. 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.
“Not a debate for this board”? The problem is, your claim that “the historical record suggests (nice get-out clause there) christianity is far more beligerent than islam” is plain bollocks, and what’s more falls full in-line with BBC groupthink, as purveyed by numerous mendacious and partial tv, web and radio programmes that soft-soap islamic expansion, colonialism, slavery and occupation (I’m still waiting for the BBC documentary on the 400-year Turk occupation of Greece and the Balkans) – and seem to be swallowed whole by the likes of MWL.
Gus 12:21
Showing your age I’m afraid !
They produced one of the greatest spinners, Lance Gibbs, but one of the many problems for the Windies is that they haven’t had a really good spinner for years.
Anyway, I had better not get started on cricket, it will take over the whole site !
MWL 6:35
Your last statement is astonishing and , in any case, quite impossible to substantiate.
However, it is certainly not true of the present day !
correct –I hate cricket but my beloved sports of Rugby Union and League doesn’t produce many spin bowlers
Robert | 20.02.09 – 8:08 am
It is clear that christianity and its central texts have been used throughout history to justify all sorts of barbarity. It is equally true, although on a far smaller scale, that this continues to be so. Religious texts of all stripes are so open to interpretation they can be used to justify anything.
MWL: As yesterday, point out the Christian fundamentalist terrorists stoning people to death and calling for the death of all the members of another religion and launching rockets against practitioners of such a religion; then we can compare.
The UK economy is going down the pan and our Public Service Provider airs “What dress shall I wear to the Brits?” Sackcloth and ashes would be appropriate. This on Breakfast TV when most Brits are discussing their mortgage over their cornflakes. Let’s start by sacking half of the weather presenters and saving money that way. You want a weather forecast? This is it. If it’s winter it might snow, if it’s summer it might rain.
Word Association – continued – today’s BBC website main page
“The Jazz age hits Main Street, but conservatives resist”
Have listened to Jazz enjoyed it’s history / critics for 40 years. A first! -well done BBC
MWL 8:48
The reason I never open the door to Jehovah’s Witnesses is because they might be suicide bombers.
mikewineliberal:
I didn’t see the London news Report so I can’t comment • except to ask, two questions…
1. Did the BBC journalist ask about the long parliamentary recess? For even if we take the word of her most sympathetic neighbour i.e. she spends 4 nights a week in Peckham • this would not offset the 20 odd weeks in the year when Parliament is not sitting.
2. Did the BBC journalist ask about her habits BEFORE she became Home Secretary? After all, her expenses claims pre-date her promotion. They cover a period when she was just a backbench Labour MP and a GVN whip. Returning to point 1 • why would either a backbencher or GVN whip need to work in London when Parliament was not sitting?
Now as for the BBC employee • I am talking about the corporations output on Tuesday • which continually referred to this mysterious figure. On the 1 O’clock BBC TV news, for example, a female political correspondent (I did not catch her name) categorically dismissed the compliant by Jacqui Smith’s neighbours. Not only did she infer that their testimony was politically motivated by mentioning that her neighbours had contacted Mr. Cameron’s office [a true statement • but not really pertinent to the case, unless you believe that the neighbours are bearing false witness on purpose] but she also stated that a ‘trusted’ BBC employee, who lived locally, had confirmed to the corporation that Jacqui spends most of the week and much of the parliamentary recess, at her sister’s house.
Then on Thursday, sources close to the Home Secretary (the BBC’s description not mine) offered this little nugget: Jacqui “she spends the bulk of her time in London but had asked the police to maintain a “low profile” so the neighbours may not have realised she was in residence.”
Source – http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/7899201.stm
But one neighbour and only one neighbour • the BBC employee • claims to have seen through this low-profile police operation. So perhaps you can now understand my suspicions mikewineliberal. Who is this mysterious person and why and how would they have a greater understanding of Jacqui’s whereabouts than her fellow neighbours? Why would the BBC have placed such great store by his or her testimony? Why has the BBC’s chief political correspondent • Nick Robinson • been so confident throughout this scandal that Jacqui has done nothing wrong (his words on the Daily politics not mine). Now we know that Jacqui Smith’s sister does work for the BBC as a reporter / journalist. Clearly, she would know the truth and clearly, the hacks at broadcasting house must have been tempted to ask her a few questions. If they weren’t, they should change profession. So my question is • has the BBC’s output been coloured by reassurances from Jacqui’s sister (a prejudiced source) and a predisposition to trust one of their own? The longer that the BBC hide the identity of Jacqui’s star witness, the more my suspicions grow…
Just one final point • if this is all above board • then why in the interests of justice hasn’t the corporation pressurized / persuaded their employee to write to Mr Lyon? After all, isn’t the BBC supposedly fearless in the search for truth? [NB: I had to stop myself from laughing at that last sentence • hey! They think they are]
On Today Jim discusses Marinetti & the Futurism art movement. He is scornful of Marinetti for his association with the Italian Fascists. The interviewee has to point out that many of Marinetti’s contemporaries were Communists, who also had their flaws.
Jim is silenced, for now. But we know that Jim & co would never be so exercised, & seek to diminish someone, over their attachment to the authoritarian left.
I agree
The BBC often features artists and musicians from the communist era (esp under Stalin) without any negative comment.
Naughtie is a pompous tedious little champagne socialist, basing his entire personality on the legendary Keith “Sardine oil” Vaz
I see the BBC spinning like a top this morning with regards house repossessions.
I heard this morning that ‘repossession figures announced this morning are likely to show a 70% increase over similar figures last year’.
The figures arrive and, hey-ho, the figures aren’t as bad as that, What a surprise.
Many years ago I worked at the stock exchange dealing with company announcements. Many, many companies provided us with details maybe 48 or 72 hours prior to the announcement with an embargo on release. I have no doubt this is exactly what happens with these figures – it’s why they often seem to be able to ‘predict’ figures before they are made public.
The figures are bad but it’s not as bad as thought. So it’s better than everyone says.
I find it odd that having looked at BBC news online all week, I’ve failed to see any stories about different cabinet ministers positioning themselves to take leadership of the Labour party. Yet today, out of nowhere, there’s a story about Hazel Blears appearing on Newsnight rebutting the stories which never appeared on BBC news online. http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/7900650.stm
Of course, those of us who read the dead tree press or online blogs knew that various names are in line to take over from Crash Gordon when he loses the election. But the BBC never told us.
Does anyone else find that odd? Or is that par for the course with the BBC?
BBC Watchdog presenter Julia Bradbury and her sister are facing a police probe into whether they received thousands of pounds worth of free flights…
I thought Auntie had told us to all stop flying (unless, absolutely necessary) • I read somewhere that it damages the environment! 🙂
Still I’m sure that Ms Bradbury has used all of her 238,000 Virgin air miles wisely; did she accrue any of the above while working for the Beeb?
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1150822/Watchdog-presenter-Julia-Bradbury-police-probe-20-000-Air-Miles-scam.html
just had the misfortune to hear Oliver James rantings on the Vine show.
He clearly blames Thatcher and Blair (“Blatcher”)for all our ills social and otherwise including gambling.
(I was under the impression gambling existed before Mrs Thatcher)
The man was spitting out the most ridiculous socialist horseshit whilst that weakling Vine just sat in quiet acquiesense.
By an abscence of criticism of his crazed rantings, the BBC obviously think that living in an overbearing fascist Oliver James world would be just fine.
Try catching in on playback it really is a stunning example of the BBC’s inability to be freethinking!
A truly shocking story that you won’t be reading about anytime soon on the BBC…
“Billions of pounds could be taken from council staff pension schemes to bail out the Government’s PFI school projects, The Times has learnt.
Partnership for Schools, the government body responsible for the £55 billion building programme, has approached several local authorities to ask for emergency cash from pension funds because private finance has dried up.
The funds, worth £100 billion, cover final-salary pensions for two million council staff including social workers, cleaners, refuse collectors, lollipop ladies and town hall officials. Unlike other public sector schemes, they are made up of contributions from staff and employers.”
The BBC – we covered up for Maxwell, now we’ll cover up for Brown – it’s what we do 🙂
Hat-tip: Coffee House
Has MWL disappeared rather than answer a straight question?
Must be his day-off. And why not – Nick Robinson – hasn’t posted on his blog all week.
Clearly, the BBC’s political correspondant’s holidays now match Parliament’s both in their timetable and frequency.
Still it’s only our money and it must be jolly hard work spinning for the GVN at the moment 🙂
I notice the Beeb isn’t reporting the BNP’s victory in Kent….or did I miss something?
NotaSheep: MWL is always absent when difficult questions come up.
Perhaps he’s locked in the toilets on Hampstead Heath?
NotaSheep | 20.02.09 – 8:55 am
Well, the LRA is one. The KKK another. The Army of God. National Liberation Front of Tripura. Laurent “rebels for christ” Nkunda in Rwanda. All seem to take inspiration from their interpretation of Christianity. You can take what you want from any religion.
martin | 20.02.09 – 4:10 pm
Did you have a bad and belittling beasting experience in the army Martin? Why don’t you share it with the group?
Hi MWL…
Have you unmasked the mystery BBC employee yet?
Did you watch question time last night? Yet, another one of Jacqui’s neighbours was in the audience and guess what – he confirmed that the Home Sec. only spent about a third of her evenings in Peckham. So basically it’s Jacqui’s word (+ the BBC’s mystery guest) against the rest of the street. So who is he or she and why / how do they know more than the rest of Jacqui’s neighbours?
Is your star but somewhat perjured witness • Jacqui’s sister or some boyfriend who also works for the BBC?
MWL:
While you at work, perhaps you could answer some of the points that I raised in the post below…
—————————
Tale of two BBC stories and the Brownie….
Under the headline ‘Recession reduces total tax paid’ the BBC accurately report on today’s debt figures from the Office for National Statistics [ONS]
“Government borrowing now stands at 47.8% of the UK’s economic output. Last January, it stood at 42.2%”
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/busin…ess/ 7898871.stm
However, in a subsequent article today, the BBC also report on Gordon Brown’s Press Conference with Silvio Berlusconi. Not only was there no mention of the Italian PM bribing the husband of a UK cabinet minister • I wonder if a Tory PM would be afforded the same leeway • there was also this little nugget: “Mr Brown defended Britain’s levels of debt claiming it was one of the lowest of the major economies at 40% of national income”.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_po…ics/ 7900193.stm
So Brown claims UK debt is only 40% of GDP. While the ONS reveal that it is 47.8%. It wasn’t even 40% last year and nor would it be anywhere near 40% today, even if Northern Rock was taken out of the equation. Add in the fact that the ONS has just announced that “…the debts of the Royal Bank of Scotland and Lloyds will be included in the public finances. It said this could add between £1 trillion and £1.5tn to public sector debt – between 70% and 100% of the UK’s GDP….” And the true level of Brown’s brownie becomes apparent.
Now given that the ONS reported today & given that this is one of the major news stories of the day (even on the BBC) then why didn’t the BBC challenge Brown’s obvious lie… either in person at the press conference (I assume a BBC reporter was present • in fact there were probably several • BBC News 24, Five Live etc…) or on the website. I presume both the writer and editor of the second story were aware of the true ONS figures • and if not, why not!
Surely, if nothing-else, it is the job of our national broadcaster to correct deliberate falsehoods laid out by our political masters. And please Beeboids don’t us the ‘impartiality’ defence. These are the FACTS • our National debt is officially 47.8% (even without PFI, Pension Liabilities); Brown claimed it was only 40%. Now 7.8% might not sound much between friends, but in terms of national GDP • the discrepancy is huge!! You can’t even argue that Brown was legitimately rounding down • otherwise it would have been 45% – if he was rounding to the nearest 10 • then he should have said 50%.
So come on then BBC • why wasn’t this lie challenged. The very least you could do, is draw your readers attention to the discrepancy in your on-line article…
MWL 4:12
“You can take what you want from any religion”. It’s just that some muslims take a little more from Islam than most non-muslims take from their religions !
We atheists are perfect, of course.
( That will give someone the chance to to bring up the Hitler/Stalin argument, as if their crimes were motivated by non-belief etc. etc…. round in circles !!! ).
Well, the LRA is one. The KKK another. The Army of God. National Liberation Front of Tripura. Laurent “rebels for christ” Nkunda in Rwanda. All seem to take inspiration from their interpretation of Christianity. You can take what you want from any religion.
and the major christian religions condemn them and are on record doing so.
Mainstream islamic religious governments are nearly all anti democratic and intolerant of all other religions (and in some cases factions of Islam itself)
On the other hand most Christian governments are democratic and allow other religions to flourish.
This really seems pretty obvious even to BBC lovers
“National Liberation Front of Tripura” WTF…
I can now see why you were away for so long MWl. You cleary have been doing your homework.
But pray, could you tell me, how many people have been killed on the streets of London by followers of the
National Liberation Front of Tripura or any of the other insitutions you mentioned?
No need for exact figures – a nice round figure will do – if you catch my drift 🙂
lets all pretend that islamic states are really OK and noone is suppressed by homophobic anti-christian anti women’s rights religious police..
PLEEEEEEEEEEEEEASE let this be a good as it looks….:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/sussex/7901764.stm
MWL: Tick tock, tick tock…..
Sorry about the spelling • any answers please.
If you don’t like the above questions… How about this one I posted earlier (did you like the Blue Peter gag – old hat I know) 🙂
BBC Watchdog presenter Julia Bradbury and her sister are facing a police probe into whether they received thousands of pounds worth of free flights…
I thought Auntie had told us to all stop flying (unless, absolutely necessary) • I read somewhere that it damages the environment!
Still I’m sure that Ms Bradbury has used all of her 238,000 Virgin air miles wisely; did she accrue any of the above while working for the Beeb?
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/…Miles- scam.html
Hi MWL – Don’t you like that question either. Then how about this one..
“Billions of pounds could be taken from council staff pension schemes to bail out the Government’s PFI school projects, The Times has learnt.
Partnership for Schools, the government body responsible for the £55 billion building programme, has approached several local authorities to ask for emergency cash from pension funds because private finance has dried up.
The funds, worth £100 billion, cover final-salary pensions for two million council staff including social workers, cleaners, refuse collectors, lollipop ladies and town hall officials. Unlike other public sector schemes, they are made up of contributions from staff and employers.”
So why hasn’t the BBC covered this story?
The BBC comrades are planning a story on the BNP win, they are putting together their usual attack piece with quotes aplenty from every ‘BBC approved’ source and you can bet it will include the usual smears.
MWL: And answer’s there came none.
The BBC ignoring the people who pay our wages – it’s what we do
BTW MWL – What happened to that nice Mr Reith? Oh! Sorry I forgot – you don’t like questions… 🙂
Jonathan | 20.02.09 – 4:20 pm
Simmer down friend. I’m at work (not the BBC incidentally – is that what you’re suggesting?).
First, I happen to know where JS lives, and it isn’t Peckham. Second, my only point in the earlier thread was that the BBC in a piece I saw on BBC London, interviewed two neighbours; one who suggested she was there often; and another who thought she was not. That seemed pretty balanced to me. And suggested they were delving a little. I haven’t a clue what you’re on about with the BBC employee I’m afraid as I didn’t see the piece you referred to. Just the piece I referred to.
As for your other questions, buggered if I know. Your posts read like an Edgar Allan Poe short story.
Oh, on the “how many in the UK”? Not many if any in the last hundred years. That’s not my point though. My point is all religions have, can and do act as inspiration for barbaric acts. Period
MWL – Glib and totally unconvincing.
If you are incapable of addressing the points Jonathan has raised, then you are in no position to maintain your habitual claim – that the BBC is unbiased.
Jonathan has done what many others here have done over the weeks you have been here: presented unequivocal examples of BBC bias. Your response seems to consist of an airy wave of the hand and ‘I didn’t see that item’, followed by a bland assertion that the BBC is unbiased.
You’re fooling no one with this limp stuff.
The BBC’s biased report, is in praise of the release Ethiopian Gitmo detainee, Mohamed, who is about to come to live in the UK:
“Guantanamo inmate ‘released soon'”
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/7902243.stm
The BBC (and its chums at selective ‘Liberty’), as they get out the non-alcoholic drinks, pretend that he is a ‘British resident’; Littlejohn knows otherwise:
‘Mail’, today:
“Under this rule, even Osama Bin Laden is British”
[Extract]:
“Binyam Mohammed is an Ethiopian citizen who was granted leave to live in Britain. In 2001, he decided he’d rather live in Afghanistan.
“Shortly after 9/11, he was arrested at Karachi airport carrying a false passport, trying to board a plane for London. He ended up at Guantanamo Bay and claims to have been tortured.
“Britain is now moving heaven and earth to bring him ‘home’. Yet he hasn’t lived here for eight years and left of his own free will. By no stretch of the imagination is he a British ‘resident’, let alone a British citizen.” (Littlejohn.)
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/debate/article-1150525/RICHARD-LITTLEJOHN-Under-rule-Osama-Bin-Laden-British.html
MWL: Fair enough – you didn’t see the Jacqui Smith story but what about the two Gordon Brown stories thst I linked to?
Do you accept that the BBC should have pulled Brown up on his lie about British debt standing at 40% of GDP?
BTW – Sorry I did think you worked for the BBC 🙂
MWL: 7 hours to come up with that list of Christian groups that “seem to take inspiration”? I asked for a list of Christian fundamentalist terrorists stoning people to death and calling for the death of all the members of another religion and launching rockets against practitioners of such a religion; then we can compare.
You came up with “the LRA is one. The KKK another. The Army of God. National Liberation Front of Tripura. Laurent “rebels for christ” Nkunda in Rwanda.”
I thought the Lords Resistance Army were Acholi rather than single-denomination Christian or even solely Christian.
The Army Of God – grasping at straws with this one aren’t you? Please detail the terrorist atrocities carried out by this massive organisation…
The National Liberation Front of Tripura are a new one to me and from the look of their activities not quite on the same level as the Taliban, Al Quaeda, hamas, Hezbollah, the Janjaweed etc. etc. etc.
Laurent “rebels for christ” Nkunda – A Christian but does he claim to be acting on the words of the Bible?
Try again MWL, not good enough.
Chuffer 4:36
Maybe, “Watchdog” will do a feature on people who cheat on their airmiles.
Notasheep 6:01
You are quite right, the LRA are, in any case , not a “Christian Army”. Their leader, Joseph Kony, believes that he is God’s representative on earth and also believes in spirits, etc, whatever takes his fancy at the time.
I think MWL would need to have some understanding of African psychology, the interaction of voodoo and religion to get this.
By the way, MWL, I am off to W. Africa in 10 days time. My offer for you to join me is still open !
Jonathan | 20.02.09 – 5:59 pm
Not at all. At worst this is slack journalism. bbc coverage of the debt story elsewhere has been huge, and given prominence to tory attacks. So no whiff of a cover up and not mr cooper’s unequivocal bias.
NotaSheep | 20.02.09 – 6:01 pm
Good enough boyo. It demonstrates my point
MWL:
Slack journalism – once or twice maybe. But Brown and his cronies keep on telling those porkies and the BBC keep on accepting his or their word at face value.
Try following the link..
http://www.spectator.co.uk/coffeehouse/3283886/a-transcript-of-halftruths-exaggerations-and-brownies.thtml
Jonathan
That dissection of Brown’s lies and evasions should be required reading for every voter.
And maybe Peston could read it as well.
Actor accused showed ‘no remorse’
What do you make of this headline? I read this as another celebrity scandal.
Whether 18yr old Rob Knox can be called an actor on the basis of a few bit parts and a tiny, forgettable role in a Harry Potter movie is debatable. (Go on, without checking who was Marcus Belby?) However, he wasn’t accused of anything.
He was the victim.
Sex charge cabbie admits to lying
A black cab driver accused of drugging and sexually assaulting female passengers has admitted in court giving women champagne and lying to them.
Either ‘Mr’ Worboys is white or some innocent’s photograph has been added to the article by mistake.
Further in the article we learn, The prosecution claim Mr Worboys spent 18 months preying on young women he picked up outside nightspots across central London in his black cab.
Sloppy editing, not a change of the BBC policy. 😆
MWL: No, not good enough, not by a long shot. Poor, very poor. Are you sure you don’t work for the BBC?
Who writes these profiles?
Profile: Benjamin Netanyahu
Benjamin Netanyahu is one of the most right-wing and controversial leaders in Israel’s history.
Just what makes him or any other Israeli right-wing is never explained. Palestinians are never divided into left or right wing. Just what makes him more controversial than Menachem Begin or Ariel Sharon is similarly not addressed.
he was the first Israeli leader to be born after the creation of the Jewish state.
This is deceptive. Rabin was the first native born Prime Minister. Netanyahu was born after 1948 – so what?
He subsequently lost the Likud leadership to Ariel Sharon, though he served as a sometimes rancorous member of Mr Sharon’s cabinet.
Actually he lost nothing. He resigned his seat in 1999 and temporarily retired from politics. In 2003 he returned to politics as Foreign Minister in Ariel Sharon’s government.
The Israeli military offensive against Hamas in the Gaza Strip, launched in late December 2008, slightly narrowed Mr Netanyahu’s lead over his rivals in the 10 February election.
Speculation. Netanyahu’s lead in the polls actually rose during the war and dropped later. It is just as likely that other factors as Livni’s campaign strategy, his own lackluster campaign and the growth of a ‘right-wing’ alternative in Lieberman reduced his lead.
Although Kadima narrowly defeated Likud in the poll, it was Mr Netanyahu who President Shimon Peres asked to form the next government.
The President is bound to ask the party leader with the best chance of forming a government. The profile doesn’t explain that Israel is a multiparty democracy and government is always a coalition. An uninformed reader (anyone relying on the BBC) might think Kadima won a majority of the votes rather than a one seat lead and both parties gained less than one quarter of all seats.
His election, by the narrowest of margins, represented a major turning point in Israeli politics.
I presume that refers to 1996. The BBC website is noted for ‘cut and paste’ leading to odd chronological sequences. Why his election was a major turning point is not explained. Begin’s victory in 1977 was a major turning point. Netanyahu’s, as any election where government changes hands was a turning point. You could argue that Rabin’s election was a turning point but it is equally true to say that changes as the Oslo Agreement came after Rabin reversed promises he made to get elected.
Is the profile biased? I’m not sure. Is the profile sloppily written and edited. For sure. My pity on anyone who relies on this collection of speculation and unsupported claims for information.
deegee
A profile is not some piece that has to be published quickly. There is therefore even less excuse for that sloppy (if not biased) writing.
The BBC is a major source of MISinformation about the Middle East.
R 4’s Feedback today was instructive. In its usual anodyne way, the programme pretended to ‘investigate;’ how the BBC assigns priorities to news stories.
Feedback habitually does this by dispatching an inadequate reporter to ‘listen in’ as BBC types discuss how they do whatever is under discussion that week.
It’s hard not to wonder if the most probing question their reporter has ever asked in her entire life is, ‘how do you like your coffee?’
This week, listening to the deliberation of the BBC’s news sages, one of the lead roles in the process appears to be being played by a 14 year old.
Not for the first time, it occurred to me that a significant cause of the problems at the BBC is the over-promotion of yoof and the mistaken belief that audiences under 25 are worth sacrificing millions to entice.