Writing for the Observer ( yes I bought it – I wanted the Heathers DVD ) Nick Cohen asks the key question.
Who would you rather trust – the BBC or a blogger?
Bookmark the permalink.
Search Biased BBC
Recent Comments
- JohnC Nov 22, 02:48
Midweek 20th November 2024
This is how it works Digg. It’s no different from the BBC. Positions are mandated for certain ethnic groups by… - Zephir Nov 22, 01:56
Midweek 20th November 2024
As mentioned in Youtube comments: To all advertisers, including Faguar, stop trying to sell black people to us, that shit… - Mustapha Sheikup al-Beebi Nov 22, 01:00
Midweek 20th November 2024
We all know how impartial the BBC is and how hard it tries to give both sides of any issue.… - StewGreen Nov 22, 01:00
Midweek 20th November 2024
Blue line gang backdating offences https://twitter.com/WeAreFairCop/status/1859528690163495212 Then the whole process was unlawful and did amount to harassment. - StewGreen Nov 22, 00:09
Midweek 20th November 2024
Libmob don’t know the price of things 1Kg sugar is now just 89p at B&M It is £1 at Poundland… - vlad Nov 21, 23:37
Midweek 20th November 2024
It’s called ‘Unleashed’ – not a word I would apply to BoJo. Like being savaged by a dead sheep. - Sluff Nov 21, 22:30
Midweek 20th November 2024
After watching by accident the fawning sycophancy of the 10 pm BBC news to John Prescott, there can be no… - harry142857 Nov 21, 22:02
Midweek 20th November 2024
The emoluments for the Chief Executive for the year was £154,044. Registered Charity 802052 Children In Need
Categories
agw anti-American anti-conservative anti-Israel anti Israel. pro Palestinian Antisemitism BBC - sickeningly biased at all times. BBC agenda BBC bias bbc bias and balance. bbc bias by omission BBC censorship BBC Question Time BBC selectivity bias Biased BBC climate change dhimmis general thread immigration Islam israel Mark Mardell obama obama bias Obamalove open thread pro-labour pro-palestinian pro EU pro Hamas pro Islam pro Labour bias pro Obama PRO OBAMA AT ALL COSTS. pro Obama BBC agenda question time question time live Richard Black save gordon. USA politics US economy US News US politics US presidential elections
On another level,I trust the BBC more than I trust zanu lab.
That’s about as generous as I can be.
As someone remarked to me the other day, now when I read a story on the BBC website, my first reaction is to turn to other sources, wondering what is the real story.
Those other sources are now almost always on the Internet and always include informed bloggers.
GCooper,
Isnt that a real shame though…when you have to go else where for the real story?
The BBC has a unique place, where it could accomplish so much BUT it will never accomplish anything because of its institutional racism against anything white, israeli, jew, american (republican that is).
The BBC cant be trusted to cover these stories because of the bias it comes with.
In my ideal world (one where we still have to pay for it), the BBC’s role isnt to spread its opinion (through its blogs) or to go chasing scoops.
No…the role of Al Beeb would be to get the story behind the story. Leave scoops to the msm that requires scoops to make money. The BBC should get in behind and get the full story, the story the fee paying media wont or cant tell you because of their need to turn a profit.
Unfortunately, this will never happen as long as Al Beeb remains mired in its own institutional bias.
Mailman
Provided your critical faculties have not been rotted by marxism and its derivatives, religion (the m word springs to mind) or environmentalism, you have freedom of expression + the internet + the search engine. You can think and know and have your own opinion, not the one others want you to have.
The MSM have been corrupted beyond redemption.The news agencies are poisoned sources. Just beware of their tentacles – the management of Wiki to protect the big lie about climate.
It feels a pretty adult world. Most of all I look forward to the death of the Guardian Media Group – a stain on the underpants of humanity.
For British news I opt for reading the political blogs before dipping into either the BBC or the biased ranting of the dead tree pedestrians. Unfortunately, blogs can be very limited in scope when stories break beyond our shores, as in the EU parliament for instance. But then, you don’t really get those stories in the MSM either.
What the blogs do tell us, for anyone who reads the comments, is that people are fed up with criminally biased news filtering. They are also sick to death of being treated like idiots. They are the temperature gauge of public opinion and it seems the temperature is rising.
Long live blogs and the likes of Guido, Devil’s Kitchen and Watts Up With That!
Reducing the size of the Middle East Bureau might actually improve the BBC’s objectivity (or reduce the lack of it) rather than the opposite.
Another area where economies could be found is the bloated size of its US bureau, including the odious Matt “Stir” Frei, and the undue and exaggerated prominence given to all things American from its politics and weather to its films and music in the BBC’s output despite the Beeb’s disavowal of the “special” relationship.
BBC News 24 replaced by Roland Rat for a few days. I know that the Rat would do better reporting.
GCooper:
“…now when I read a story on the BBC website, my first reaction is to turn to other sources, wondering what is the real story.”
This is being said by many people I know. The sin, as we have discussed, is always in the omission of important fact or facts. This editing is not done by inexperienced people but by knowing hands.
The conclusion has to be this: There is the deliberate touting of an agenda. New visitors to this site are always reluctant to believe this, but it is by the proving of our point by FACTS (not insults or abuse) that we convert them.
Rock on!
The BBC seems to bias against anything that is middle of the road or right of the road. I think it comes from the institutional left wing leaning people that have been recruited over the years and that if they do not say the right thing or agree with those recruiting then they don’t stand a chance of being given a job.
Why was Dr David Bellemy dropped in favour of Bill Oddie as the BBC’s countryside expert?
There have been many issues of news seen on other sites and news programmes that have not seen the light of day on the BBC. Likewise some issues done to death on the BBC, left wing or politically correct of course, have been given more hours of broadcasting than one would imagine.
I regard the BBC much like Fox news, to be ignored for truth and even handed reporting but good for a laugh.
I wouldn’t trust any international reporting by the BBC, that’s for sure.
moorlandhunter- not many laughs on al beeb these days.
In fact I reckon you’d get more chuckles from Harriet Harperson’s stand up comedy tour…..
Ethno centrically Non denominationally Non gender Specifically yours…..
On Friday morning my first reaction to the Beeb leading with Labour’s changes to the Monarchy was “what are they trying to hide?” Turned out it was some desperate economic figures.
The point is, that’s my immediate, natural reaction nowadays.
Beeb delenda est.
The Guardian article is laughable when the author writes:
“Why, then, mourn the passing of the hack? The best reason for wanting my colleagues to survive is that serious reporters and broadcasters offer a ***guarantee*** that what they say is true.”
The dead-tree press are as unobjective as the BBC on most stories.
I would slighlty disagree on a point of principle with AndrewSouthLondon’s comment above when he refers to “freedom of expression” and “having your own opinion”.
Most people’s opinions are uninformed nonsense because they do not know *how* to think effectively. They do not possess knowledge, but rather have absorbed, like sponges, many cliches and pre-packaged truths, without the tiresome job of having to evaluate whether what they are told is right or wrong. People leave the evaluating job to journalists and the BBC out of laziness, particularly on matters scientific and economic.
However, though opinions are like a***holes, in that everyone has one, what matters is not “freedom to express opinion”, as ASL refers above, but forming *objectively provable* conclusions based on knowing full contextual facts, coupled with a moral compass that emphasises the protection, rather than the sacrifice, of the individual.
Even Cameron is erroneously preaching on the ludicrous notion of the “court of public opinion” as if somehow (we are not told the mechanism) that it is a rational basis for drawing any conclusion – 50 million Britons can’t be wrong – on any matter.
Has anyone these days ever heard of objective-based principles?
I’d rather trust ITV news than the BBC’s.
The difference between ITV’s factual report on her expenses at 18:30 and the BBC’s love-in with Labour, Gordon and Smith’s expenses at 18:00 was staggering. It was like reporting on two totally different stories.
Nick Cohen?
ah yes, Nick Cohen.
I’m with Mailman’s ideal world. 12:19
I’d prefer to have the BBC ‘turned around’ as in well known jargon-remedy for ‘failing’ ‘unfit for purpose’ institutions. We need more than the alternative – a market-led free-for-all. I think the BBC’s hard-won reputation lingers just enough for it to be rekindled, if they act urgently and radically. Purge and reshuffle, I say.
I know some people who refuse to use a computer for goodness sake. (Guardian readers.)
“GBS: Most people’s opinions are uninformed nonsense because they do not know *how* to think effectively”
Quite so, I agree. My point was that those who are able to grasp the opportunity of knowledge through the internet and not the MSM-filtered versions has a historically unique opportunity to know what they think.
anonymous
well posted –he is probably the reason I don’t knock around with journalists–puffy little prick
I’d sooner trust a naked man with an erection, a carving knife and a violent look in his eye than the BBC.
As someone remarked to me the other day, now when I read a story on the BBC website, my first reaction is to turn to other sources, wondering what is the real story.
Those other sources are now almost always on the Internet and always include informed bloggers.
GCooper | 30.03.09 – 12:03 pm |
indeed GCooper – it wasnt until i heard last weeks Monocle podcast that i realised that there was a South Korean angle on the Madagascar coup
(Daewoo buying millions of acres for growing palm oil and maize)
The Far East Asian incursions into Africa in a kind of colonialism mark 2 is one of THE big geopolitical stories right now.
i think i’m just fascinated by it because you never hear about this sort of “big picture” from the BBC , lost as they are in their own pet agendas.
Archduke
May I ask you to consider why this is the case?
It is said that China in particular is actually controlled by the western establishment. This is because it is, and has long since been so.
China is now a conduit for western banking (HSBC) and multi-national conglomerates, running out of Hong-Kong.
Communist China is also a slave state and therefore far more useful for making money and therefore global power for our own American, British and European ruling elite class.
Africa is indeed being colonized yet again, but not ultimately by the Chinese government, and certainly not the Chinese people. Africa is being colonized by the same powers that colonized it the first time around.
Is this another poll? I vote neither
Has anyone thought of getting hold, through the freedom of Information Acts, of the names and numbers of staff employed by the various BBC newsrooms. It would not, of course, show their religious affiliations but there may be indications
What would be really interesting FOI request would be the political affiliation of BBC employees.
A peeler cannot be a member of the BNP, Freemasons etc as this would affect his impartiality while carrying out his duties.
Therefore it follows that political loyalties would affect an impartial and influential organisation like publicly funded TV?
The trick is to get the extremes and realise the truth is somewhere in the middle. Something like BBC/BNP/Guardian/Mail, the bloggers – UK Commentators, Harry’s Place, Cranmer etc, etc.
Biased BBC is actually very useful beyond its stated scope, as it pulls in a great deal more.
The fora are astonishingly useful and valuable, and I have a feeling might hold the key to the rescuing of Britain from complete demise.
“….might hold the key to the rescuing of Britain from complete demise.”
Not quite sure about that, but at least it’ll be far better anatomised and documented than would otherwise have been the case.
One trusts traditional media at his peril. One trusts a blogger after doing a bit of research.
for a bit of interesting news that the US media has failed to cover.. check out Hillary’s gaffe in Mexico City.
Check it out…. this seems to be confirmed through several postings and stories.
http://www.catholicnewsagency.com/new.php?n=15511
Not quite sure about that, but at least it’ll be far better anatomised and documented than would otherwise have been the case.
I agree it’s a touch optimistic, but I sense there is a growing sense of “conservative confidence” growing from the online outburst of suppressed taboo emotion and thought on a whole array of issues about which we have been effectively silenced up to now in the public sphere.
Hugh Oxford
Yes, maybe.
However
The narrative, as they say, is an enormous protest against so called capitalism, over the next few days, not so called socialism.
It is free market capitalism, (as the brainwashed masses know it,) that is being attacked. Not 11 or far more years of authoritarian corporate socialism of the type being currently promoted all over the entire free world by every single democratically elected government, bar none. Red, Blue, or yellow team it has made no difference in the end, because they are all now following establishment policies, at exactly the same time.
Some call this a virtually secret conspiracy at the highest democratic level. Mainly because it is a virtually secret conspiracy at the highest non democratic level. A level that the great masses do not even understand exists, thanks to completely evil organizations such as The BBC.
These protests are APPROVED or authorized by the establishment, otherwise they would not exist. Or if they did they would not be getting any sympathetic coverage, or indeed any coverage at all from the establishments favorite media, namely The BBC.
The country side alliance protests however were clearly not authorized. Which is why the media ignored the whole event as much as possible, and the police came down on highly peaceful largely middle class conservative thinking citizens, like a proverbial ton of bricks. As they would us, or indeed any REAL protest that genuinely came from the ordinary people, without any doubt whatsoever.
the only real protest the establishment worry about is one by ordinary hard working and productive net TAX PAYERS. Not establishment subverted Trades Unions members or brainwashed university graduates. Who are the future servants/employees of the establishment, whether they like it or not.
We must try our best to understand that the establishment controls all sides of the perceived and greatly contrived argument, if at all possible.
This is often called MIND CONTROL, because it is MIND CONTROL.
IMO and many others that have properly studied these things.
The radical left are even more controlled by the establishment then the reactionary right.
If any given establishment can control the radical side, the reactionary side is a relative piece of piss to control. Which is why our establishment has been controlling our universities ever since the establishment first created them.
AGW and socialism generally are entirely establishment agendas set up, financed, and promoted by same.
Surly this is by now self apparently so?
The thing I have noticed about blogs and comments is… people tend to always back up their posts with links to articles/facts.
Those people that do tend to be logical.
Those that don’t tend to be the usual ‘tards that we get in here – i.e. those that spout emotion as fact. People that argue with broad strokes and nothing to back it up. They also tend to be the people that ignore well reasoned arguments, rebuttals and questions.
When somebody poses a question they don’t like (or more likely, one that runs contrary to their world view) they just pretend not to have seen it. They refuse to acknowledge their mistakes and cherry pick pointless arguments while ignoring the major thrust.
IMHO they tend to be followers of El Cubo logic.
Atlas shrugged | 31.03.09 – 2:59 am
It is said that China in particular is actually controlled by the western establishment. This is because it is, and has long since been so.
Utter nonsense. “It is said” by you and perhaps your alt-history pals, but not in reality. If China was controlled by the Western Establishment, North Korea would have been sorted out years and years ago. Actually, the Korean War wouldn’t have happened in the first place, if we’re to believe your crap. Nor would the Vietnam War. The French would still be colonizing the place, no? Simple as that. You are talking complete garbage.
China is now a conduit for western banking (HSBC) and multi-national conglomerates, running out of Hong-Kong.
Yes, because they’re not stupid. They figured out how to suck money out of “Special Economic Zones” twenty years ago. (Everybody should do an internet search on that term, and decide for yourselves how much BS AS is spouting.) It was only a matter of time before they figured out how to domesticate it. The yuan was pegged to the dollar for their own benefit, not ours, or the The Western Establishment’s. You are talking garbage.
Communist China is also a slave state and therefore far more useful for making money and therefore global power for our own American, British and European ruling elite class.
Okay, the first part of that is partially true. But it’s to enrich the Chinese mandarins, not ours. The West benefits from cheap goods and plenty of technically proficient violinists for our orchestras, sure, but only until they start poisoning our children and pets, infecting our computers, killing leukemia patients, etc. (the goods, I mean, not the violinists).
Africa is indeed being colonized yet again, but not ultimately by the Chinese government, and certainly not the Chinese people. Africa is being colonized by the same powers that colonized it the first time around.
Yes, a bit of Africa is sort of being economically colonized by the Chinese, and you don’t hear the Leftoids at the BBC or anywhere else complaining about it. But that’s because the Chinese aren’t white, and there’s no collective historical guilt to assuage by whining. It’s not because the Chinese are controlled by the Western Establishment.
I know you won’t offer one single scrap of an explanation for all the shite you’re talking, because it’s nonsense. It is said.