75 Responses to Open Thread

←Older Comments
  1. David Preiser (USA) says:
    June 9, 2009 at 2:02 pm

    The BBC is so proud of Jonathan Ross, that they're bringing his show to the US on Friday nights. Well, maybe they're not really proud, but just want the advertising money. But that means they think he's so great that he'll earn them good cash over here.

    I don't know what's worse: the fact that the BBC thinks US viewers who watch BBC America – who claim to have the most-educated audience in TV – will enjoy Ross's persona and his "humorous" exchanges with UK celebs most of us have never heard of, or that they know he's crass and tedious but think that's what we want.

    I'm sure their US marketing people noticed that there was a tiny amount of attention paid to the Ross/Brand/Andrew Sachs, and thought they might take advantage of it. I think I'll write to Charles Moore for advice.

    Aside from that, here's how special Matt Frei and BBC News America think they are. I missed this when it was published last September, but it's definitely worth noticing even now:

    The magnetic governor of Alaska has been the subject of endless fascination in the British press. And she's received plenty of coverage on BBC America's weeknight newscast—so much so that anchor Matt Frei says, “We're having to sort of pinch ourselves.”

    That's partly due to the heightened viewer interest, but it also serves as a reminder not to get caught up in the celebrity aspect. “She's the sexy news material at the moment,” says Frei, a 22-year BBC veteran.

    At least that was the case before the financial meltdown and last week's controversy over the first presidential debate. But the debate about the debate emphasizes Frei's point that the road to the White House has multiple angles—something he had to remind the staff about at the height of the Palin phenomenon. “Let's not just talk about her; let's talk about Barack Obama, and let's talk about John McCain,” Frei says. “On both sides of the aisle, it's fascinating—and certainly abroad, people are fully engaged.”

    Too bad they forgot to actually talk about John McCain, except to say that he was just George Bush all over again.

    The balancing act comes with the show carrying the BBC brand with all its international equity and flavor, but targeting Americans. Hartman, known in part for his time producing the CBS Evening News With Katie Couric, is charged with finding that sweet spot, along with giving the newscast a certain detachment that's distinct from its cable and network competition.

    “We're always bringing an outsider's perspective,” says Katty Kay, the show's Washington correspondent and former reporter in Zimbabwe and Tokyo. “There is a way that we see American news in the context of our experience in other countries—how America fits into global politics.”

    They wouldn't respect a US broadcaster who went to the UK and started doling out an "international perspective" on British politics and current events, but I'm expected to swallow this? And now for the best part:

    According to anchor Frei, the show carries a “BBC-nurtured tradition of storytelling” and presents domestic news “in a slightly arch British way.” Often, a slight bemusement at American life (politics or otherwise) can be detected in his inflection or comments, though he and Hartman maintain that the network takes even-handedness very seriously.

    So they admit it. This is what I've been saying for the last year and a half. I think I'm done watching Frei Boy and Co.

       0 likes

  2. TPO says:
    June 9, 2009 at 3:12 pm

    George R @ 12:48

    Minister cleared in expenses row .

    What the BBC are not telling you is this:

    Gordon Brown refuses to publish report into finances of Labour MP Shahid Malik.

    http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/newstopics/mps-expenses/5485793/Gordon-Brown-refuses-to-publish-report-into-finances-of-Labour-MP-Shahid-Malik.html

       0 likes

  3. Anonymous says:
    June 9, 2009 at 4:49 pm

    For those that read my comments, especially to those that dont understand them or can't be bothered to properly try to understand them.

    You may have noticed that I use the word FASCIST rather a lot of times to describe The BBC, and all of our major political parties, and most if not all of the smaller ones.

    Unlike those that also use the term Fascist I actually know what the word means , and so do not in any way use the word lightly.

    Here is a perfectly accurate definition recently posted on CIF.

    "As an economic system, fascism is socialism with a capitalist veneer. The word derives from fascie, the Roman symbol of collectivism and STATE CORPORATIST power: a tied bundle of rods with a protruding axe. In its day (the 1920s and 1930s), fascism was seen as the happy medium between boom-and-bust-prone liberal capitalism, with its alleged class conflict, 'wasteful' competition, and profit-oriented egoism, and revolutionary Marxism, with its violent and socially divisive persecution of the bourgeoisie. Fascism substituted the particularity of nationalism and racialism—blood and soil—for the internationalism of both classical liberalism and Marxism."

    You will hopefully notice that indeed fascism is a compromise between all out Marxist Revolution and liberal capitalism. So Fascism is not one or the other. FASCISM is in effect selected elements of BOTH operating at the same time.

    Fascism in itself has NOTHING whatsoever to do with RACISM, other then being a means to a FASCIST end.

    Fascism like its blood brother Communism are not movements of the people, because there has not been such a thing, since the middle ages. The swift end of which culminated in the leader of the peasants revolt ( which was really a lower middle class, tax payers or bourgeoisie revolt )being sliced in two, by the then young Kings best mate.

    All political ideologies are products of the worlds aristocracy and other related elite ruling classes.

    Therefore The BNP are most surly Fascists, but so are the New and OLD LABOUR Parties, The Conservative Party, UKIP, The SNP, The WNP, The UN, The EU, and last but not at all least, The Lib/Dums and The Green Party.

    In short we live in a completely FASCIST world, completely run by FASCISTS.

    The only debate is, 'how Fascist they are,' not whether they are fascist or not.

    This explained by the surly obvious FACT, that we neither live in a Communist country, and we sure as hell don't live in a free market liberal capitalist one either.

    This country has not EVER been a free anything, in its entire history. Not even half free, during the best of the Thatcher years. This country is not even ours, it is part of The Crown Estates, and as such the as good as private property of The Queen of England. We are all slaves that have been cleverly conned into helping THEM enslave the rest of the planet in our name.

    This may be an unpleasant truth, and not much related to what you were told at school or university. But it is still the truth, like it or not.

    For the record. I am a conservative libertarian. Which means I pursue truth and FREEDOM. Which above all are the two things that FASCISM and FASCIST can NEVER allow.

    Which brings us back perfectly to the real reason why we have organizations such as The BBC.

    Atlas shrugged

       0 likes

  4. George R says:
    June 9, 2009 at 5:31 pm

    The whole structure of the BBC NEWS WESITE is not only politically biased, but also misleadlingly out-of-date on its content.

    For example, the BBC site has 'side-bars' and sections (listed on BBC 'News Front Page' left-hand side) such as 'Health', 'Education', but there is NO section: 'IMMIGRATION'.

    Of course, the BBC has political difficulty in uttering this word, preferring silence or the misleading, inaccurate substitute euphemism, 'migration'.

    The British people are more concerned with 'immigration' than the BBC is prepared to report apparently:

    -from 'MigrationwatchUK'-
    8 June 2009

    "Voters in EU elections cared more about immigration than NHS and crime"

    [Extract, pdf format]:

    "A YouGov poll released today shows that more than a third of people who voted in the EU elections named immigration as one of the issues which most influenced their vote.
    "Naturally enough, the top issues were the nature of Britain’s relationship with the European Union (51%); and the economy, jobs and the standard of living (also 51%). 40% named 'the conduct of MPs – their pay and expenses' as an issue that most influenced their decision.
    "All the other main policy issues scored less than half of immigration:

       0 likes

  5. CapnX says:
    June 9, 2009 at 6:10 pm

    Brrr! Snow in the UK in June! Global warming uh? Did we see a BBC reporter up to their gumboots in a snowdrift. Don't think so, although we have had many an expensive report from the nether regions of the poles. Still, it won't do for the BBC to report that the UK weather is as fickle as ever, climate change or no climate change.

       0 likes

  6. deegee says:
    June 9, 2009 at 6:44 pm

    At the risk of repeating ourselves.
    More attacks on Indians in Sydney
    Note differences between this version http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/asia-pacific/8090580.stm [Page last updated at 06:18 GMT, Tuesday, 9 June 2009 07:18 UK] and this http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/asia-pacific/8091566.stm [Page last updated at 13:24 GMT, Tuesday, 9 June 2009 14:24 UK].

    Strange that the latest version has much less detail. Perhaps the BBC thought the accompanying video might strain Australian brains?

    Version 8091566.stm has An Indian man in his 20s was allegedly set upon by a group of men of Middle Eastern appearance, while version 8090580.stm sneaks in a Reuters quote from an unidentified witness "And the Lebanese hit them Indians very badly".

    The Lebanese and the Indians don't have a common border nor do they have substantial minorities of ex pats in each others' territory. What could they find to fight about or perhaps the Indians were assaulted by Jehova's Witnesses of English extraction?

       0 likes

  7. David Preiser (USA) says:
    June 9, 2009 at 7:16 pm

    When the Organization of American States lifted the ban on Cuba last week, there was joy at the BBC. The story was on the front world news page, and still sits in the "Americas" section of the website, along with Castro's dismissal of the recent spy bust.

    However, Cuba doesn't seem to be so keen on joining. Not only has the BBC buried this story in the bowels of BBCCaribbean.com, but they – surprise – hide the truth and blatantly misrepresent what happened.

    A senior Cuban official, Ricardo Alarcon, has welcomed a decision by the Organisation of American States to lift the 1962 ban on Cuban membership.

    Mr Alarcon, the Speaker of the Cuban parliament, said it was a major victory – but added it did not mean Cuba actually wanted to re-join.

    The rest of the BBC article is – surprise – the usual stuff about Cuban exiles condemned the OAS lifting the ban, and how President Obamessiah wants a new beginning with Cuba, etc. But they admit that there might be some "conditions".

    What the BBC left out is that Cuba really said: no thanks.

    Sure, the BBC sub-editor put in a caption under Alarcon's photo noting that he said Cuba wasn't planning to rejoin (why isn't that worth mentioning in the body of the story?), but it's not quite the whole truth.

    In a statement published in the Cuban government newspaper Granma, Cuba called the OAS a graveless cadaver, and thanked ally nations for their efforts to correct a "historic and illegal error."

    "Ever since the triumph of the revolution, the Organization of American States has taken an active part in support of Washington's policy of hostility toward Cuba. It made official the economic blockade, arranged for the embargo of arms and strategic products and stipulated the obligation that its member countries should break diplomatic relations with our revolutionary state," the statement read.

    A rather emphatic rebuff. But the BBC doesn't want you to know that. Instead, they tell you that it would all be rainbows and unicorns and kittens except for those fools who don't think Communism is incompatible with democracy and human rights, and some Cuban exiles who are anti-Castro anyway.

       0 likes

  8. George R says:
    June 9, 2009 at 7:36 pm

    For BBC and chum S. Chakrabarti:

    How Gitmo inmates are treated:

    Christopher Hitchens @ 'slate.com'

    "The Gitmo madrassa
    Torture! 'When the Extreme Becomes the Norm,' by Christopher Hitchens at Slate, June 8:

    …"Yet if we think it probable or possible that a man would only mutate into such a monster after undergoing the Guantanamo experience, then I can suggest one reason why that might be. Nothing prepared me for the way in which the authorities at the camp have allowed the most extreme religious cultists among the inmates to be the organizers of the prisoners' daily routine. Suppose that you were a secular or unfanatical person caught in the net by mistake; you would still find yourself being compelled to pray five times a day (the guards are not permitted to interrupt), to have a Quran in your cell, and to eat food prepared to halal (or Sharia) standards. I suppose you could ask to abstain, but, in such a case, I wouldn't much fancy your chances. The officers in charge were so pleased by this ability to show off their extreme broad-mindedness in respect of Islam that they looked almost hurt when I asked how they justified the use of taxpayers' money to create an institution dedicated to the fervent practice of the most extreme version of just one religion. To the huge list of reasons to close down Guantanamo, add this: It's a state-sponsored madrasah.
    Read it all."
    (a 'Jihadwatch' extract, from Christopher Hitchens' 'slate.com' article.)

       0 likes

  9. George R says:
    June 9, 2009 at 9:03 pm

    What political impartiality means to BBC: claiming to be impartial by saying so, but in practice being very biased-

    "BBC 'in talks' over Sir Alan job"

    (BBC 'politics' page.)

       0 likes

  10. George R says:
    June 9, 2009 at 9:14 pm

    Excellent dhimmi BBC report: no mention of Islam –

    "Turkey censured on domestic abuse"

    (-on BBC 'Europe' page, of course.)

       0 likes

  11. George R says:
    June 10, 2009 at 7:54 am

    Further to 10:03 pm above:-

    'Daily Mail':

    "BBC urged to delay new series of The Apprentice over fears Sir Alan's 'enterprise tsar' job could clash with election"

    [Extract]:

    "The BBC is being urged to delay the next series of The Apprentice in the wake of Sir Alan Sugar's appointment as the Government's 'enterprise tsar'.

    "Opposition MPs fear his new role could be compromised if the new series – due to be screened next March – clashes with the run-up to the general election, expected in May.

    "Sir Alan has insisted he will continue to front The Apprentice despite growing controversy over his appointment by Gordon Brown.

    "BBC director general Mark Thompson has said Sir Alan, who is to become a Labour peer, could not accept a job in which he would 'promote or endorse Government policy'.

    "He also said he should not mix any role with elements of the format of his hit programme.

    "The BBC is in discussions with him about ensuring no editorial guidelines would be broken after he accepted a seat in the House of Lords.

    "But Tory culture spokesman Jeremy Hunt has now written to BBC boss Mark Thompson to protest that the next series could be screened during the campaign for the general election.

    "Sir Alan attacked the Tories for protesting to the BBC that his Government role broke its rules on impartiality, but has refused to answer questions on whether there was a conflict of interest."

       0 likes

  12. Fred says:
    June 10, 2009 at 8:39 am

    I see Mark Mardell is once again claiming that the BNP are left wing. Lets get this quite straight. The BNP campaign primarily amongst the working class and the underclass. They promise "British jobs for British workers". They almost have no presence in middle class areas at all, and there is no evidence of any support coming from the upper class. All their seats on councils are in working class areas. By definition the BNP MUST be left-wing. This is because the terminology "left-wing" refers to the French parliament when those that represented the aristocracy sat on the right side of the house and those that represented the ordinary folk sat on the left.

    Mardel is welcome to describe the nationalist UKIP as "right-wing". He is welcome to describe the BNP as "nationalist". But he must not describe the BNP as right-wing. That is merely a ruse to conflate the politics of the BNP with the politics of the Tories when in fact the politics of the BNP appeal to those that are most likely to otherwise vote Labour.

       0 likes

  13. JohnA says:
    June 10, 2009 at 9:01 am

    Fred

    I agree totally. It is mostly ex-Labour voters who are supporting the BNP, because it is in working-class areas where they are getting most of their votes.

    But the BNP is described by everyone at the BBC as right-wing.

       0 likes

  14. deegee says:
    June 10, 2009 at 9:58 am

    Left-Right?
    May I suggest everybody take the World's Smallest Political Quiz. it was developed precisely because of the failings of the traditional left-centre-right paradigm. Since learning of this test I have stopped using the terms Left and Right except when describing a person's self-described labeling.

    Perhaps, someone with a better knowledge of the BNP than I have could take the quiz on behalf of the BNP and tell us where it falls.

    In the interests of transparency I took the test and gained a result of 40 on the Personal Issues Score and 20 on the Economic Issues Score, i.e. Statist.

       0 likes

  15. deegee says:
    June 10, 2009 at 10:06 am

    BTW By this test, modestly given by myself on behalf of the BBC, that organisation falls way to the left on the scale. Interested to know if someone else answering for the BBC gains a different positioning.

       0 likes

  16. George R says:
    June 10, 2009 at 11:23 am

    Of course, Stephen Glover does not overlook the role of the BBC in all this:

    'Daily Mail'-

    "The Guardian, a failed putsch and a question of media ethics"

    [Extract]:

    "The question is whether the Guardian was more than a mere spectator, offering its honest view as to what the Prime Minister should do. Was it trying to orchestrate events so as to secure the resignation which it had called for in its editorial?

    If it was involved as a player, the person whose head was deepest in the maul was Polly Toynbee, the Guardian's sometimes overwrought columnist. From Wednesday until yesterday she was interviewed innumerable times on radio and television, far more than any other journalist.

    "She has appeared on Sky News several times; on BBC2's Newsnight; and she was a guest on Sunday evening during the BBC's coverage of the European election results.

    "Much more robustly than any single Labour rebel one can think of, Ms Toynbee has repeatedly called in the most vitriolic terms for Mr Brown's resignation.

    "It would not be too much to say that she has served as his most trenchant critic. When Cabinet members such as David Miliband failed to follow James Purnell in resigning from the Cabinet and to mount a coup, Polly was withering in her scorn and condemnation."

    (Stephen Glover.)

       0 likes

  17. Grant says:
    June 10, 2009 at 11:38 am

    Fred 9:39
    The BBC are happy to call any party , think tank or individual "right-wing" if they disagree with the BBC's political position, but I can't remember the last time the BBC used the phrase "left-wing" about anything.

    It rather gives the game away !

       0 likes

  18. David Preiser (USA) says:
    June 10, 2009 at 2:53 pm

    Fred and JohnA,

    The only time the BBC will use the word "Socialist" in a sentence when talking about the BNP is when a presenter is asking one of them if they're "National Socialists". In all other situations (except for one accidental admission by Mardell on his blog), they're far right.

       0 likes

  19. Craig says:
    June 10, 2009 at 3:36 pm

    David P (7.23 pm, yesterday)

    On a personal note, that's my Achilles heel with regards to the BBC! I love Radio 3.

    The fact that they're broadcasting 'Götterdämmerung' (and lots of Haydn) ticks all my boxes (as Beeboids might put it).

    I'd pay for that willingly, & will pay well above and beyond taxation to keep it.

    The bias though, the unforgivable bias……

       0 likes

  20. David Preiser (USA) says:
    June 10, 2009 at 4:07 pm

    Craig,

    That's the thing, isn't it? Tax-funded arts programming is one thing, even if its occasionally used to influence the culture. I'm not saying Radio 3 does that – I'm just saying it can be done.

    But the news – real life, so to speak – is quite different. The multi-generational relationship between the public and the BBC gives the news department too much of an advantage in influencing public opinion. As the official state broadcaster, certain things they do have more weight, simply because it's the BBC. It's not that the reputation and trust was never earned in the past. Instead, I think the overwhelming feeling here is that the latest generation has squandered it, taken advantage of it, and have a negative influence on certain issues. The people running the show don't deserve the trust or funding they receive, and the current situation of the BBC as it stands is untenable.

    Shut down the news division and light entertainment, end the outmoded license fee, and I would bet that almost nobody would object to having the remaining BBC funded directly out of the national budget. There would still be the occasional fuss about a biased history or science show, but it would be a very minor problem compared to what they do now.

       0 likes

  21. Mailman says:
    June 10, 2009 at 4:35 pm

    Fred,

    The BNP ARE left wing simply because they are so far to the left they have come out the other side! 🙂

    Mailman

       0 likes

  22. Mailman says:
    June 10, 2009 at 4:37 pm

    David,

    You have hit the nail bang on the head. The problem with Al Beeb is its news division…it is so politically biased it makes the leaning tower of Pisa look straight.

    Yes get rid of it, cut the news division free and let it fight for paying customers like all the other media organisations have to.

    On the other hand, Al Beeb does produce some very good documentary's and childrens programs. Id happily pay for those (like I pay for SkyTV).

    Mailman

       0 likes

  23. Craig says:
    June 10, 2009 at 5:15 pm

    David,

    That's so true (and brilliantly put).

    A drastically slimmed-down BBC could be a national treasure (think of 'Springwatch', much of Radio 3, rare bits of Radio 4 such as 'In Our Time', the occasional documentary (usually by David Attenborough)) but it might be hard to justify funding this sort of BBC from either the existing licence fee or even from a significantly reduced one.

    The likely – and logical – outcome that follows from this is painful but necessary. However risky, this new BBC must come from the willing pockets of its customers.

    As Mailman argues, though, the priority is surely that BBC News should be set free to fight Sky News (etc). I truly resent having to pay for left-wing propaganda. A vibrant democracy cannot have a state broadcaster whose various biases run counter to the opinions of huge swathes of the population, or that tries to change those opinions so remorselessly.

    If not – and, you would think, obviously! – the BBC should be forced to maintain the standards of impartiality it is legally required to uphold – and which it so signally fails to uphold. That is surely not too much to ask – or demand.

       0 likes

  24. Anonymous says:
    June 11, 2009 at 2:26 pm

    From Wikipedia: "In politics the term left wing derives from the French Revolution, when radical Montagnard and Jacobin deputies from the Third Estate generally sat to the left of the president's chair, a habit which began in the Estates General of 1789. Throughout the 19th century, the main line dividing Left and Right in France was between supporters of the Republic and those of the Monarchy.[5]"

       0 likes

  25. George R says:
    June 11, 2009 at 3:58 pm

    Quite recently, BBC DG, Mark Thompson was telling us that the BBC had to pay top dollar for the services of the Ross-Norton-Clarkson brigade.

    Now apparently, the BBC has yielded, to some extent, to public pressure:

    'Daily Mail':

    "BBC stars face 40% pay cuts: Huge salaries of Ross, Norton and Clarkson to be slashed"

    [Extract]:-

    "Dozens of top BBC stars have been told to expect savage pay cuts of up to 40 per cent.
    "Jonathan Ross, Jeremy Clarkson and Graham Norton are among those facing swingeing reductions in their huge salaries as the corporation tries desperately to save money.
    "About 100 of the corporation's most popular performers were summoned to a meeting where BBC director-general Mark Thompson warned them that, in the current economic climate, slashing fees is inevitable. "

       0 likes

←Older Comments