Hi all. Just to say that I have been thinking in recent days about how we make this as pleasant and welcoming a site for people as possible and have decided upon the following. I have asked people not to swear (unless it’s for laughs)! and in future, if I am around and see crudity without value, I will delete it. I will also remove any comments which appear gratuitously abusive. If someone chooses to continually resort to ad hominem abuse, I will warn them once and then ban them. I do this to make this a good space for you all. I am no prude and hate having to dictate but this must be done and I am prepared to do it. So, be witty, be incisive, be acerbic, be on topic and you will have no hassle from me. We’re finishing January with great traffic, record levels of comment and I sincerely want to do the right thing here to keep things growing and I hope you will support my aim.
A LITTLE HOUSE KEEPING
Bookmark the permalink.
although – i think david should make ONE exception for the swearing ban.
when QT is on.
but thats taken care of via the livechat thingie…
atlas’s comments about the political elite selling us down the river?
too extreme , you think?
not a bit of it. its happening.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1133117/Revealed-The-secret-Soviet-past-sleaze-peer-Truscott.html
“The Labour peer at the heart of the Lords sleaze row has secret links to Soviet Russia, a Mail on Sunday investigation has uncovered.
The party faced calls for a new inquiry into Lord Truscott in the face of fresh information about his astonishing rise to power, which throws new light on the ‘love at first sight’ account of how he met his Russian wife Svetlana in the former Soviet Union.
At the time they married, Lady Truscott was an active member of the Communist Party and her father was a senior Red Army officer at a secret military institute connected to the Soviet equivalent of the SAS.”
tip of the iceberg…
these people do not give a flying fig for YOUR job or your family. they only care about themselves.
Atlas has got a point. Why the hell would they let people like YOU anywhere near power? Generosity? Honour? Integrity? Tradition? Values?
Or alternatively just tax you and ignore you.
The most startling thing to come out of Davos has been one hack’s blog stating that only 2 people researched and predicted this recession. Too busy riding the train – choo choo.
Res ipsa loquitor – stop thinking you’re better than you are – you’re not. With all this media it’s made you think you can achieve something with your life, that you can influence decisions, help people – that you have ability. Take a look in the mirror folks – you’re exactly where you are because it’s sewn up before you get in the building, let alone the room.
The Obama thing is Hollywood – why report news, why fight the story – the character arc?
Dick the Prick | 01.02.09 – 1:01 am
keep an eye on those strikes – sky news still refers to them as “wildcat” – which means that they are being organised OUTSIDE of the unions. which means that the workers dont trust the unions.
that is an interesting development to say the least.
it would be imprudent of me to make a call on “the revoluton has started”… but its certainly something to keep an eye on.
Archduke – yeah it’s cool isn’t it? Fair play to the lads. Why no one’s reporting the story that it’s a simple tax dodge beggars belief.
Why not get 1 or 10 or the useless talking heads they’ve got stationed all over the world (that we never hear from – funny that??) and do a story on how porous our tax system is? Actually, popping a suggestion loke that on this site is the daftest thing i’ve done today but it’s early.
They really do think we’re ejeets.
The only real answer to this question of bias is to realise that nobody is able to see the same situation in the same way,…….. EVER.
The glass is always either half empty or half full.
The only thing that is important is who controls the narrative.
I am a lover of difference of opinion. The BBC shapes opinion, from cradle to grave.
If the BBC were honest,
It would give a disclaimer before every statement it made.
It does not and will not.
The public should demand the destruction of the dead tree press (on carbon footprint terms).
If the Government really believed in freedom it would completely de-regulate the media.
No chance.
Good news I will visit more often.
It might have been Janet Daley, Telegraph, who said a few days ago that TV should be unregulated. If they do not need to pretend to be fair, we could have both sides in a straighforard manner without all this pretence.
She said something like: Let Channel 4 make a programme giving the Palestinian’s side. And let someone else present the Israeli’s side. Then we can make our own minds up.
Caveman | 01.02.09 – 10:32 am
Let Channel 4 make a programme giving the Palestinian’s side. And let someone else present the Israeli’s side. Then we can make our own minds up.
You don’t actually need to deregulate telly to do that. C4 can today commission two partisan programmes, made by different people and putting different sides of the case.
The only requirement is that they do balance one programme with the other.
What we get from the BBC is one mealy mouthed programme, pretending to be impartial, but which favours one side.
This blog is about BBC bias, the leftist agenda unmasked, and is a place for conservatives, who are truly an underground, to debate opinion and name facts to keep each other informed…
betyangelo | 31.01.09 – 6:02 pm
I’ll get my coat then… 😉
Well said David V! :+:
Chuffer and NO should take their disagreements outside.
Biodegradable:
Conservative thinkers (discriminators between right and wrong with no confusion on the matter) see BBC bias. If you are a liberal you don’t see it, as the facility to discriminate has been numbed.
Atlas, the conspiracy has already taken place. This generation and the up and coming generation of anglo saxons have been programmed to be guilty of being white, western, prosperous. It’s why you allowed Britain to be now threatened with take over by Islam, you’re avowed enemy, only now seeing what you have lost. And now you can’t reclaim it or suffer the name “bigot”. When the people get the nuts to endure the name bigot proudly they may reclaim Britain. The conspiracy is within the people, and you have become your own enemy.
I think your restraint has been admirable David V. Offenders cannot claim not to have been fairly warned.
martin | 31.01.09 – 8:02 pm |
“Actually in case ‘some’ hadn’t noticed I’ve turned over a new leaf.”
Way to go dude! If an ex-soldier can curb his swearing for the good of all, so can anyone! 🙂
About f***ing time! Just kidding – makes a lot of sense and keepup the good work
Conservative thinkers (discriminators between right and wrong with no confusion on the matter) see BBC bias. If you are a liberal you don’t see it, as the facility to discriminate has been numbed.
betyangelo | 01.02.09 – 4:13 pm
You don’t know the first thing about me, do you?
One of the things that turn people off this blog is the foul language at times.
The other thing is the impression that B-BBC is a right-wing echo chamber.
I try to correct that false impression and you prove their point.
This blog is about BBC bias, the leftist agenda unmasked, and is a place for conservatives, who are truly an underground, to debate opinion and name facts to keep each other informed…
betyangelo | 31.01.09 – 6:02 pm
That first part is correct. The latter part sounds like conspiracy theory worthy of “Atlas Shrugged”, or your own wishful thinking.
“You don’t know the first thing about me, do you?”
Hi Biodegradable:
Of course I do not, and would never pretend to.
As a matter of opinion I do consider conservatism underground, by necessity. I’m not alone in seeing things this way. I don’t go for conspiracy theories. I don’t consider the present mania over Obama a conspiracy, for instance, but I’m smart enough to realize I must keep my opinions to myself in public or risk getting mobbed by his well wishers. I was even accused of being racist for not voting for him. It’s a bit sick, but that’s how it is.
So, I am not sure what underground means to you – perhaps you have a different definition than I – but to me it means holding an unpopular stance against the majority, and so having to keep to myself about it. It is a fact today that holders of popular opinion wish to deprive us of our right to free speech, while they spout whatever they wish, however misinformed.
When I said, “If you are a liberal you don’t see it…”
I should have said “a liberal doesn’t see it” because I did not mean to point at you in particular, but was being as general toward the liberal as I was to the conservative in the sentence before it.
You said, “The other thing is the impression that B-BBC is a right-wing echo chamber.”
Well, and so what if it is? Left wing echo chambers abound, in fact I’ll bet the ratio is about ten to one. Mostly anyone reading with an eye to the truth finds a lot of good reference to particular bias on the part of the BBC, no mistake, with plenty of proof and cross reference. And as far as the swearing goes, nothing compares to the thread where the muslims invaded, no, not one other poster here comes close to that!
Well said David. Good luck with it.
betyangelo – BioD’s point is that ‘conservatives’ do not have a monopoly on observing and complaining about BBC bias.
While we’re at at it can we also have a ban on ‘liberal = left-wing’ please?
To be fair, Sarah Jane, while it is sometimes wildly inappropriate to equate the two, the confusion and usage does stem from the Left (particularly in the USA) which co-opted the word, much as it has ‘progressive’.
Thanks GCooper – we speak the same language but we don’t exactly speak the same language. If anyone wants to educate me about the particulars for Britain vs. American, I’m always ready to listen.
betyangelo – right-wing and liberal in this country are far from mutually exclusive, as many of the libertarian commentators here point out from time to time.
Lots of our right wing politicians and establishment figures are pretty liberal ie tolerant of people who are different to them – a good example would be Boris Johnson, Margaret Thatcher would be another one.
A quick review of some of the more unpleasant characters and despots of the 20th Century will provide a list of lefties who are far from liberal…
GCooper – just because it’s happened over there doesn’t mean we necessarily want it over here. Whoever started it 🙂
A good example of this and why it’s relevant to the board. Would be the press jumping on the BBC staff on facebook describing themselves as liberal – this could easily just mean ‘I dont have a problem with gays’. Facebook, being American, does not provide a ‘lefty’ or ‘socialist’ option so we could not really tell their ‘party’ politics.
I was quite surprised at the number who declared themselves ‘libertarian’ – maybe they thought it meant ‘very liberal’ ie ‘I am so right-on I have been to a gay wedding’.
🙂
Sorry, gone OT a bit there.
(Although I was more surprised at the number who thought it was sensible to post anything at all about their ‘political’ views – doh!)
You said, “The other thing is the impression that B-BBC is a right-wing echo chamber.”
Well, and so what if it is? Left wing echo chambers abound, in fact I’ll bet the ratio is about ten to one.
betyangelo | 01.02.09 – 9:30 pm
I don’t want to argue with you because by and large I agree with most of what you say in your comments. But, I think it’s important that B-BBC doesn’t become identified with neither the left or the right. It is about BBC bias and as such, if we strive to be fair, we shouldn’t base our criticism on whether the BBC is too far left, or too far right.
I would never have voted for George Bush, but even so I’ve always felt that the coverage of him and the BBC’s opinions of him were unfair.
I’ve always considered myself to be somewhere to the left, but I disapprove of the BBC’s demonisation of the right while it carefully hides any misdemeanors committed by the left. As it does in its coverage of the Middle East; studiously ignoring Hamas attacks on Israel and atrocities committed by Hamas against Fatah while jumping on every chance to repeat false accusations of war crimes against Israel.
I want a BBC that’s fair and balanced, as called for in its charter, and I want a Biased BBC blog that can unite people of all political colours and creeds in a common cause against BBC bias, not an exclusively right wing blog.
I support your efforts, David V., but may I suggest that instead of deleting inappropriate comments you flag them or mark them up somehow as being so? I remember when a previous moderator started deleting comments, and it was hard to tell what was going on. Orphaned replies were left in which made no sense to the rest of us, and sometimes nobody could tell if they had crossed some line or if it was just HaloScan acting up. The result was sometimes difficult to figure out.
Leaving a comment in, but with an editorial warning or something, would make it more transparent, and would provide at least some semblance of standards. After one clear warning (or whatever limit you choose), then ban them, while the offending stuff is left for us to see as an example. It’ll also eliminate the inevitable vast amount of “Why was my comment deleted?” posts.
Just my opinion.
David Vance,
I am not a fan of the bad language and name-calling on this website, but I do have a problem with censorship except in extreme cases , like the absurd “Bill Buchanan” who posted under another person’s name.
The problem is, who censors the censor ?
Chuffer and NO should take their disagreements outside
Tell that to Chuffer. He was stalking me for days on end, on several threads.
I have no intention of allowing him to stalk me unchallenged.
even so I’ve always felt that the coverage of him and the BBC’s opinions of him were unfair
NO!! REALLY???? 😉
To be fair, Sarah Jane, while it is sometimes wildly inappropriate to equate the two, the confusion and usage does stem from the Left (particularly in the USA) which co-opted the word, much as it has ‘progressive’.
And we should fight this lie.
I do.
yet another uncalled for personal attack
What was that about pot, kettle….?
I suppose that to you, context and sequence are of no consequence?
All you have done for weeks on end, since you discovered this site, it insult others
That’s two fabrications:
1. I discovered this site many moons ago.
2. I have done a great deal more than insult others.
You’ve been calling me a liar for weeks, based, it seems, on the claim that I dared to correct your grammar during an exchange about apostrophes.
No: for claiming that I am the only one here who insults others.
As soon as I corrected David, very politely, you launched an abusive attack on me.
I have resisted the temptation to remind you of the time, during a debate about homosexuality and HIV, you suggested that I was unaware of my wife’s virginity status when I married her.
You can repeat this fabrication as often as you like – well, you DO repeat this fabrication very often – but it’s still a complete fabrication. I never said any such thing.
Oops, I pressed Send too soon as I have a dodgy broadband connection and already lost it twice today.
My ‘quickfire’ response was because you were saying, essentially, that it’s everyone else’s fault and you are white as the driven snow.
You are not. You admit so yourself.
You have apologised for stalking me. Thanks. Accepted.
I am happy to draw a line under all that if you are.
.
I feel this is an excellent development. I regularly read this blog as like most of your readers I am concerned about the level of insidious bias in the BBC. However, the bald truth is that many of the comments resort to juvenile name-calling which detract from the serious issues at the heart of the discussion.
Also, you could have a flag system whereby you could select, say, 20 moderators and give them the task of marking feedback comments such as:
‘B’ = you are straying too far into bad taste
‘L’= watch your language
‘P’=don’t get personal/childish
it might help as feedback on this particular issue is hit and miss. Two people support you and you think it’s a crowd. Or no-one says anything and you think it is not in bad taste.
Consider line drawn…..but I insist on having the last word!