Monthly Archives: October 2010

SUNDAY MORNING LIVE

By | |
43 Comments

Dumbing down as ever. Pouting Suzanne Reid on Sunday Morning Live asks whether WE are partly responsible for Islamic extremism (The short answer is No, blame it on the Koran, not the boogie) and noted philosopher Terry Christian is on to argue for making Class A drugs available on prescription. Just some of the liberal navel-gazing on BBC1 this morning.

Click through to read and contribute comments on this post.

JUST SAYING…

By | | ,
16 Comments

On Twitter:

Oh well, that’s it then. Discussion over. Eurosceptics are wrong, clearly. Well done Justin and your Tory stockbroker acquaintance for sorting that one out for us all. Met anybody else on your travels whose views we might find valuable?

Click through to read and contribute comments on this post.

LAUGHING MATTERS

By | | , ,
31 Comments

Listening to the first ten minutes of The News Quiz last night (couldn’t take any more than that) I was struck by how the audience reaction seemed a little out of proportion to the “funny” comments of the panellists. Even allowing for the fact that I – a right wing bastard – am never likely to be particularly impressed by The News Quiz, something still didn’t ring true.

Here are some clips all taken from the first ten minutes of the programme. You’ll hear the final few words of some “amusing quips” by Andy Hamilton, Sue Perkins (x2), Sandi Toksvig, Miles Jupp and Jeremy Hardy, and the audience reaction to each. Each clip is followed by a shorter clip isolating part of the audience response. Finally, the 6 isolated clips are played one after the other for direct comparison. Is it just me or is there something a tad similar about them?

Listen!

What do you think – is there a bit of laugh track manipulation going on there? Could it be that even the sort of people who attend News Quiz recordings aren’t as impressed by the jokes as we’re led to believe?

Update. In response to a request in the comments, here’s the relevant part of the 6 clips in the form of sound wave graph thingies. Obviously they’re not entirely identical because there’s other stuff going on in each individual clip, but I think they’re close enough to suggest the same bit of laughter may have been added to each one:

Also via the comments I’m reminded that during the opening ten minutes of this week’s show Sandi Toksvig said, “It’s the Tories who have been putting the ‘n’ into cuts”. I’ve become so jaded by Radio 4 comedy, so inured to the bias, that this passed me by as just another unfunny joke. On reflection it really is quite a thing to say, especially when one considers the time the show goes out.

(On the other hand the Tories will indeed put the ‘n’ into cuts if they back down and say “Not now”, as that idiot Huhne has suggested.)

Click through to read and contribute comments on this post.

No Brainer

By | |
62 Comments

US given one-month deadline to rescue Mid-East talks.

Arab League ministers, that reasonable, even-handed body of sages has spoken. They must have carefully weighed up all the pros and cons, deliberated, cogitated and anguished over their decision before arriving at the conclusion that Abbas should stand firm and walk out of the peace talks. More time must be given and more pressure applied to Israel by Obama. The world shall greet this announcement with joy, wonderment and feigned surprise.

Name one factor in this farcical chess game of manipulation that would favour the Arab League advising Abbas to return to the table and overlook the end of the freeze on settlement building? Can’t think of one? Nor can I.

Consider.
The world has swallowed, hook line and sinker, the theory that settlements are the obstacle to peace.

The world has swallowed, h l & s the contention that the occupied territories are illegal under international law.

The world has swallowed the contention that all settlement building amounts to Jews stealing Palestinian land.

The world unquestioningly accepts the Arab demands for ‘preconditions.’

So the long awaited decision by the Arab league was a bit of what they call a no-brainer. A bit of a foregone conclusion.

So now Obama has to demand that Israel brushes aside the Palestinians’ refusal to renounce violence, recognise Israel’s right to exist, budge on the right of return and all the rest of it, because the whole wide world and your BBC has conspired to delegitimise Israel, and instil the notion that Arab intransigence and pride are quaint traits of their culture. Innit.

Click through to read and contribute comments on this post.

TWIN ADORATION…

By | |
2 Comments

The BBC’s news editors probably danced in glee when they decided to run with this story: a bunch of MEPs demanding more action on biodiversity. Two of their favourite causes – worship of the EU and eco-nuttery – combined in one! The ludicrousness of the EU’s latest demand for yet more power to combat yet another imaginary set of problems, is, of course, totally lost on them. Breathlessly, the feature reports that these over-paid, mainly useless MEPs include in their aims:

…eliminating subsidies harmful to biodiversity; zero net deforestation; the end of destructive fishing practices; and preventing the extinction of known threatened species.

That will be the EU that (for starters) is forcing the spending of trillions of our cash on needless climate change measures, a fraction of which – if used instead to promote sustainable business enterprise – could end help poverty in Africa; the same EU that is so incompetent and corrupt in handling money that its own accounts have not been signed off by accountants for 15 years; it will be the same EU that, throught the madness that is the CAP, forces the adoption of monocultural and rigid farming practices that are the enemy of wildlife; and the same EU that like common gangsters have bought up and plundered fishing rights off the coast of Africa with zero regard for the needs of Africans.

Of course, the BBC would not dream of discussing issues like this. Instead, the story is an exercise in admiration for both the EU and its puffed-up politicians. It’s by a veteran BBC greenie camapigner Mark Kinver, whose love of the EU is second only to his save-the-world zealotry.

Click through to read and contribute comments on this post.

HALF THE PICTURE, ALL OF THE TIME

By | |
9 Comments

Biased BBC Clameur de Hero writes…

“Could anyone fail buthear Naughtie giving virtually uninterrupted air-time on the Today prog thismorning to the whingeing bleat from David Walker, the (thankfully soon to beex) spinner-in-chief of the Audit Commission?

Walker clearly felt that his politically-charged rant last month in the journalPublic Finance against the wise decision of Eric Pickles to scrap Walker’snon-job hadn’t resonated enough, hence the second go this morning, courtesy ofthe ever-sympathetic Beeboids. He seemed so distressed at what he thought wasthe exaggerated misrepresentation of the number of press officers at theCommission, and appeared particularly troubled at the odium heaped upon him forthe Commission’s staff away day at the races. In the private sector, he said,events like this happened all the time.

But did Naughtie think to ask him why on earth it was that a body like theAudit Commission even needed 48 communications wonks in the first place? Nope.

Did Naughtie point out to him that if private sector organisations have awaydays, they’re not paid for by the taxpayer? Nope.

Strange. But then of course, in his day job, Walker is none other than Mr PollyToynbee, isn’t he, so not much chance this side of Hell that the Beeboids wouldask him any awkward questions.

Click through to read and contribute comments on this post.

WORST DISASTER – AGAIN AND AGAIN.

By | |
11 Comments

Further to Robin’s post earlier today, I received this very interesting follow up from a Biased BBC contributor which exposes further deadly bias.

As you state the usual bias is there and quite clear, I do however feel the need to point out the grotesque inaccuracy of the graphic which is embedded in the story (titled “chemical breakdown of sludge”). As someone who carries out chemical research and has a degree in chemistry I was outraged by the misinformation in this graphic. 

“Red Mud” is very nasty, it is caustic and like drain cleaner, you don’t want to be in contact with it. However this graphic clearly tries to link it with cancer using misleading statements. It states aluminium oxide (alumina) “caused cancer when tested on animals”. This is news to me as I use it all the time so I did a search of scholarly articles which brought up one that states clearly they found no link! It’s also the stuff you get on wet and dry paper, so I think that might have been banned by now if there was a risk.

It then states that silicon dioxide “silica” can cause cancer and lung disease if inhaled. Yes it can, if it is very finely milled in a factory for a particular use, not in it’s natural form where it is harmless, it is what sand is made of. It is the particle size that is important and silica (as silicate) in red mud is not going to have the same danger. Lastly it states “Titanium dioxide caused cancer when tested on animals”. Again, it may be a risk if inhaled over a long period as a fine dust, otherwise it is not a problem, that is why it is also found in skin cream and toothpaste! 

The graphic makes inaccurate and scaremongering statements which would give to the lay public the impression that there is a direct risk of cancer from the red mud. So the question is where has the information come from, the journalist’s eco friends at all? I am going to contact the BBC to try and find the source of this information, especially about alumina which appears to be complete nonsense. I imagine I will be stonewalled as usual. However I was so appalled by the misinformation I felt I had to point it out to a wider audience if possible.

Click through to read and contribute comments on this post.