It is big news that the BBC has actually upheld some of the complaints against Jeremy Bowen. The way they’ve wriggled and jiggled out of the remainder is an indication of the wider battle we’re faced with.
Whether or not they sack him remains to be seen; it’s just the tip of the inherent bias iceberg really. The tenacity of the complainant Jonathan Turner is remarkable. Anyone else would have lost the will to live long ago.
Greg Dyke is making it crystal clear that the complaints system is a charade. According to Dyke’s perverse arguemnt journalists could get away with any breach of the BBCs own rules on impartiality. He’s also made it clear that if the BBC don’t like the Trust’s findings they will utterly disregard them. In other words he’s just driven a coach and horses through the credibilty and authority of the BBC Trust.
hippiepooter | 16.04.09 – 10:11 am
Not that I disagree with the underlying sentiment, but you have to be accurate with these guys or they’ll weasel out of answering your point.
Tom Paulin’s career at the BBC continued without a blip. He affirmed his comments.
I’m no expect but this strikes me as inaccurate. Unless you know something I don’t – Paulin never had a career at the BBC.
He is tenured university faculty and only ever appeared on the BBC as an ‘expert’ talking head.
He was once a regular panellist on the Newsnight Review show but stopped doing that years ago – maybe at the time when he called for the settlers to be shot.
I think I saw him on BBC only once after that.
Scott | Homepage | 16.04.09 – 1:35 am |
Scott,
“god bless you for never letting your own ignorance getting in the way of a strongly-held opinion
It should say letting and get. Obviously you can’t say letting and getting in that sentence.
I only point this out since you are criticising my writing thereby drawing attention to your own.
I would love to know how you know anything about my practical knowledge or otherwise. Do I know you?
To clear up your misunderstanding, no-one should fall at my feet.
I come, admittedly, from a pro Israel perspective. My research is mainly via pro Israel protagonists, but they necessarily deal with the other perspective in setting out their case.
The BBC, on the other hand takes the pro Palestinian/Arab view, though the difference there is that their sources tend not to deal with any perspective other than their own.
What we celebrate, if anything, is that there are any ‘upheld components’ at all. We only celebrate that because it might hold the BBC’s anti Israel bias up to scrutiny, especially in the light of other recent BBC flaws.
I certainly don’t expect you to agree with anything I say about the subject, but your comment seemed merely petulant and personal.
Dyke’s fatuous and self serving bullshit about ‘hideously white’ did it for me. Hideously white? Imagine the reaction to ‘hideously black’ and you get the picture. Did he include himself in that description or was he thinking of raiding the Black and White Minstrel props archive and blacking up? Or better still resigning in favour of a black DG? As far as I can see Thompson seems to be of the hideous racial strain so it’s ok as a pathetic go nowhere generalisation for the beeboid oiky toilers but when it’s their own necks up for the chop the whole thing disappears up it’s own slimy fundament.
Being anti-Israel is a shoe-in for jobs at the BBC, Guardian and Not So Independent.
No doubt Bowen is being lined up for Director General, right now.
The BBC is bathing under the glow of scandals, fines and public mistrust. They no longer bother to hide their bias, but publicly revel in it.
Notoriety is part of the agitprop agenda.
The fact that only a week ago the BBC had their lowest viewing figures in the last twenty years is not important to them – when the mugs keep paying the telly tax.
They see their role as the metrocentric mouthpiece for the ruling elite and as vicarious armchair radicals – thrilled by anarchist demos, extremist Islam, foul mouthed talk show hosts, questionable green issues and this sinister government. Every thing they produce from talk shows to travelogues, from news coverage to current affairs, from drama to soaps are saturated with their on-message dirge.
In the evening, they leave their publically funded offices and travel into the smug world of Medialand – Fulham, if they are senior staff; Camden Town if they are medium rankers and Stoke Newington if they are new kids on the block, worried only that their £1million terrace house in London has fallen in value recently whilst the school fees keep going up.
They are completely out of touch with reality. Most have gone there straight from University and stayed ever since.
When they show the outside world it is odd and patronising. Their recent rural series of BBC 4 shows how little they know of the world beyond London and the prosperous London world view.
They haven’t a clue about business or commercial pressures. Like Peston, it’s all based on theory.
Bargain Hunt – their eponymous “antique” show sums this up quite neatly. Only on the BBC would you have people buying retail (at markets/shops) and then trying to resell the item wholesale (at auctions) and hope to make a profit!
They are so out of touch, the whole creaking edifice has to be dismantled. Sooner, rather than later.
As for Paulin? I remember his reactive kneejerk rant about two Bloody Sunday films on Newsnight Revue. He completely lost the plot, inserting himself into the story almost as a protaganist of the event. That they were films and based on subjective viewpoint eluded the trolly marxist leprachaun and as his normally partisan co-tossers gaped in wonderment he collapsed muttering and red faced into a kind of mad stuttering stupor. Ever since then I’ve not seen too much of him and for that I must be eternally grateful.
Peter:
However, I was intrigued by this subhead:
‘..former director-general says top journalists should not be undermined
| 16.04.09 – 8:13 am | #
————————————-
Hah! I just knew which little self-important, bustling, busy rent-a-gob this was going to be, before I even got to the name. Pops up like a jack-in-the-box at every opportunity, spouting his trademmark estuary bilge.
“Bargain Hunt – their eponymous “antique” show sums this up quite neatly. Only on the BBC would you have people buying retail (at markets/shops) and then trying to resell the item wholesale (at auctions) and hope to make a profit!”
Ricky:
You’re right. I caught this show one time, and within a couple of minutes I realised it was based on a fatuous concept. None of the contestants ever makes any money, because the way the show is set up makes it impossible. The “winner” is the team which loses the least money. As a way of summing up the ethos of the public sector it makes a lot of sense. Must have something to do with the unique way the BBC is funded.
Seems to be something wrong with the cutting-pasting to the comments pages.
The BBC’s report on Bowen stated that it upheld Bowen’s assertion that 10% of the Israeli population (supposedly) opposing Jewish settlements in the west bank is “a substantial number”. Assuming that the BBC meant 10% of Jews, then I await their verdict on the BNP’s results in June and the explicit ‘substantial’ opposition to multi-culti destruction of the UK.
Anybody ever notice that the words “Jeremy Bowen” conceal the words “Jew boy enemy bore”?
Prepostero:
I thought it was the other way round.
piggy kosher
Not sure what you mean. I meant “enemy of Israel and a bore”.
BiasSpeak: “Anti-Semitic” n., someone who applies equal scepticism to Israeli claims as to Palestinians’ when those claims do not match the speaker’s one observations.
Bowen’s clearly a Nazi!
Seriously, calling someone anti-semitic just because they don’t believe the bollocks put out by the Isreaeli government is a patheticly cheap attempt to avoid any actual discussion and is obviously the tactic of someone who has nothing substantial to say.
I dispise Israel, but I work with and for Jews. It doesn’t bother me what they do on a Saturday – it’s a free country. Condeming the actions of a murderous government (who are, yes, faced by a murderous opposistion) in no way relates to hating ordinary Jews for being Jewish.
So, get a new record; this one won’t play any more.
I would have thought you would be celebrating the fact that the BBC is big enough to accept one of it’s reports was rapped. Yet you ignore the fact that the BBC have done a good job at checking themselves in this case. Give them credit where it’s due.
Cockney | 16.04.09 – 11:13 am |
where the compliants were inspired by the complainant’s own bias these were correctly rejected. The ones that were upheld was when Bowen lapsed into he usual half arsed generalisations and throwaway lines and in doing so exposed his personal blatant pro-Palestinian views which have no place in impartial reporting.
Seems like that’s how it should work.
Joe you say “I dispise Israel”, so clearly you are not receptive to counter arguements, even the true ones.
Your calim not to be biased has the same hollow ring as “some of my friends are black”.
Sorry mate, you are damned by your own blatant bias. You should apply for a job in the Blatant Bias Corproation.
The message of the BBC anti-semitic propaganda needs to be heard.
Listen up “Biased BBC is baised”
You say the “the BBC have done a good job at checking themselves in this case”. That is untrue. Did you make a mistake or are you spinnng for the Blatant Bias Corporation? Do you work for the Beeb?
Please see http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/middle_east/8000922.stm
It states clearly “The body which oversees the BBC on behalf of its audiences has criticised an article by the BBC’s Middle East Editor, Jeremy Bowen.”
ie not the BBC itself, indeed the Blatant Bias Corporation seeks to defend its dischraced anti-semitic propagandist.
“…In reply, BBC News said Jeremy Bowen had been exercising his professional judgement on history.
…In its defence of the web article, BBC News said the Trust’s conclusion was “a single, partially upheld finding related to one piece of output about events that took place over 40 years ago.
Jeremy Bowen was simply exercising his professional judgement on history. Clearly there is no consensus view of history and it is self evident that there are others who have a different analysis.”
And finally, maybe many who post here at Biased BBC have their own agenda but please note (i) the population is not forced to pay for us on pain of imprisonment, (2) we make no pretence of impartiality and (3) we are not highly paid professional journalists.
nrg
_____________
whats your beef with the report on bowen then? seems to me they did a good job at recognising his mistake. I suppose you wouldn’t be happy til he was strung up would you?
stop this ‘forced to pay’ nonsense. you can choose not to pay. no one will arrest you if you don’t. just don’t watch tele. your choice.
I want to watch telly – just not the BBC. And I don’t want to pay for the BBC propaganda.
Prepostero:
Just a play on words. Think laterally.
millie tant
______________
complaining about the license fee and complaining about supposed BBC bias are too different things, and you shouldn’t link the two when it suits your argument.
piggy kosher:
Sorry, got you.
Biased BBC is Biased:
“. . . done a good job at checking themselves in this case”???
What on earth were they busy checking during the past twenty years then? And when are they going to start checking every other truth manipulator and outright liar they employ, which is virtually every one of them? Really, the irritating stupidity of some is beyond belief.
I would have thought having to be taxed for an unrepresentative biased propaganda entity just adds undemocratic insult to injury.
Preposteroso
_______________
past 20 years? what?? what have they done in the last 20 years that has upset you?
“Joe you say “I dispise Israel”, so clearly you are not receptive to counter arguements, even the true ones.”
That does not follow logically. I dispised George Bush, but that didn’t mean I refused to believe a word he said. I base my dislike on actions, not, as seems the norm here, on pre-determined dogma.
“Your calim not to be biased has the same hollow ring as “some of my friends are black”.”
I didn’t claim to not be biased. Apart from the saints who populate this site, everyone in the world has biases. I just said that I do not equate the government of a particular country with a generalised judgement on everyone of a particular race/religion.
It is just as racist to deem all Jews as good because of something positive the Israeli goverment does as it is to condem all Jews for something bad it does. You are the one making sweeping generalisations about Jews as a faceless mass, not me.
“Sorry mate, you are damned by your own blatant bias. You should apply for a job in the Blatant Bias Corproation.”
LoL.
“The message of the BBC anti-semitic propaganda needs to be heard.”
Why? Are the voices in your head not loud enough?
Biased BBC is Biased!:
millie tant
______________
complaining about the license fee and complaining about supposed BBC bias are too different things, and you shouldn’t link the two when it suits your argument.
Biased BBC is Biased! | 16.04.09 – 5:21 pm | #
————————————–
Listen, Matey: cause links effect whether you like or not. See the connection yet?
And while we are on the subject of linking, don’t go linking Biased BBC bias with BBC bias. See any difference in significance between he two?
Frank Adam over at Oy Va Goy posits the excellent suggestion that the old B.B.C. set up of a Jerusalem correspondent and an “Arab World” correspondent should be revived. Lumping Israel together with the arab “world” just makes for pro – arabist expat propaganda bullshit, as well as being a scary foretaste of the staus of Israel in a mooted Israel/Palestine (may G-d and his legions of angels forebid)
sal | 16.04.09 – 11:24 am |
“I’m no expect but this strikes me as inaccurate. Unless you know something I don’t – Paulin never had a career at the BBC.”
Always worth taking people up on accuracy. I distinctly recall it being reported that Paulin did affirm his comments and the BBC stated it was not going to drop him due to his comments. I don’t know how long he remained a talking head thereafter, but the disparity between the nature of his comments and the BBC response compared to Carol Thatcher is enormous and telling.
The term ‘career’ was of course used in a loose sense – he was a regular on a BBC arts programme.
Joe, I notice that you are suggesting I am suffering from mental illness. you guys cannot help reverting to type.
You seem to prefer smears to the truth – do you work in a labour party spin office? Or are you in the BBC payroll?
BBBC is B: “I suppose you wouldn’t be happy til he was strung up would you?”
No I would be perfectly happy for him to get a job in a left wing organisation instead of one which purports to be impartial.
“stop this ‘forced to pay’ nonsense”
Oh come on, try an keep a nodding acquaintance with truth and reality.
Are you on the BBC payroll?
In fact Sal, a search under “Tom Paulin” on this site reveals he carried on with his BBC career. His inflammatory anti-Jewish comments were made, it appears, in 2002, and the last mention of an appearance by him on this site is 2007.
Bryan,
Just use the zoom function.
.
“I dispise Israel”
That makes you an antisemite who can’t spell.
But don’t think that makes you special: there are plenty of illiterate antisemites out there.
nrg: “Joe, I notice that you are suggesting I am suffering from mental illness. you guys cannot help reverting to type.”
I don’t know, is a total lack of a sense of proportion OR a sense of humour not some form of mental illness?
Also, I liked the default action of making a sweeping generalisation at the end there. “You guys”; what does that mean? You guys who refuse to see the world exactly as I do? You guys that actually think about what they believe when they watch TV instead of falling back on dogma? You guys that don’t believe that fairy tales and folklore is how the world should be run?
That’s the problem with bigotry, by its nature it is incoherent. If it was rational, it wouldn’t be bigotry.
Indeed. And that makes Joe a revolting bigot.
‘Nearly Oxfordian:
“I dispise Israel”
That makes you an antisemite who can’t spell.’
Does thinking Gordon Brown is an idiot make me anti-Scottish too?
Oh, and I’ve just remembered that I fell out with one of my uncles once. I suppose by your cast-iron reasoning that means I hate my Mother and Father too.
Actually, now that I think about it, you’ve proven that I hate everybody in the whole world because there are SOME people I don’t like.
I’m glad I came here, I had no idea how screwed up I was!
You’re just a bunch of sad wankers that can’t cope with turning on the telly and not hearing all your pre-conceived prejudices echoed directly back at you, aren’t you? Go on, admit it. You know you want to. You’d feel better, honest.
Joe: Way to go in trying to distract attention from the simple fact the rotten, bloated, poor quality, parasitic, left wing propaganda spouting, patronising, biased state broadcaster has been formally exposed.
Now would you like to answer the question: do you work for the BBC? or have a close connection with the BBC, Labour party or some other left wing or Palestine support or propoganda organisation?n A loose parasitic cabal I liketo refer to as “you guys”.
I notice that like Britian’s worst ever Prime Minister you have a prolem apologising for the smear against me.
Would you like to apologise now?
I look forward to
…your answer.
ps “sad wankers” is that the best you can do. Is that how you define anyone who does not share your world view? How very Labour!
“Joe: Way to go in trying to distract attention from the simple fact the rotten, bloated, poor quality, parasitic, left wing propaganda spouting, patronising, biased state broadcaster has been formally exposed.”
You’re one one trying to make a very minor criticism into a lynching. My comments were aimed at that – you are clearly desperate for any crumb of support for your very biased – not to say weird – world view.
“Now would you like to answer the question: do you work for the BBC? or have a close connection with the BBC, Labour party or some other left wing or Palestine support or propoganda organisation?n A loose parasitic cabal I liketo refer to as “you guys”.
No, I don’t. I did accidentally vote for Labour once under the impression that they couldn’t be worse than the Tories. I seems I was incorrect on that. Very. 🙁
“I notice that like Britian’s worst ever Prime Minister you have a prolem apologising for the smear against me.”
What smear? You’re not still going on about the jokey comment about voices in your head, are you? Get a life!
It’s always interesting to see which topics brings ’em out, and so strongly.
I wonder how someone like Joe even finds this site?
Joe | 16.04.09 – 7:38 pm |
I suppose it OK for you – Your prejudices are played on the BBC daily. No one wants a one-sided BBC – spouting its own opinions as fact. I want to hear both sides of an argument (properly conducted), not just BBC opinionated “reporters” talking amongst themselves.
I want to hear the views of the people who get voted in to run the country from all sides of the political divide. Then the public can make up their own minds of what is believable and what is propaganda.
“I wonder how someone like Joe even finds this site?”
Probably by searching for the BBC HYS site.
So seeking balance and accuracy is “weird”? Defaulting to an immediate attempt to smear anyone who disagrees with you is a “jokey comment”?
Anyway, thanks for respondin. Do come back and see us again, a good challenge every now and then does this site a world of good.
“You’re just a bunch of sad wankers”
Projection, you loser; projection.
.
To idiots like him, a disgusting comment about schizophrenia is a “jokey comment”. What a little shit.
I wonder why the critics won’t ever reveal how they found this blog? Seeing as how it’s obscure and all.
Degee and Nearly Oxfordian,
Thanks guys, I shoulda known that. Zoomed in on the summary of the findings and gritted my teeth and read a bit of it. Trying to get that trust to acknowledge BBC bias is a Herculean task.
They should have a separate category concentrating specifically on tone. Bowen sneers a lot at Israel. It’s not at all difficult to pick up.
heh.. hark at Fisk attacking the beeb
(from the ultra-left, of course!)
http://www.independent.co.uk/opinion/commentators/fisk/robert-fisk-how-can-you-trust-the-cowardly-bbc-1669281.html
Joe: Calling people “sad” = under age 35? Lower? Long way to go before sense arrives.
Intruiging stuff.
Bowen will have to either become a CNN/FOX kind of flunky or quit.
As an old school BBC dood he’s caught between a rock and a hard place since Israel is the Apartheid South Africa of the new millennium…BUT Israel has to be a racist society for joos to have somewhere to survive.
Anyroad.
He’s far better off taking his pension early, writing, drinking beer and going fishing.
The best policy for the BBC is to completely ignore the daily butchery in Palestine/Israel, the whole place just depresses people anyway.