Monthly Archives: November 2010

STEPHANOMICS AND STIGLITZ

By | |
16 Comments

Stephanie Flanders is pretty excited by the decision by the US ‘Fed’ decided to pump $600 bn intothe US economy.Whilst the rest of the media reported that just about everyindustrial country in the world was outraged by the US move ‘Stephanomics’ wasas usual behind the curve :

” This week’s statement by the Federal Reserve hasachieved all that Ben Bernanke might have hoped it would achieve; stocks areup, the dollar is down, and so are US bond yields. We can’t say for sure thatit will “work”, but all of these developments ought to be netpositive for the US economy….the US sees competitive depreciation as awin-win for them. If other countries, with flexible countries, don’t respondwith QE2 of their own, then their currencies will strengthen, and demand for USgoods in those economi! es will (theoretically) go up. If they do respond, withmore easing to counteract the rise in the currency, then global demand goes up,and the US is once again better off. Put that way, it sounds like a no-brainer’

What is missing is the BBC’s usual kneejerk jump to get a comment from JosephStiglitz, Nobel prize winning economist….and supporter of Labour’s and theBBC’s positon that ‘stimulus’ works, tax cuts don’t. This time Stiglitz wasopposed to the Fed’s printing money….saying Fed policies will not reduce longterm interest rates and produce loans for SME’s and are creating chaos inemerging markets…the money is going to emerging markets which don’t want themoney…because India and China are doing fine, but the influx of short termmoney creates a bubble and increases exchange rates, destabilising theireconomy…The US policy is having an adverse effect around the world.


So no gig for Stiglitz! If you run against their meme, you’re history

Click through to read and contribute comments on this post.

IN OUR GENES…

By | |
12 Comments

Here are a few great examples of BBC professional neutrality.

First, here’s BBC employee Mary Walker…

When I joined the team of “Living Islam” (the BBC series) two years ago, my perception of Islam was dominated by prejudice and ignorance, and I found its treatment of women abhorrent. To me the veil symbolised the oppression of women, making them invisible, anonymous and voiceless, and the cause of this oppression lay in the will to perpetuate the family and maintain a patriarchal framework – the very basis of an Islamic society. I thought women were entirely submerged by divine justification of their role as wife and mother.

Ah, but that was then. She knows so much better now. Give it a read here. And then, lest we think lovely Islam-loving Mary is alone in her admiration for the Religion of Peace, there’s posh Ed Stourton bending the knee…

In a feature about a ‘woman friendly mosque’, in Manchester. Ed Stourton interviews Sabina Hammed, who says she has ‘the very rare privilege of being able to come and go as she pleases’ at the Mosque. She notes the separate entrances and boys as young as eleven being banned from the women’s room inside. Stourton never challenges her about sexual segregation in Islam or the attitude of other Mosques which are breaking English law by keeping women out. At one point she trots out the ‘It’s cultural, nothing to do with Islam,’ argument. Later there is a report about a discount coat store being turned into an Islamic community centre/mosque only two blocks away from Ground Zero in New York. Stourton tells us: ‘There are strident voices attacking the proposal and using it as a vehicle to strike at Islam.’ A BBC reporter goes on: ‘Islam is once more under fire from a noisy minority who see the Koran as suspect.’

Click through to read and contribute comments on this post.

HERE WE GO AGAIN…

By | |
18 Comments

Roger Harrabin has been conspicuous by his absence lately, but he’s back with a bang this morning, reporting a call by international ecofascists (and the BBC best chums Friends of the Earth) to condemn millions of people into fuel poverty by ending subsidies on fossil fuel production. Funny how he was absent – and didn’t report – recent stories about how windfarms not only gobble subsidies but also are hugely inefficient. Or about how people hate windfarms. He also strangely missed this item, expertly reported by James Delingpole, about how solar panels – thanks to massive government subsidies – are disfiguring the English countryside but are virtually useless. And he also chose not to report this item by David Whitehouse (a former BBC correspondent), who eloquently points out that despite the ecofascist calls for “carbon” emission reductions, there is not a shred of evidence that the gas has had a significant effect on global temperatures. He also did not report this important broadside on the CO2/temperature alarmist scam. When will econut Harrabin ever wake up?

Click through to read and contribute comments on this post.

Next Act. Supreme Court.

By | |
19 Comments

Another episode in the everyday story of the Balen Report.
Last time they decided that “the information sought was held by the corporation for the purposes of journalism, it was effectively exempt from production under the Act, even if it was also being held for other purposes.”
When applied to the BBC, the Freedom of Information Act doesn’t mean ‘Freedom’ or ‘Information’ – it just means ‘Act’.

Click through to read and contribute comments on this post.

PRESTIDGITATION…

By | |
9 Comments

Back then, in 2007, under the wonderful nuLab , local councils switching off street lights in Devon and elsewhere was hailed by the BBC as a social experiment to be lauded, an essential part of the green crusade. It saved tons of that vile substance called carbon, don’t you know? Now, according to Newsnight, tonight, it’s part of the nasty cuts agenda. Snuffing those carbon-intensive sources of illumination was transformed into an issue of “fear” sometime after the general election. Funny, that. Not sure yet how Matt Prodger is going to handle the subject on Newsnight, but I can guess.

Click through to read and contribute comments on this post.

Twitter From America

By | |
64 Comments

Hey look, there’s a shout-out to the Biased BBC massive from BBC Washington correspondent Iain Mackenzie :


Not so much “Reds”, Iain, as partisan hacks.

Remember Obama’s inauguration?


Or your views on Sarah Palin, Iain?


I’m yet to find an American-based BBC journalist betraying sympathies for the Republican Party. Plenty the other way, though. Funny that, eh?

One more thing Iain – why did you immediately delete those jokey tweets you posted in response to a complaint you had to deal with? Did somebody in a more senior position point out that it didn’t look good to be so flippant? Still, nice for you that you’re so confident about your job, especially in the current economic climate, that you find the idea of journalistic impartiality a bit of a joke.

Click through to read and contribute comments on this post.

IMPARCIALIDADE (pt2)

By | |
10 Comments

Tea Party-hating BBC Brazil correspondent Lucas Mendes opens his latest column with a word of thanks:

The Republican tsunami could have been worse for the Democrats. Thank you very much, Latino brothers.

They saved the Democratic Party leader, Harry Reid, Senate candidate for the State of Nevada, threatened by Sharon Angle, one of the most radical and least prepared candidate’s Tea Party. Latinos have left home and 90% voted for Harry Reid.

So here we have a US-based BBC journalist thanking his fellow Latinos for voting Democrat and saving Harry Reid.

I drew attention to Mendes’ Daily Kos-style rubbish last month, but it’s clear from this latest offering that BBC editors are happy with his highly partisan output. I doubt they would be so relaxed with: “Well done, white brethren, Obama’s old seat fell to the Republicans!”

It’s not as if the BBC Latin America services can claim ignorance of BBC editorial guidelines. BBC Mundo, the Spanish language section, even reproduced a blogpost by David Jordan, Director of Editorial Policy, when the new guidelines were published in October. If the BBC’s defence is that Mendes is employed to provide opinion rather than objective journalism then the question is “Why?” followed by “Where’s the alternative view?” – queries that shouldn’t need to be made of an impartial broadcaster.

Click through to read and contribute comments on this post.