PLUS CA CHANGE

The BBC has a new-look website. Check it out, it’s quite sharp. No doubt it cost tens of thousands of our cash to engineer. The main purpose remains depressingly the same, however. For example, I checked out the new science and environment page. Every link at the bottom (a new feature, I think) – the Environment Agency, DEFRA, the Royal Institution, the Royal Society, Research Councils UK, NASA, the National Science Foundation – is to bodies which have web areas dedicated to unqualified, loud, unsubtle, lying, climate change drivel. Surprise, surprise.

Bookmark the permalink.

19 Responses to PLUS CA CHANGE

  1. Biodegradable says:

    The newly redesigned news website has the story about the rioting in Belfast in the Europe section and not the UK section. 
     
    Is Belfast no longer part of the United Kingdom?

       0 likes

    • Biodegradable says:

      The (stealth) editors are hard at work – the Belfast rioiting story is nowhere to be found now! *DONT_KNOW*

         0 likes

  2. Biodegradable says:

    No doubt it cost tens of thousands of our cash to engineer.

    More like hundreds of thousands!

       0 likes

  3. sue says:

    The new look hasn’t gone down very well judging by the comments.

       0 likes

    • John Anderson says:

      A quick scan of the comments so far suggest that the redesign (probably very expensive) has introduced lots of faults,  poor navigation etc and is putting people off.

      Anyone spending that amount of money should have pre-tested the results thoroughly before making the switch.  The BBC is arrogant enough to ignore user opinion.

      Good thing if people who use it as their homepage now switch to somewhere else.  Less indoctrination.

         0 likes

      • John Anderson says:

        and looking quickly at the new site – all those critics are right,  it is far worse then the previous design.

           0 likes

  4. Erik Morales says:

    ‘ the Environment Agency, DEFRA, the Royal Institution, the Royal Society, Research Councils UK, NASA, the National Science Foundation’

    Who would you suggest? Biased BBC?

       0 likes

  5. Bupendra Bhakta says:

    http://wattsupwiththat.com/

    http://www-eaps.mit.edu/faculty/lindzen.htm

    http://climateaudit.org/

    for, you know, what’s that word?… balance.

       0 likes

  6. Martin says:

    REad any national newspaper tihs morning (or Sky News) and the top story is Blair’s comments about the one eyed mong being a mad retarded twat.

    But look at the BBC headline on thier ‘new’ website

    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/politics/

    “Blair broke Brown quit promise”, really, does the BBC think that is the top story? Not that McTwat really was barking mad? Book after book has stated this yet still the beeboids try to stick up for the fat one eyed twat.

    No wonder no one takes the BBC seriously.

       0 likes

    • woodentop says:

      I noticed that, and that the article is tailed by Andy Burnham. Can you imagine a similar book about a Tory government getting this treatment? Didn’t any of Labour’s opponents have an opinion on these hugely damaging shenanigans?

         0 likes

    • Grant says:

      The BBC will never accept that Brown is mad, bad and dangerous. A total nutcase.

         0 likes

      • Martin says:

        The BBC tried to smear and rubbish Rawnsley, Price and the woman from the anti bullying charity because they dared to out the one eyed mong as a nut case and bully.

        The BBC are a f**king disgrace, toilet sniffing scum.

           0 likes

  7. Chris says:

    I don’t know what they have changed as my virus checker won’t even go near anything to do with the BBC website now. (see attached picture)

    It doesn’t like parasitical small infectious things and has now developed a vaccine it would appear to the BBC.

    Though it doesn’t surprise me at all that the BBC is now trying to steal confidential data etc. from accessing their website “It’s what we do” after all as a government agency / propaganda division.

       0 likes

  8. John Anderson says:

    Here’s a REAL journalist commenting on the various ClimateGate whitewashes.

    I recalled the other day that when Watergate happened,  lots of people didn’t see the significance,  but it was the steady drip-drip-drip of criticisms and revelations that brought Nixon down.  Above all,  the clear evidence of cover-up.  It took about a year and a half.

    I think ClimateGate – and the concurrent challenges to the “settled science” of the IPCC – has hardly started yet.  

    http://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2010/07/climategate-and-the-big-green-lie/59709

       0 likes