that Matt Frei might actually think Mark Thatcher either didn’t mean to fund the coup attempt, or had good intentions or whatever, and so left it alone. My own anti-Frei bias got in the way.
This is how the BBC reports the charitable donations which are currently being given by some British adults and children to people in Romania:
“Shoebox gifts put spring in children’s step”
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/7788650.stm
The continual enlargement of the E.U. means that people in so-called richer countries, like the UK, which contains millions of people on low incomes, especially in the recession, are expected to subsidise people of Romania, Bugaria, etc.,.
This is done by discriminatory distribution of E.U. funds towards such people, and mass immigration of such people of Eastern Europe, and soon from Turkey to the UK. The UK Labour government cannot prevent this; it has only minimum powers of delay:
“Thousands more migrant workers allowed”
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/3833941/Thousands-more-migrant-workers-allowed.html
chuffer 10:41 am
for once I don’t think that the vCJD storyis bias – just lazy reporting at the BBC.
Every December there is a new vCJD scare story – I presume there is a need to apply for new funding for the CJD researchers – out comes the press release and I assume in goes the funding.
However any anti-farming story and you can be sure the BBC will pick it up.
On the subject of Bernie Maddoff.
You can not understand this case unless you are aware of this.
A million is a lot of money. A billion is a thousand times more then a lot of money, but it is also the type of money no one can easily hide. Many billions is many times harder to hide. Hide that is, without a higher conspiracy with an even larger group or groups of highly well connected crooks, going on. Which must without doubt lead directly towards some kind of government. Either to the democratically elected one or the secret one that actually runs the US, or both.
Organized crime on this scale is always connected to government. It simply can not happen otherwise. The most organized criminals of all are the secrete governments around the entire world. The illegal drugs industry for example is effectively sanctioned by the state they always control, every bit as much as the so called legal drugs industry. The largest thieves of all are elected governments, as are the greatest liars.
Except of course the BBC, which must surly go down as the most highly funded, universally well know bunch of cruelly dishonest liars in recorded history.
Deborah
You mean the BBC promotes fear about CJD in the same way it used to promote fear about AIDS. Interesting because there appears to be much evidence that both of these diseases where developed in British American, French and German laboratory’s. As was also SARS and BIRD FLU. Which funny enough are also BBC type pet subjects.
There is less point in the establishment creating diseases to frighten the life out of people. Also get the public used to the idea of new fatal diseases suddenly appearing from nowhere, for no otherwise sensible reason, when they never have done in the past. While of course murder a few measly thousand of the public as well, just because they can, and get totally away with it, while testing public reaction. If the public do not know about them.
Which is why these diseases, that combined do not add up in this country to the amount of people who die by accident in their own bathrooms. Get so much BBC publicity. It has virtually nothing directly to do with scientists getting grants. Or the BBC would rather discus the latest child stabbing, and would do so.
Atlas shrugged | 18.12.08 – 10:26 pm |
Come on, there’s no evidence that AIDS or SARS were developed like you claim.
Also, all that money Madoff pissed away wasn’t hidden by any conspiracy. It was overlooked and ignored by people who allowed themselves to do so, certainly. But that’s not the same thing. Further, the money is gone now, not hidden. The only way your conspiracy theory works, as far as I can tell, is if that money went into Rothschild pockets or whatever. It didn’t.
“Global Warming Censored, a study published by the Business & Media Institute in 2008, showed the major TV network news programs rarely included dissenting voices in the climate debate. In media reports on global warming, alarmists were overwhelmingly more often quoted than those with more skeptical views, even when alarming predictions failed to materialize.
On average, NBC featured nearly 13 alarmists for every skeptic presented. ABC did a slightly better job with a seven-to-one 1 ratio, while CBS’s ratio was nearly 38 to one, the study found.”
http://tomnelson.blogspot.com/
Even the BBC could beat that at 100% alarmists versus 0% “sceptics”.
BBC cunts on Newsnight doing a big pro Mc Fatty one eye article headed by Michael Prick.
Brown fucks up the economy but he’s doing a great job to fix it? Oh really Prick? I have to admit I hadn’t noticed amongst the hundreds of thousands being made unemployed and the pound being worth less than a Labour party pledge card on ebay.
Richard Littlejohn hits the spot on climate change
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/debate/article-1097850/RICHARD-LITTLEJOHN-If-Del-Boy-today-hed-trading-carbon-offsets.html
Jon | 18.12.08 – 11:07 pm | #
Excellent stuff, thanks for sharing that quote. Alarmists being widely cited despite the failure of their every prediction. Like this:
http://blogs.news.com.au/heraldsun/andrewbolt/index.php/heraldsun/comments/column_the_10_worst_warming_predictions/
simon | 18.12.08 – 9:32 am, 7:07 pm,
I recall that the BBC described Indonesia’s war on terror without distancing itself from it with sarcastic quotes or prefacing it with “so-called” as it inevitably does when mentioning Bush’s or America’s war on terror.
From your link:
planning to detonate homemade bombs … on the anniversary of the king’s coronation.
The bombs would have contained “large amounts of small iron balls”…
And there’s nothing specific about that?
BBC apologist Jolly is doing the usual hypocritical BBC trick of trying to lead the complainant into a fog where words are meaningless. But at least he responded. Perhaps you should take your complaint to the next step.
Actually you’d probably have better luck if you pretended to be outraged at the BBC for having the cheek to call a planned attack by Arabs a terror attack and insisted that the BBC call it a militant attack.
They’d probably issue a speedy and abject apology.
I see our good friend Shami Chakrabati is on Any Questions this evening. Been a long time since I’ve heard her on there. But where are Vince Cable or Shirley Williams?
The BBC relays a statement made by their allies Hamas: They are ending their ceasefire and complaining that Israel hasn’t honoured its commitment to open the borders and give everyone in Gaza a bunch of flowers.
They also report that Israel, rotters that they are, now claim they didn’t even promise all that. Broken promise!
“We promise! We promise! Cross our hearts and hope to die!”
They’re trailing Alan Johnston and Ingrid Bettancourt comparing notes about being kidnapped. Only Alan Johnston is actually Claire Short. Their larynxes must have identical physiognomy or maybe physiology, anyway they make the same sound. I know he can’t help it, but that hoarse androgynous bleating is not ideal for broadcasting. In my humble opinion.
BBC’s update still obfuscates:
“Forced wedding GP seeks annulment”
BBC omits to mention that, concerning Ms. Abedin, that :
1. she is Bangladeshi, not British;
2. it was her Muslim parents who forced her to marry a Muslim .
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/london/7791167.stm
Bryan–
“Actually you’d probably have better luck if you pretended to be outraged at the BBC for having the cheek to call a planned attack by Arabs a terror attack and insisted that the BBC call it a militant attack.
They’d probably issue a speedy and abject apology.”
Agreed. But of course I don’t want them to do that…
Aleem Maqbool’s donkey serenade continues.The road to Bethlehem EVENING, THURSDAY, 18 DECEMBER: AL FAR’A REFUGEE CAMP
More questions than criticism today.
George Rishmawi is passionate about walking through the region and has done extensive research into biblical sites here. Is this the same George Rishmawi who co-founded the International Solidarity Movement (ISM) along with Adam Shapiro, Huwaida Arraf, and Ghassan Andoni? The same George Rishmawi whose Alternative Tourism company had as clients the two British/Pakistani Muslims who bombed Mike’s Bar killing three people? I think we should have been told who is guiding Maqbool.
BTW A search through Google Scholar for academic articles finds a George S. Rishmawi, a George N. Rishmawi and a a George K. Rishmawi cited. None has a paper listed for research on biblical sites.
point out remnants of Canaanite villages. This is fascinating. The Canaanites faded from history around the early Iron Age. I would love to know what villages or much more likely archaeological sites Nedal and George were referring to. Could they (a oversight, surely) have been the remains of Turkish/Arab settlements abandoned for all sorts of reasons, of much more recent vintage?
But as time has gone on, there is much more of an air of permanency about this, and all of the other refugee camps in the West Bank, which now look like slightly haphazard, squat, concrete towns. A matter of interpretation. Look at this photograph of (tinyurl.com/al-fara)Al Far’a camp, presumably uploaded by the same Nedal Sawalmeh (Tourist?) and draw your own conclusion.
Whenever the BBC reports that G.Brown, (or any Labour cabinet minister) ‘WARNS’, it simply means that he has come out with yet another empty soundbite of mere words and no action.
For example, in the case of the energy conference that Brown has been attending this morning, he “warns” of the volatiltiy of oil prices. How profound of him. A few months ago, he went cap in hand to Abdullah of Saudi Arabia, pleading for lower oil prices. Now, when oil prices are about $100 dollars a barrel cheaper, he makes vapid comments about price volatility.
BBC report:
“Brown warns on volatile oil prices”
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/7791269.stm
So, all in all, what does Brown really leave us with on oil prices?:
1.)a “warning” soundbite, with no action;
2.)Brown still cosying up to Arab oil producers;
3.)Brown continues to impose highest fuel duties in EU on British consumers – to ensure high cost of living, and high production costs for British transport and manufacturing industry.
George R: Yes I noticed that particularly vacuous statement.
Seems its a pattern of thought. First there was concern over rising world temperatures, and when they didn’t rise, it war quickly switched to changing temperatures. A safe bet as its always changing.
What we have here is a stark warning of “oil price change”
Its The Leaders “Thought for the Day” isn’t it. He’ll no doubt have another thought tomorrow for us to read.
MORNING, FRIDAY, 19 DECEMBER: AL FAR’A REFUGEE CAMP
Aleem Maqbool answers questions from Class 4S (8-9 years old) Frith Manor Primary School, North Finchley, London and others of a similar mental age.
I am mildly curious about how many questions were submitted and if these were typical how many were rejected in HYS style.
deegee | 19.12.08 – 9:53 am
Those “refugee camps” look like ordinary towns to me.
There are chabolas, shanty towns, slums, on the outskirts of Madrid and other Spanish cities inhabited by gypsies, Moroccans and Rumanians that are a hundred times more squalid than any Palestinian “refugee camp”.
On BBC Radio 4 ‘World at One’ today, there was a brief report on the sentencing to life imprisonment of a UK-based al-Qaeda director in Manchester.
The BBC’s radio report mentioned that there were chants of support in Arabic from the public gallery of the Manchester Crown Court for the convicted terrorist. The BBC reporter did not provide a translation, but going to the BBC website report,
there is this:
“member of the public gallery shouted, ‘Jannah (paradise) is yours’ as Habib was led to the cells, while another said, ‘He is innocent’.”
“Terror director Briton given life”
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/7791602.stm
Two points:
1.)we are NOT talking about a ‘tiny minority of extremists’ in Britain; we are witnessing such Islamic jihad activities receiving significant support in the Ummah;
2.)jihad activity is motivated by Islamic ideology.
The BBC web reporter does not, of his/her own initiative use the phrase:
‘Islamic terrorism’, but the Judge does:
“Handing him a life sentence, Mr Justice Saunders said: ‘The prosecution case accepted by the jury was you were not one of the leaders but a recruiter and organiser of smaller terrorist cells throughout the world to work for al-Qaeda.
“‘I am satisfied you are dedicated to the cause of Islamic terrorism. You are an intelligent, capable and superficially reasonable man who is involved in terrorism.
“‘That makes you an extremely dangerous man’.”
Supplementary report ‘Manchester Evening News’:
“Terrorist hit-list revealed”
http://www.manchestereveningnews.co.uk/news/s/1086391_terrorist_hitlist_revealed
It’s recession time at the BBC:
“It’s jobs for the boys time at the World Service”
[Extract]:
“After the sacking of Ed Stourton and the retention of Jonathan Ross, BBC decision-making seems opaque to outsiders. So is Auntie really now planning to parachute Richard Sambrook into the position of Director of the World Service without doing a proper external trawl for candidates or advertising outside the BBC?
“Ex-BBC types are getting very exercised about the matter. The post has been advertised in Ariel, the BBC’s in-house magazine, but the World Service press office has confirmed that it will not be advertised outside. A spokesman for the BBC informs me: ‘The position of Director, BBC World Service, will be advertised internally. This is standard BBC practice and, if no suitable candidate is found through this process, then the search will be widened.’ As yet there is no news as to when the new appointment will be announced.”
http://londonersdiary.standard.co.uk/2008/12/its-jobs-for-th.html
“TPO | 18.12.08 – 4:49 pm |
How unusual of the BBC and their website to remain quiet after the Archbish of Canterbury delivered his scathing attack on Gordon Brown.”
Your right. It was on ITV news, but BBC and C4 both decided to supress it. I guess C4 are on a promise for some licence fee cash.
BBC don’t even pretend to be impartial nowadays.
Sorry, you’re right not “your” right.
Gordon Brown says, Gordon Brown says, Gordon Brown says.
The BBC is just full of what Gordon bloody Brown says. No criticism, no analysis, no probing of what appeared to be little more than empty rhetoric about British spirit and oil prices. Just a faithful reporting of the great leader.
If I want Labour Party press releases I’ll go to their web site. I don’t want it rammed down my throat by the BBC.
Here’s something the pro-E.U. BBC is inclined to avoid reporting – it’s about Nigel Farage of UKIP taking on the bureaucrats of Brussels on the lack of democracy:
“This Week’s Row” (video clip)
http://www.brusselsjournal.com/node/3698
‘Jihadwatch’:
Results of Dhimmi/ Anti-Dhimmi of 2008
http://www.jihadwatch.org/archives/023988.php
simon | 18.12.08 – 7:07 pm |
I think I get the BBC’s game here. It seems like they want to pretend that they accept that an act may be called “terrorist” in the abstract, but they don’t think it’s appropriate to use the T-word when discussing the perpetrators of said act.
I can’t explain, though, why the one is considered “subjective” and not the other (unless I’m in a cynical mood, then I can think of an obvious explanation). I think this Jolly Beeboid is being a bit disingenuous, fully aware of the reality of what he’s saying.
Simon,
A while ago when I complained about Have Your Say the BBC took me on the proverbial merry-go-round. This included e-mails that I was asked not to respond to because they were automatic. I eventually ended close to where I’d started, faced with a Newswatch complaints link that cheerfully informed me that they don’t read all e-mails, but appreciate my attempt to communicate.
On another occasion, I had smoke coming out of my ears I was so angry at seeing a link on the BBC Middle East page with text that indicated the Israeli Air Force had been responsible for blowing up an entire family and a few other people in a house in Gaza. The link accessed an article wherein Hamas was quoted as admitting that the deaths were caused, typically, by a work accident of their own …er…militants.
I wrote to the BBC, telling them they had crossed the line from distorting their reports in favour of Palestinian terrorists to actually lying about events. I mailed it to the “Complaints” website, Newswatch and Steve Hermmann, editor of the BBC News website.
Funny thing happened a few hours later. They changed the text of the link, making it unambiguously clear that Hamas’ own members had caused the blast. Not only that, they kept that link prominently displayed on the page for a week or so.
Now I ain’t saying my complaint nudged an editorial conscience or two at the BBC, but it’s possible. It’s also possible that they received other complaints. But typically, the BBC felt it unnecessary to respond to my complaint, not even by automated message. And they felt it equally unnecessary to draw attention to the “error” in any way, shape or form. So anyone who saw that original link and didn’t bother to go to the text would have come away with the impression that the brutal Israelis were busy killing innocent Palestinians again.
That should have been Steve Herrmann.
Settling down to watch Survivors on iPlayer (I don’t use a TV) I noticed:
The main group we are following has an extraordinary mix in its personnel with the apparent leader, a strong Scottish lady, a sensible and good looking black guy, a nice looking female doctor who may be a lesbian, a middle-eastern ex-playboy and a young muslim boy. Oh, I nearly forgot there is a selfish English blonde bimbo and one English white guy who seems to be an escaped murderer. The characterisations are strong and no inference is needed to niche the characters.
If we put aside the negative stereotyping applied to the small Anglo Saxon part of the cast, it gets better. The muslim boy is asked if he believes in God and he says “yes – of course” (or something like that) and his view is rightly, respected but when a group of Christians interfaces with our group they are portrayed as nuts following a paranoid schidzoid and if memory serves – one of them is cynically asked if they really believe in all that stuff [God etc].
Wherever they interface with another group, the others seem to be white, male led, and violent, or in any case dysfuctional in almost every way.
The acting is pretty good and at a superficial level the program is good but one gets the feeling that we are being fed a new BBC approved world order. One should recognise that, in the event of such a devastating near extinction event, the odds are that you will get random mixes and any combination of characters would be possible but trust the BBC to find this lot.
Don’t forget to look at the well tended gardens/lawns, the lack of plant encroachment on the remote lanes and the really clean 4x4s they all use.
Go ahead, watch it – lou’ll love it.
Below is an extract from the BBC website condemning parents who indulge in the disapproved practice of private tuition for their children. Tut, tut.
Nothing new there.
The only reason I include it is to show how they twist things, by saying many parents earned MORE than average. Without having access to the survey I am sure it would have been equally valid to say: “Many of the parents who responded also earned substantially LESS than average income.” but they decided not to use that one. When you interview 257 people that is what you will find – a wide spectrum.
Many children at grammar schools are certainly not from wealthy families, despite what the article is trying to imply. The most common profession in the schools near me is probably private hire taxi driver.
Quote follows———–
Coaching discouraged
Two hundred and fifty-seven had hired private tutors and spent an average £700 in fees. Many of the parents who responded also earned substantially more than average income.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/education/7788039.stm
EEEEEEEvil Tories at it again.
(As are the BBC’s stunningly useless headline writers!)
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/wales/7790939.stm