I read that Chris Patten is performing to cue;
The new BBC Trust chairman told the Sunday Telegraph he would fight for it as a 20% budget cut across the corporation takes effect this year. Lord Patten has said his love of the BBC World Service made protecting it a “priority” – particularly the “core” Arabic, Somali and Hindi services.
I think the World Service, and in particular the “core” he defines, SHOULD be cut, as a priority. The BBC spreads its malignancy via the tendrils provided by World Service so best it take the brunt of the cuts.
Yes; Patten’s and BBC-NUJ’s political propagandist global cultural empire needs to be ended. It is against the interests of British licencepayers.
“BBC Three under threat, Lord Patten warns.”BBC Three or BBC Four could be axed as part of the broadcaster’s plans to save cash, Lord Patten has admitted.”
Patten/BBC-NUJ diktat:
‘Ignore the interests of the domestic British licencepayer, cut out BBC 3, and 4 television channels, and some sport, to pay for: especially BBC Arabic TV service, from Broadcasting House, London for the Muslims of the Middle East!!! No. No.
Read more: http://www.metro.co.uk/news/866056-bbc-three-under-threat-lord-patten-warns#ixzz1P3OrHJB0
I thought (hoped) that the asian network radio station and radio 6 would finally be shutdown. But no, even those promises have been broken, because a few bbc celebrities made a fuss. Why don’t they shutdown their 24 hour news channel, if they want to save money.
Or close down their incredibly expensive website, that “competes” with other businesses that have to raise their own income.
Why are those three defined as “core”? Doesn’t make sense to me although it is not exactly a surprise, coming from the Beeboid Corporation.
I seem to remember they shut down the dedicated service to the Falkland Islands some years ago in favour of providing an Arabic service.
I posted on the open thread about this. I love the idea of the Somali service being “core” ! Anyway, at least Fatty Patty has come out in the open about where he stands, full square behind the BBC. He is a prat and David Cameron is a fool.
The World Service has always seemed to be in part a branch of the Foreign Office. I can sort of understand that as part of the BBC’s core remit is “to bring the world to the UK and the UK to the world”. But when it’s as biased as the Arabic service is, you’ve got a problem. While I realize the FO has long been full of Arabists and anti-Semites, it’s difficult to see how demonizing Israel helps British foreign policy interests. Unless……
The fact that Patten mentions the Somali angle does bring the idea that the BBC World Service really is meant to fnction as a banch of the FO. We’ve heard pllenty of talk recently about Somali immigrants exporting terrorism, etc., and even how the EU is supposedly working to train Somali forces to restore order to the country. By including Somali in his statement, Patten reveals that he views the World Service as a political tool.
Is this really right? Does this, then, mean that at least part of the job of World Service Beeboids is not pure journalism but in fact propaganda on behalf of the Government? Doesn’t that go against the whole idea of the Corporation being independent – specifically editorially independent – from the Government, or at least the FO?
So when Call Me Dave refers to Gaza as an “open prison”, Hague speaks out against Israel, and the BBC demonizes it, i think we can see the BBC and Government working in harmony after all (yes, even though they’re nasty old Tories). Domestically the BBC is independent, but the World Service is not. Is that how it works?
Unless there’s a better explanation, it seems that Patten has given the game away.
Having said all that, I wonder if Patten sees the wilting BBC World News America as part of the “core” services he’ll fight for.
David, I don’t think the domestic bbc is independent. It is a rogue organisation and needs to be culled.
“Rogue” by definition means independent and not under someone’s control, no?
In my view the World service is the most left wing of all BBC outlets, even more than Radio 4. I think it is a major embarassment to us as it makes the British appear to be left wing.
I think that it should be taken out of the hands of the BBC altogether, radically slimmed down and the F.O. should allow UK companies to bid for it.
Let’s not forget that Patten didn’t win this job in a raffle.
I will have no sympathy for any Conservative MP’s who in future air their disdain in public about the Corporation.
I don’t know if it’s Cameron’s ignorance or cowardice (perhaps both) but the BBC now have a free pass and they know it.
john,
You are right. The appointment of Patten gave the BBC the green light to do what they want and they have been markedly more extreme since. They have really given up even pretending.
INBBC clamours to spread the word of Muslim Brotherhood to Muslims of Middle East and North Africa at OUR expense, while NOT reporting the Islamisation of London!
Campaigning as it does for the Islamisation of Britain, European Union, Israel (and the Middle East and North Africa, advocating the Muslim Brotherhood), Islam Not BBC (INBBC) does not report the following on the practicalities of the Islamisation on INBBC’s London doorstep:
“Police ‘covered up’ violent campaign to turn London area ‘Islamic.’Police have been accused of ‘covering up’ a campaign of abuse, threats and violence aimed at ‘Islamicising’ an area of London.”
(by Andrew Gilligan)
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/law-and-order/8570506/Police-covered-up-violent-campaign-to-turn-London-area-Islamic.html
i think it is great if patten can get this through. it might prompt more people here to stop paying their licence fee. people pay their licence fee to watch tv programmes not ostensibly to create a political propaganda wing. as living costs increase, more and more will start to question this near 150 pound expense and what they are getting back for it, in the age of internet tv, torrents, you tube etc,. i can see mroe and more people not having a tv. it albeebas continue unabated on their crusades, i can see more people voting to keep money in their own pocket. the internet is the way the bbc licence fee becomes more irrelevant or becomes a subscription service.
Somali?!!!! Anyone hazard a guess from where the worst contribution* to the UK in terms of disease, crime, unemployment and and benefit attaining to new entrants comes from?
*MUG (made up generalisation)
An example of the problem is seen in some of the comments…the ones the BBC has on top…pure coincidence you understand.
Anthony says:
“Mikhail Gorbachev in 1991 being interviewed after his release from house arrest following a failed coup attempt in the Soviet Union.
When asked how he kept up to date with events whilst under arrest he answered “by radio. The BBC signal was the clearest.”
Coming from the then leader of the Soviet Union that was a powerful demonstration of the global reach and integrity of the BBC.
So, the signal was the strongest, this to me says “it was all I could get” yet to Anthony it’s all about power and integrity!
<img src=”http://static.bbc.co.uk/modules/comments/1.9.37/images/warning_icon.gif”/>
mac says:
BBC World Service may be the only true electronic world news provider with journalistic integrity. It matters to millions of people. At a time when there is so much misinformation in the world, perhaps the British government should look at BBC World Service as a form of foreign aid, as part of Britain’s contribution to the world and fund it as such. BBC is a tribute to the people of Britain.
Journalistic integrity? The irony is that mac confirms the misinformation so he has noticed at least some…just not looking over his shoulder.
Yes, all the jounalistic integity of Lord Haw Haw.
The BBC is just an organ of the political establishment. At the moment the BBC doesn’t believe that New Labour was defeated in the last election and the Coalition is now in charge. Has there been any change in the propaganda broadcasts? The continual drone of the same issues that pervade the airwaves
makes me think there is no difference between the two/three political elites: Labour, Tory & LIBDEM have the same agendas, therefore no change in programme content is necessary. The people and the world are getting the right message.
DAB radio is due to take over from FM, AM will end as well(I believe) hence total BBC on the radio nothing else except respectable programmes that have been past by the censor or fulfil the needs of the BBC, NUJ, and of course the political masters. Foreign news and programmes will not be received on DAB except the BBC local stations broadcasting immigrant languages. German or French or any other language will only be obtained on AM or shortwave but there are problems with receiving them, ask any Amateur Radio enthusiast who is inundated with constant RF noise that surrounds houses from badly made domestic equipment. I hate to say it but total control of propaganda has always been the aim of any government since the invention of domestic radio and television, there is no better tool to control the population be it today in Britain or Hitlers Germany. But today is Britain at war? It seems that Britain is at war with itself on many issues. In war truth is the first casualty!
Am I a Luddite for being suspicious of the move to digital ?