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.
I see a story about the Titanic is at the top of the home page.
And who said the BBC didn’t do irony?
http://www.bbc.com
Anonymous | 21.01.09 – 9:41 am | #
And who asked him why he wasn’t at Bible reading? The President?
Re the BBC Geert Wilders report. No quote from Amnesty, I see. Probably wasn’t worth the reporter ringing them for their views on this one.
Re Chris Moyles. He was making fun of celebrities, not Auschwitz victims, and I thought it was quite funny (for him, at least).
He said: “Unlike a lot of the Who Do You Think You Are? shows I didn’t go to Auschwitz … pretty much everybody goes there, whether or not they’re Jewish… they always kind of end up there, you know, if they just pass through on their way to Florida or something.”
http://www.thisislondon.co.uk/standard/article-23624359-details/BBC+%27regrets%27+Moyles+Auschwitz+joke/article.do
The comment received no complaints.
The BBC “regrets” what Chris Moyles said but stands by its Gaza coverage coverage. Go figure.
Too much coverage.
Biodegradable | 21.01.09 – 1:47 pm |
Tired of comparing Israel to the Nazis the BBC’s new tactic is to compare Israel to Rwanda! Sick, sick, sick and evil!
I don’t think this one is as bad as that. It looks to me like a well-intentioned piece, although somewhat misguided.
It looks like Mark Doyle was comparing the Tutsis with the Israelis as victims of genocide, not as perpetrators. Of course, the comparison shows a misunderstanding of Israel’s situation in that the Arabs are not anywhere near as willing to engage in peace with Israel as Hutus are with Tutsis.
However, Doyle betrays his own bias (I’m being generous here) in that he thinks Israel is not fighting a proxy war like Rwanda. That has to be one of the more ignorant statements I’ve seen from a Beeboid about the scene in some time.
But I don’t think he intended to portray Israel as genocidal like the Africans.
The BBC in full flow damage limitation for their cronies in Labour and the boy Milliband.
India plays down Miliband dispute
India says it disagrees with UK Foreign Secretary David Miliband’s comments linking Mumbai to the Kashmir dispute – but has played down any diplomatic row.
Indian Foreign Minister Pranab Mukherjee said that the issue was now a “closed chapter”.
http://newsvote.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/south_asia/7842664.stm
Now the reality.
Banana fool in King Charles Street
Seems like the Indian Prime Minister Manmohan Singh has written a personal letter to the slug Brown complaining about Miliband’s behaviour and comments.
http://www.spectator.co.uk/melaniephillips/3275946/banana-fool-in-king-charles-street.thtml
Puts me in mind of the time when that grotesque little labour gargoyle Robin Cook, with his ‘ethical’ foreign policy, seriously pissed off India. The BBC spent days on damage limitation on that occasion too.
David
Given that the Bush administrations had two black secretaries of state, I would say his comments about the religiosity of the bush years included plenty of non-Whites, them included. It was a colour blind comment
Plenty to chew on in here too. Response to Harriet in particular (“many individuals in many churches are guilty of bigotry”)
– http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/thereporters/justinwebb/2008/03/on_race_and_religion.html
He’s clearly got no time for religious extremists, but doesn’t seem to restict this to white people. Here’s a quote not aimed at white people: “Islamic terrorists want war. They want suffering – among others and their own people alike
And i’ve found a transcript of the famous pro-American Webb outburst which outraged so many left wingers. Well worth a read, as is the blogger’s reaction.
http://www.cloggie.org/proggold/2006/01/20/113776715603846539/
PS – that Bush senior quote was August 27, 1987:
Robert I Sherman: What will you do to win the votes of the Americans who are atheists?
Bush: I guess I’m pretty weak in the atheist community. Faith in God is important to me.
Sherman: Surely you recognize the equal citizenship and patriotism of Americans who are atheists?
Bush: No, I don’t know that atheists should be considered as citizens, nor should they be considered patriots. This is one nation under God.
Sherman (somewhat taken aback): Do you support as a sound constitutional principle the separation of state and church?
Bush: Yes, I support the separation of church and state. I’m just not very high on atheists.
Tired of comparing Israel to the Nazis the BBC’s new tactic is to compare Israel to Rwanda! Sick, sick, sick and evil!
I don’t think this one is as bad as that. It looks to me like a well-intentioned piece, although somewhat misguided.
[…]
But I don’t think he intended to portray Israel as genocidal like the Africans.
David Preiser (USA) | 21.01.09 – 4:50 pm
On re-reading it I do find it quite ambiguous and feel that with the current penchant for connecting Israel with allegations of genocide the result, if not the intent, is to leave the casual reader with the impression that Israel is being used as a comparison with the one perpetrating the genocide in Rwanda.
The other articles I found via google draw entirely different and opposite conclusions of any linkage between Rwanda and Israel.
The BBC piece is shoddy to say the least, and if it’s intention was to show both Israel and Rwanda as victims of genocide, which I doubt, it failed miserably.
David P.
I’ll just add that it was the Jews, not Israel, who were victims of genocide.
Israel has only been accused of committing genocide so I’m sure that was the intention of the piece.
You’re being too generous.
The article makes far too many subtle and not-so-subtle allusions to be given the benefit of the doubt.
mikewineliberal | 21.01.09 – 5:48 pm |
Given that the Bush administrations had two black secretaries of state, I would say his comments about the religiosity of the bush years included plenty of non-Whites, them included. It was a colour blind comment
Hello, I asked for an example of Webb condemning a particular belief of a particular non-white person. I specifically said that criticizing religiosity didn’t count, yet here you are doing it anyway. The comments about “churches” and Islamists don’t count either.
But please, keep digging the hole you’re in.
Thanks for the Poppy Bush quote. He’s a dope. Still, it’s pretty meaningless as regards to the Administration he ran, and you still haven’t explained how or why that would “resonate” with you or affect you or your family in any way. Or anyone else, for that matter.
Did anyone else see the BBC report on the alleged ‘warming’ in Antarctica?
I can’t read the full Nature report as you need a subscription to the website but the BBC report on their website is the usual rubbish of the BBC piecing things together from different reports.
On the BBC news there was a silly comment about what would happen if ‘all the ice melted’ which is of course just utter nonsense, but I’m sure the lettuce eaters at the BBC will love that.
The increase in sea ice is explained away by ‘wind’.
The truth is they only have 50 years of data. No one should be drawing a conclusion on the climate based on 50 years of data.
I wondered how long the BBC would take to bring us yet another load of rubbish about climate change. Also note in the beeboid report that they put the warming down to human activity. The scientists clearly state they can’t say how much is down to natural climate change. That was missed out of the BBC report on TV (of course)
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/sci/tech/7843186.stm
http://www.nature.com/nature/journal/v457/n7228/full/nature07669.html
Non-appearance of poll
14% Tory lead. BBC Coverage?
http://ukpollingreport.co.uk/blog/
Martin,
Just looked at the offending ‘article’
by that well known non scientist comrade Richard(who needs proper scientists when you got a copy of AGW for dummies)Black.
The remark about the 0.6 warming over the last fifty years fails to mention what years start to end and I wonder why they only went back fifty years why not a hundred or two hundred, Hmmm, what was that? wouldnt get the answer they were looking for!(cherry picking anyone?) but hey when you gotta get your dictated quota of lies in who cares eh?
One long b******T fest with a few weak provisos and selective quotes on the side, no other opinion sought of course, that might confuse the thicko proles, cant have that can we comrades?
Topped off with a truly funny ‘its the wind wot dunnit’ Hmmm, science for the junk food generation.
BTW Martin, loved the map with the red slab over the western quarter, nothing like scary visuals to back up a half assed case is there?
david – webb on farrakhan –
http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/thereporters/justinwebb/2008/02/debate_fatigue.html#c6699491
Do I win?
If you think that Al-Beeb is bad, you should have seen Channel 4 news tonight on Gaza. That sorry excuse for a reporter Miller was an utter propagandist for Hamas. He swallowed EVERY single unverified allegation made against Israel without challenging the Palestinians.
It was Hamas who destroyed Israeli settlements that Israel left intact after the withdrawal and he did not point this out once. Not a question about Hamas rockets. Nothing.
An antisemitic shill.
mikewineliberal | 21.01.09 – 7:31 pm |
webb on farrakhan –
Do I win?
Only the booby prize for dodging the question. This isn’t condemnation of a religious belief, and you know it. What’s your problem? You’re back to insulting my intelligence again, I see.
Now that “we” have a new President, can anyone tell me when the Royal Family abdicated?
Just been watching the rerun of “The Real Sir Alan”.
It reminded me of how disrespectful to Sir Alan Sugar was the harridan Fiona Bruce.
She continually refers to him as “Sugar” throughout the entire programme.
She would not refer to Sir Jeremy Greenstock as “Greenstock” or to Sir Cliff Richard as “Richard”.
But since Sir Alan is not politically correct enough for her, he is denigrated.
sounds like his religious belief to me:
, February 25, 1996, Louis Farrakhan preached:
”
And you do with me as is written, but remember that I have warned you that Allah will punish you. You are wicked deceivers of the American people. You have sucked their blood. You are not real Jews, those of you that are not real Jews. You are the synagogue of Satan, and you have wrapped your tentacles around the U.S. government, and you are deceiving and sending this nation to hell. But I warn you in the name of Allah, you would be wise to leave me alone. But if you choose to crucify me, know that Allah will crucify you.”
I win
Cassandra: The BBC put a spin on the story that the Scientists didn’t. The nonsense in the BBC news story about ALL the ice melting was just rubbish.
The bBC, its victory march for Hamas and a really pathetic story.
Hamas leader hails ‘Gaza victory’
The political leader of Hamas, Khaled Meshaal, says that his organisation won the recent war in the Gaza Strip.
Mr Meshaal, who is exiled in the Syrian capital Damacus, said Hamas’s “victory” was a turning point in its battle against Israel. Hamas, which controls the Gaza Strip, declared a ceasefire after Israel called off its three-week offensive.
Israeli Defence Minister Ehud Barak also declared victory, as Israeli forces completed their withdrawal.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/middle_east/7843465.stm
Anybody else find it strange that in an article which promotes this view that Hamas won, Israel withdrew the bBC for once doesn’t mention the death toll. Silly me they don’t have to in any pro Hamas article.
The bBC, its victory march for Hamas and a really pathetic story.
McFatty One-Eye
The bBC and its current Middle-Eastern Headline.
http://img134.imageshack.us/img134/8109/capturetb5.jpg
I hadn’t seen this when I posted my last
The bBC and its current Middle-Eastern Headline.
mikewineliberal | 21.01.09 – 8:06 pm |
sounds like his religious belief to me:
(snip)
I win
You’re joking. And Justin’s condemnation of it is…..where, exactly? Anything like on the level of spitting he did over, for example, Sarah Palin’s religious beliefs (never mind his misrepresentation thereof)? No. In actual fact, he’s not even condemning a belief. He’s just frowning at Farrakhan’s anti-Jew stance. That’s barely even a religious belief, especially since Farrkhan is anti-Jew outside of religion, and lots of non-Muslims hold the exact same opinions.
Is Justin saying anything like “Farrakhan is denying reality” or anything of the sort? No. Keep digging.
I should remind you that even if you actually do get a little victory for finding a drop of water in a deluge, you’ll still have to explain why the BBC should be allowing its on-air talent to make take a position on religion, make religious judgments, and condemn certain religious beliefs.
In case you forgot about that bit.
A little bit more dhimmitude for you
http://www.bbc.co.uk/iplayer/episode/b00h2zlc/New_Nation_White_Welsh_and_Muslim/
I see that the BBC have subscribed to the invented brain disease “Islamophobia” and furthermore think that it is a bad thing!
And they seem to have pronounced the existence of a “new nation” – The Islamic Republic of Wales! I’m sure this will come as news to Welshmen everywhere. Never mind.
The BBC. The best recruiting sergeants the BNP ever had.
pounce | 21.01.09 – 8:35 pm |
Your comment brings up another question: If Hamas runs Gaza, why does the BBC refer to one of their leaders as being in exile in Syria? Curious.
It’s just the way the BBC, having pulled out all the stops to destroy Christianity in this country, having attacked civil society, having forced the secular agenda, now seem to be forcing this brutal new religion down our throats. They were never anti-religion at all, just anti-British.
Hugh Oxford | 21.01.09 – 9:56 pm |
Classic. They spend your license fee on this form of Social Cohesion programming, but don’t lift a finger when it’s time to condemn a little ultra-violence against a few Jewish citizens.
Even the real John Reith – no friend to the Jews – would have understood how wrong that is.
I win
mikewineliberal | 21.01.09 – 8:06 pm |
How BBC!
How Socialist!
How juvenile!
I deny all three. but a little victory over mighty david preiser is well worth claiming. It’s only my second one; and technical knockouts only i’ll admit.
Jack C
Alan Sugar is an arsehole, he deserves no respect from anyone. let alone the bbc.
Alan Sugar is an arsehole, he deserves no respect from anyone. let alone the bbc.
Garbage.
It’s not for the BBC to pick and choose which knights to be respectful to and which ones to disrespect.
They hate him because he is not PC.
They have never to my knowledge treated any other knight of the realm this way.
Sir Alan Sugar may be an “arsehole” to you, but he has created many jobs in this country over his lifetime.
How many have you created?
At 7:24 on Today this morning:
Tom Fielden: “It’s official – there is now no place on Earth to hide from global warming.” Gleefully reported with no room for doubt, no mention of the hazards of indirect interpolation of data, no mention of error bars, no mention of recent dicovery of volcanic activity in Antarctica which could possibly have something to do with it.
This is reporting a recent paper purporting to show that Antarctica has been getting warmer for the last 50 years. It’s based on interpolation of satellite data.
For a more balanced view see:
http://wattsupwiththat.com/2009/01/21/antarctica-warming-an-evolution-of-viewpoint/
Interesting link here
BBC Newsnight – Warming up President Obama’s inaugural speech?
…
It would seem that someone at the BBC had taken the trouble to splice the tape so that half a sentence from paragraph 16 of the inauguration speech was joined on to half a sentence from paragraph 22, and this apparently continuous sound bite was completed by returning to paragraph 16 again to lift another complete sentence.
So has anyone lodged a complaint with Al Beeb over the manipulation of THe Light Workers speach?
Mailman
johnse18 – i’m sure your moniker derives from the fact that you, like me, live in south east london. be aware though that 18 or indeed 88 or 14 are suffixes commonly used by neo-nazis.
Anon | 22.01.09 – 12:04 pm
Then they have the chutzpah to run a piece from their man in China reporting on how the Chinese edited out O’Bama’s reference to “communism”!
This must be the funniest rejection slip I’ve had so far 😆
Dear BBC Blog contributor,
Thank you for contributing to a BBC Blog. Unfortunately we’ve had to remove your content below
This decision has been made because it contains words or phrases in a non-English language. Non-English languages, codes, and text speak should not be included in your posting.
You can read the BBC Blog and messageboard House Rules in full here:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/messageboards/newguide/popup_house_rules.html
If you can rewrite your contribution to remove the problem, we’d be happy for you to post it again.
Please note that anyone who seriously or repeatedly breaks the House Rules may have action taken against their account.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/messageboards/newguide/popup_breaking_rules.html
Regards,
The BBC Blog Team
URL of content (now removed): http://www.bbc.co.uk/dna/blog92/F12277060?Thread=6214492&post=74725899
Subject: Gaza points of view
Posting: 581. At 11:23pm on 21 Jan 2009, cdn4peace wrote:
#580: It is also racist to equate Arabs and Muslims with Nazis and terrorists, as you have in your previous “contributions” to this blog.
Not at all. It’s fact.
Hitler, The Mufti Of Jerusalem And Modern Islamo Nazism
>johnse18 – i’m sure your moniker >derives from the fact that you, like >me, live in south east london. >be .aware though that 18 or indeed 88 >or 14 are suffixes commonly used by >neo-nazis.
>mikewineliberal | 22.01.09 – 12:34 >
>pm | #
Bloody hell – that had never occurred to me, I will never look at Club 18-30 in the same way again.
Not being able to use the number 18 will be even more inconvenient than not being able to display the Union Jack on the grounds that the BNP also use it.
That certainly negates anything I might have to say on AGW or on any other topic.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/18_(number)
Green > Obama in the BBC’s mind. It seems that The One’s inaugural speech just wasn’t green enough. They managed to get this quote from the speech:
We will restore science to its rightful place, [and] roll back the spectre of a warming planet. We will harness the sun and the winds and the soil to fuel our cars and run our factories.
Which the eagle eyed among us will notice doesn’t exist in the speech, but is actually a concatenation of phrases from the speech spliced together! The BBC wouldn’t misquote The One’s historic speech would they? Would they?
The phrases come from 2 separate paragraphs:
Paragraph 16
For everywhere we look, there is work to be done. The state of the economy calls for action, bold and swift, and we will act – not only to create new jobs, but to lay a new foundation for growth. We will build the roads and bridges, the electric grids and digital lines that feed our commerce and bind us together. We will restore science to its rightful place, and wield technology’s wonders to raise health care’s quality and lower its cost. We will harness the sun and the winds and the soil to fuel our cars and run our factories. And we will transform our schools and colleges and universities to meet the demands of a new age. All this we can do. And all this we will do. [My emphasis]
Paragraph 22
We are the keepers of this legacy. Guided by these principles once more, we can meet those new threats that demand even greater effort – even greater cooperation and understanding between nations. We will begin to responsibly leave Iraq to its people, and forge a hard-earned peace in Afghanistan. With old friends and former foes, we will work tirelessly to lessen the nuclear threat, and roll back the spectre of a warming planet. We will not apologise for our way of life, nor will we waver in its defense, and for those who seek to advance their aims by inducing terror and slaughtering innocents, we say to you now that our spirit is stronger and cannot be broken; you cannot outlast us, and we will defeat you. [My emphasis]
Hat tip to TonyN http://ccgi.newbery1.plus.com/blog/?p=147
mikewineliberal | 22.01.09 – 7:17 am |
but a little victory over mighty david preiser is well worth claiming. It’s only my second one; and technical knockouts only i’ll admit.
You haven’t proven anything this time. Your last attempt showed only Justin Webb frowning (indirectly, to be sure) at Farrakhan’s anti-semitism. Actually, since that alone is such a rara avis at the BBC, I should probably give you partial credit. Even so, you still haven’t provided one single example of ol’ Justin condemning an individual’s religious belief – or even a group’s religious belief, for that matter.
In baseball, you would have struck out already and been sent to the bench.
Oh, yes: The real point is that the BBC isn’t supposed to condemn anyone’s religious belief, ever. So even if you “win” this one, you lose.
Alleged problems of global Islamic jihad are apparently over, as BBC reports that Obama-messiah is to close Guantanamo:
“Obama orders Guantanamo closure”
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/americas/7845585.stm
Next, chats with the alleged Islamic jihad supporter, Ahmadinejad.
Meanwhile, surely this prosecution of a Dutch MP will also appease the Islamic jihad supporters, before they inevitably demand more of kafirs*?:
“Islam film Dutch MP to be charged”
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/europe/7842344.stm
‘Jihadwatch’:
“There will still be free speech in America” [and Britain]”in much the same way as Henry Ford used to say that you can have any color car you want, as long as it’s black”
http://www.jihadwatch.org/archives/024516.php
* On Kafirs:
‘Kafirs’ (by Bill Warner)
http://www.politicalislam.com/blog/kafir/
For an explanatory account, which goes beyond yesterday’s BBC report, of the the global political significance of Dutch decision to prosecute MP, GEERT WILDERS, suggest see also:
“Wilders Redux” (by Bill Warner)
http://www.politicalislam.com/blog/wilders-redoux/
david – Do you think the BBC should be less critical of a belief derived from a religious viewpoint than it should of one that someone just holds? I think that’s what you’re implying. Or are you saying it’s in the bbc’s charter and guidelines? I don’t think any broadcaster should show any undue respect to views which are plainly stupid or pernicious.
Grimebeard – the Tony N (Harmless Sky blog)expose of Newsnight’s shameless twisting of Obama’s words about “climate change” is truly astonishing/ The team at the corporation’s self declared television flagship flagrantly broke every rule in the elementary journalism handbook. Every one of them, and especially Susan Watts as the mouthpiece of such distortion, should be sacked (and would have been when I worked at the BBC) for gross incompetence.
But for the BBC now, everything they do to support the cause of AGW is legitimate – even playing Micky Mouse with the inaugural speech of the US President.
You could not make it up.
It will be very interesting to see how Tony N’s complaint is dealt with. He and Bishop Hill are conducting some of the best investigations around into BBC sharp practice.
Why does the BBC page on Dawn Butler’s letter from Barack Obama show the version of the letter without the House of Commons portcullis? Could someone ask the BBC to explain why…
BBC reports mildly on D. Miliband:
“India plays down Miliband dispute”
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/south_asia/7842664.stm
Melanie Phillips, in contrast, has this critique of D. Miliband’s policies:
“Arrogant, ignorant and out of his depth, is Banana Boy Miliband our worst Foreign Secretary ever?”
[Extract]:
.”..on his visit there [India] last week he suggested that the only reason India was targeted by Islamic terrorism was its dispute over Kashmir, and that the government of Pakistan had played no part in the terrorist attack on Mumbai last November.
“Not only did this contradict India’s belief that Pakistan had been involved, but it also firmly believes – with overwhelming justification – that the Islamists who target it do so not just because of Kashmir but because they regard India and Hinduism, along with America, Israel and the west, as enemies of Islam to be obliterated or conquered.”
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/debate/article-1126579/MELANIE-PHILLIPS-Arrogant-ignorant-depth-Banana-Boy-Miliband-worst-Foreign-Secretary-ever.html
mikewineliberal | 22.01.09 – 5:14 pm |
Do you think the BBC should be less critical of a belief derived from a religious viewpoint than it should of one that someone just holds? I think that’s what you’re implying. Or are you saying it’s in the bbc’s charter and guidelines? I don’t think any broadcaster should show any undue respect to views which are plainly stupid or pernicious.
I’m not implying anything, FFS. I’m saying it as clearly as I possibly can. I simply can’t believe that you’re even asking if the BBC should be criticizing religious beliefs.
Your lowest move yet.