It’s Friday, we’ve arrived at the end of another week and shortly, the end of another month here on Biased BBC! The blog has been really buzzing in recent times and my thanks to you all for keeping the conversation going. In truth there are not enough hours in the day to capture every instance of bias from the State Broadcaster but we certainly try to do our very best. My thanks to all fellow writers, to all who send me so much material, and of course most of all to our legions of readers who come here and are so loyal, informed and perceptive. It does encourage me so much and gives me the motivation and strength to keep this thing going. OK – the floor is yours…off you go!!!
OPEN THREAD
Bookmark the permalink.
EGYPT.
Islam Not BBC (INBBC) has to face political reality, after its stupidity over ‘Arab Spring’.
“Cairo protesters call for an Islamic state in Egypt ”
http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/world/africa-mideast/cairo-protesters-call-for-an-islamic-state-in-egypt/article2113896/
Reprise: 1 min video commercial for ‘Arab Spring’ –
http://www.glennbeck.com/2011/05/25/graphic-content-brian-sacks-horrifying-arab-spring-commercial/
as the song goes,(all together :-o)
“Springtime…. for Hitler & Germany”
O/T Here’s one to upset Auntie…
http://www.express.co.uk/web/referendum
Petition for an EU membership referendum
Isn’t it always tempting to be able to think ‘You were warned this would happen’ and derive some skight cold satisfaction from the thought.
After months of reporting on the Arab Spring…..the gushing enthusiasm for a Muslim renaissance on a BBC approved agenda, it looks like events are moving in a direction in Egypt that many on this blog warned would happen.
The BBC bias blocked any realistic analysis of what was going to be the ultimate fate of the ‘Arab Spring’.
Here we have it.
“The demonstrators – dominated by Muslim Brotherhood supporters – are calling for an Islamic state and Sharia law.”
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-middle-east-14341089
“Now, the Islamists want their voice to be heard and are showing their muscle for the first time since Mr Mubarak stepped down on 11 February, says the BBC’s Jon Leyne in Cairo.”
“Although the Muslim Brotherhood – Egypt’s oldest political party – can turn out huge crowds by rallying its supporters at mosques, it does not necessarily represent the majority of Egyptians and is predicted to win around 20% of the vote in an election, our correspondent says.”
(The Muslim brothers, Jon, will not let that put them off. They would challenge your figures anyway.)
“Islamist groups had for the most part stayed away from the sit-in. Last week, they held their own demonstration and accused the Tahrir protesters of going against the country’s “Islamic identity”, the AFP news agency reports.”
Honest analysis of the events in the Arab world saw these developments as both inevitable and alarming.
“The BBC bias blocked any realistic analysis of what was going to be the ultimate fate of the ‘Arab Spring’.”
RGH, the BBC deliberately hid the dangers of what was taking place in Egypt. They were overjoyed that once more Israel would have a dangerous enemy on its doorstep. What they were feeding us was a load of moonshine to aid and abett what is happening now.
BB Coots Corporation meme re the US budget deficit…
Obama takes position A
‘Tea Party hard-liners’ take position B
Just because the Tea Party disagree with Obama they are ‘hardliners’. Does it never occur to the BBCC that The Blessed Obama might just be a ‘hard-liner’. (Rhetorical question so no question mark at the end).
Oh for a member of the Cabinet whose sole aim in life is not to be ‘everybody’s mate’ (Liam Fox/ Gideon for example) to put an end to the BBCC’s annual plunder of £3.2 billion from us.
To the far-Left ideologues in BBC News, the President is on the middle ground. They’re politically in tune with Him, always have been, so cannot be trusted to provide honest perspective. Not a single BBC report has mentioned His last-minute attempts to force more taxes on Boehner, or why He rejected the bi-partisan bill handed to Him a few days ago.
The BBC lexicon:
Hard-liners = people who disagree with the BBC agenda
Ideologues = Republicans
Bi-partisans = Democratics
Pizza delivery boys = terrorists
Taliban wedding party = collection of terrorists
Islamic = good
Christians = bad
Christian (as in C of E) = mad
Christian (as in Catholic) = Evil
American Christians (from Catholics to Baptists) = Nazis
Archbishop of Canterbury = dotty, harmless but useful politically
Breaking news = read it in yesterday’s Guardian
President O’s performance = sorry? I wasn’t paying attention because if I was honest I would have to criticize him and that is not acceptable.
Here is the news = yeah, sure!
By the way, folks, what are BBC domestic broadcasters saying about the second man picked up for the Fort Hood shootings? Remember the Hassan guy did this becuase he had personal problems. Any admission of a wider plot?
Good point. No worries about a wider plot at all, even though both perps said they were acting alone.
And here’s a reminder of Mark Mardell’s attempts to dismiss concerns that Maj. Hassan’s act of mass murder was motivated by his religious ideology.
David preisser, thanks for the link. A personal example: When I got back to the UK after making a documentary about the British army in Germany I told people in a BBC newsroom about the plight of the East Germans. A friendly major had introduced me to a number of exiles and the relatives of East Germans suffering badly under a terrible regime. On hearing my story the news editor shrugged and said, “Well, I see you fell for British army propaganda”.
I think it’s called “willful blindness”.
Louis, it seems you have a very good post of your own to contribute to B-BBC. A critical one in fact. The sort of information Lord Leveson needs to hear when considering the relationship between the BBC and politics.
Hippiepooter: I am still bound by an agreement entered into by my own free will when employed by Auntie. I think it would be dishonourable to break it, soI won’t.
But I can hint, I can comment, I can raise questions. Like –
Whenis a plot a “plot”
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-14349728
LOL! One addition:
Pizza delivery boys/road sweepers/relations going to a wedding/ holiday makers in Pakistan/ respected community members etc = terrorists
In the multi culti nightmare…i mean dream, of the Pak
street sweepers is a slang term for christians…
thus (a bbc slappy wristy for you), that is extremely offensive 🙂 …
mind you hard to find what isn t…..if it doesn t involve, subjegation
facist fervour, or mental slavery, in that “delightful utopia”
But she’s (Aunty) trying bless her. She’s downgraded it from ‘extremist’ to ‘hardliner’. Harry Reid et al describe Tea Partiers as ‘extremists’ and since she usually parrots the Whitehouse/Democrat line on US politics, it must’ve been a jeans-creaming temptation to call them that.
But this is the internet age, and people like us are watching. The BBC can’t just go around fabricating agendas willy nilly any more. They have to be subtle now.
Perhaps inspired by INBBC’s recent 3-part Islamic TV series propagandising Islam, jihad and Sharia law on INBBC 2 – ‘Mohammad’, we have Muslims in London organising to set up Sharia zone.
As ‘Express’ comments:
“THERE IS NO PLACE FOR SHARIA LAW IN BRITISH SOCIETY”
http://www.express.co.uk/ourcomments/view/261698/There-is-no-place-for-sharia-law-in-British-society
Given the amount of airplay/screenplay the followers of the crescent moon are given, we would be forgiven for thinking them already in the ascendant. Their PR machine is relentless. A persistent, aggravating rash of Media Muslims, many of them infidels strangely reluctant to immerse themselves completely in Allah’s pool, is forever on hand to defend & champion a religion/ideology that is incompatible with the UK – as it is now.
‘We do not need to modernise Islam, but Islamise modernity,’ so said the slippery, Tariq Ramadan, Professor of Contemporary Islamic Studies at Oxford Univ., & ‘the darling of the (foolish & ignorant) British political & security establishment’. The BBC, of course, plays a leading part in this gross espousal & ‘normalisation’ of an extreme ideology that is inimical to the West, however it is dressed up.
Is there something in the Beeboid ‘enlightened’ psyche that yearns for the harsh ‘purity’ of Islam? A masochistic trait that is pathetically self-indulgent in the privacy of their own deluded heads, but lethal when it is allowed to spout fawning, one-eyed, luvvie tosh that wilfully ignores the daily litany of Muslim totalitarian outrages around the world. What are they on? Did they ever imagine the ‘Arab Spring’ would be anything other than an opportunity for Islamic hardliners to take back the tiller? Even a much-trumpeted visit to Cairo by, none-other-than, ‘Sunni’ Jim (or is he shi’ite?) Naughtie, the BBC’s grand vizier, could persuade them otherwise.
As relations between Muslims/non-Muslims worsen, & reality spills into the backyards of the pampered, gated, media class, & playtime is finally over, even these craven, smug bores will be wishing they were standing next to something more robust than the Quilliam Foundation.
jarwill,
Oh God, that reminds that Ramadan is rapidly approaching. Another BBC lovefest.
well…..somebody better tell Rahman that, he & the IFE, think their already plugging the sharia state.
& on the arab spring….think beebo put the bunting out a little early 🙂
sick of hearing about it, yet another” told you so moment”
i was on a phone in debate at the very, very beginning of the Eygpt situation,(i think D Murray, was on later)… reiterated,
what i had said earlier, bout the MB, attempt to push for islamic state etc etc you know what virtually every contributer has on this blog either said or read….it was like talking to a brick wall,
bloody rentaislam on tap,(AGAIN)..so everyone has to listen to (again) to the same bullsh-t narrative diatribe….so much tsk tsk, from campbell & co…..gave them history, motive, & viola- fingers in ears 🙁
so the song goes,” i didn t see it coming”
oh brother
I attended a market research group earlier this week, run by a watchdog that oversees the Beeb. They were interested in views of the BBC News Channel.
Eight of us round a table – people were using the usual words, “reliable, “trustworthy, professional” etc. When my turn came I let them have “biased, agenda-driven, anti-American/Israel, patronising, always interviewing the usual left-loving suspects etc. etc.” I pointed out the glee with which they were attacking Murdoch for being a monopoly and the irony behind it.
Funnily enough most of the group then seemed to agree with me – one even said “yes, they are biased but you have to accept that and look beyond…”. Why? Many agreed the Beeb is biased against Israel in particular.
Anyway, my point is that I hope some points will get into whatever report is produced and I did kind of feel like I was representing this blog in a way!
Interesting, Davieboy. Well done for pointing out the irony in that particular Beeboid bout of hysteria. There is some hope when others seemed to agree with you. Good. I wonder if the report will be published or if it will just be fed into some internal mill at the Beeboid Corporation where it will emerge at the other end as “We get it about right”.
Many thanks for that feedback and well done for letting them have it.
Well done, Davieboy. I’m a firm believer in ripples in the pond. The more information people have the better. Did you sense that most of the people at your table started out reflexively praising the BBC, and only changed their tune after you broke the spell?
“Did you sense that most of the people at your table started out reflexively praising the BBC, and only changed their tune after you broke the spell?”
Yes I really did, I thought that they “got it” that the BBC was far from objective but somehow found that more or less acceptable.
We were only one group out of (I presume) many – I’d love to know what was said elsewhere. It was all filmed & recorded (from behind a mirror). BTW I got £75 for my pains!
Davieboy,
£75 our TV tax , well spent for once !
People’s personal image – “I’m against Evil Tories, I care about the Poor, I’m Labour blah blah” is often completely at odds with their personal opinion on individual issues. They will agree with everything you say about the damage inflicted by inward third world economic migration, the collapse of education with “all winners”, political correctness and health ‘n’ safety culture, ambulance chasing lawyers and the Criminal Rights Act, whatever. And then insist they are caring socialists who hate evil greedy Tories.
Cameron clearly hasn’t detoxified the Tory brand. Just opened it to more ridicule.
Top man, but extremely disturbing that everyone else on the panel trundled out what they thought they should say about the BBC then changed their minds when you told the truth. It’s like the BBC has turned Britain into the Stepford Wives. We all know the evil that the BBC is leading us to and we want to make sure we’re not on the wrong side of it when the crunch comes. Heartening though that at the moment when someone points out the Emperor is wearing no clothes there willing to snap out of Stepford Wives mode and speak like free human beings with a will and a mind of their own. .. At the moment. It really is like something out of a surreal horror film that you’ve just described.
Davieboy,
“Funnily enough most of the group then seemed to agree with me…”
Key words: “seemed to”.
Complaint made to the BBC today
Today – this.
http://news.yahoo.com/nasa-data-blow-gaping-hold-global-warming-alarmism-192334971.html
Two or three days ago, this.
http://pielkeclimatesci.wordpress.com/2011/07/26/new-paper-on-the-misdiagnosis-of-surface-temperature-feedbacks-from-variations-in-earth%E2%80%99s-radiant-energy-balance-by-spencer-and-braswell-2011/
and this.
http://pielkeclimatesci.wordpress.com/2011/07/26/new-paper-on-the-misdiagnosis-of-surface-temperature-feedbacks-from-variations-in-earth%E2%80%99s-radiant-energy-balance-by-spencer-and-braswell-2011/ (see article for July 26th)
and this, in which IPCC author Kevin Trenberth lays into climate modelling.
http://www.c3headlines.com/2011/07/major-ipcc-climate-scientist-publishes-paper-listing-significant-failures-of-climate-models.html
It is one thing refusing space to those of us who do not believe in AGW, quite another to ignore papers that blow major holes in the whole theory. Quite how does this tally with your Charter requirement to report impartially?
By the way, I have made other complaints recently and asked for a reply, yet have had none. Might I remind you who funds you?
I was going to post about this earlier, then I read Richard Black’s latest piece on global warming and the reasons why…
It’s like a default setting with the BBC…
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-14306781
Does NASA not care about the BBC pension scheme?
Wonder if Richard read this before his latest cherrypicking exercise.
“TOOLIK FIELD STATION, ALASKA—For nearly 3 months in the hot, dry summer and fall of 2007, the biggest arctic tundra fire in Alaska’s history—the Anaktuvuk River fire—raged on the North Slope, a large area that contains the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge and the National Petroleum Reserve. Scientists have been concerned that such fires—which seem to be on the rise—could contribute to global warming by burning deep into tundra soils, thereby releasing carbon that thousands of years’ worth of plants have stored there. But a new study finds that the Anaktuvuk River fire burned only the newest, topmost layer of the soil, leaving the tundra’s ancient stores of carbon intact below. That’s a small victory when it comes to climate change, says ecologist Michelle Mack of the University of Florida, Gainesville. Although the fire released a lot of carbon, “it’s not radically changing the carbon system, as far as we can tell.”
http://news.sciencemag.org/sciencenow/2010/06/for-global-warming-tundra-fires-.html
Yay,,, it’s the school holidays!
Are BBC employees on the same deal as teachers?
Nick Robinson just hung up a ‘Shop closed’ sign last week and has gone AWOL.
At least Richard Black was polite enough to explain, if in a rather flip manner:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-14344384
I once ran a company of two that was 365/365, 24/7.
Now, how is it a media monopoly spanning the globe gets to behave like ‘Open Most Hours’ across some pretty critical news beats?
Is it ‘cos they is unique?
If it’s not necessary for several weeks a year, why then do we need to pay for it all the rest, as it seems more a staff-benefitting indulgence to pen a few musings every so often, as opposed to any timely news.
So this morning a man was shot by police outside the airport in Eindhoven. Everybody else in the world is reportingthe incident. Why Sky news reported the story at around 1130, but want to guess which major news agency hasn’t reported this story? I wonder if the fact that the man who was armed with a knife was demanding to be sent home has anything to do with the bBCs reticence in reporting this story? But just because the bBC can’t be bothered to bring you the news I’ve dug up the video of the actual event.
The article you link to says he worked for the military police. Crazy. Maybe he was a right-wing Christian Tea Party extremist who wanted to come back to the US to support the instransigent Republicans.
No, I think it says he was surrounded by the military police and shot in the leg by military police. Apparently there were 4 shots so there will be an investigation INTO the military police action (I think!), that said he threatened armed police with a knife…oops (apparently he is Polish)
Ah, I think you’re right. It’s “in cooperation with the military police”. I was reading it as “a worker with”. Thanks for the correction. I’ll stick to trying to understand music broadcasts on Radio4.nl.
Surely, if the BBC didn’t report it, he must have been a muslim ?
I know nothing of the story, but just make that assumption for some reason.
FORT HOOD.
And in INBBC’s deceitfully censored version, there are still no MUSLIMS involved!
In contrast, ‘Jihadwatch’ has:
“AWOL Fort Campbell soldier” admits plans for massacre at Fort Hood
[Opening excerpt]:
“To review: he obtained conscientious objector status against being deployed to Iraq after saying ‘his Muslim beliefs prevented him from fighting.’ But he was willing and able to travel to Texas to attempt to pick up where Nidal Malik Hasan left off and slaughter more soldiers at Fort Hood.”
And tried to buy his ammo at the same store where Hasan bought his. Fortunately, the clerk who helped him had a clue this time and called the authorities.
The fascinating aspect of this story is that normally Muslim terrorist suspecta are arrested and then its discovered that they’re into kiddie porn as well, this time its the other way round.
NIGERIA.
INBBC, after for years saying that BOKO HARAM jihadists were unrepresentative of Islam in Nigeria, now has to say the opposite.
INBBC report:
“Nigeria: Sultan of Sokoto condemns Boko Haram crackdown”
[Opening paragraph]:
“The sultan of Sokoto, the spiritual leader of Nigeria’s Muslims, has condemned the military crackdown against the Islamist Boko Haram sect.”
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-africa-14342863
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-14324094
France: Wild boars dead amid algae on Brittany coast
You don’t have to read far before WHAM!: “Environmentalists and officials say it is a result of the nitrates in fertilisers used by the region’s farmers.”
Read to the end and find out they don’t know what caused the deaths yet.
What we could say is that other boars and most wildlife in the woods and fields come into direct contact with fertilsers, it is usually spread over fields in micro-granual (small balls) or liquid forms, some of it – no doubt whatsosver – is probably eaten accidentally by rats, mice, boars, rabbits, birds, etc…some may even enjoy it as a nice bit of seasoning 🙂
Trying Newsnight once again, stupid I know, I endured Mason re living Steinbeck.
Now the Arizona sherrif is actually enforcing the laws of the United States. If you have entered the country illegally then there are consequences that will be unpleasant.
Not that the you would have gathered that from the show. All sympathy was with the illegals. The sherrif was permitted to make his case but no attempt was made to tell us that all he was doing was his job. Upholding the law.
To the beeboid mind sympathy for the “oppressed” always trumps the rule of law. That way lies anarchy but at least you get to feel a warm glow as society dissolves into chaos.
dave
you need a very big medal
Evil, EVIL Sheriff, what’s the betting he’s a white, southern, Christian conservative right wing nutter? How DARE he do his job.
Goodness, so he’s off on yet another trip to the States. He must love the place. The Beeboids can’t keep away. It must have something going for it despite all the sneering they do.
Unf@#$#ingbelievable!! No, it’s sadly all too believable. The News Channel just now had on a Dutch economics talking head from some boiler room who said the President was too optimistic and basically wrong about the debt and the debt ceiilng, and His rhetoric was not what the ratings agencies wanted to hear.
Oh, my goodness, I hear you all saying, criticism of Him? This won’t do. And immediately the female Beeboid doing the business brief tried to correct him and defend the President.
“But He was really speaking to the American people, wasn’t He?” He’s not wrong, you see. The Dutch guy simply misunderstood what the President was doing. According to this defender of the leader of a foreign country, the President was just trying to tell the people, “If we raise the debt ceiling then we’ll be able to pay our bills.” She used frantic hand gestures like an angry parent trying to explain to a child why they shouldn’t keep touching that hot poker.
She went on to inform the poor man that the President even told the public “to call their Congressmen” about it and tell them to work together and support the President’s plan. The President is trying to save us all, you see. According to this biased Beeboid, anyway. Of course, she’s not going to examine how successful that appeal was, considering the Tea Part-backed Republicans are standing their ground even more. Which means that most people called in telling them not to support Him.
Then she got all flustered, as things had drifted too far off script and she wasn’t at all prepared to face reality like this.
Sad. This is the biased crap about the US the BBC forces on you. And it’s not just Mardell or a couple of Democrat activist freelancers in the US: It’s all of them, the entire BBC, from the News Channel to the World Service to Today, to Newsnight, to all the topical radio shows.
“According to this defender of the leader of a foreign country, the President was just trying to tell the people, “If we raise the debt ceiling then we’ll be able to pay our bills.” “
Blimey. So if you borrow money to ‘pay your bills’ then you don’t have to pay it back afterwards ? Who knew ?
This is the sort of idiot that credit companies have wet dreams about. Really not a surprise to find her suckling at the BBC teat.
Robert Peston reveals his Socialist ideology again.
Centrica: Reward for owners, pain for customers
How horrible, a business which takes care of its shareholders first. Contrary to Peston’s opinion, a business is not obligated to harm itself to give lower prices to the customer. That’s a choice they can make if they like, but there is no obligation to do so. I’m sure Peston and the Left feel it’s a moral obligation, but why are the shareholders not worthy of respect? They pay to get the company going in the first place, not the customers.
But no, as always, profit is evil at the BBC. Except when they make a whopping one off their own properties via Worldwide and licensing, of course. Those profits keep rolling in, and will only grow once this international iPlayer deal takes off, yet the BBC is cutting staff and pension contributions and all that, and certainly not choosing to obey their own moral obligation to their customers by lowering the license fee. Instead, they squeal bloody murder when it’s not permitted to rise every year.
Peston’s a hypocrite.
Peston’s a hypocrite.
Pretty sure it’s a mandatory for employment.
Sorry, make that ‘preference will be given to..’, that way a vast quango can be appeased whilst a blatant ‘ism industry plays a daft game and sails on as before.
Obama was always a ‘blank slate’ into which the left projected their fantasies. The BBC chicks haven’t got up to speed yet. It would mean being critical thinking journalists and that wouldn’t do as they are desperate for each others approval and fear the ostracism from their very cosy cosseted world.
The bBC reporting the news about Jihadist Muslims within our midst and half the story.
Blogger who encouraged murder of MPs jailed
An internet blogger has been jailed for 12 years after admitting soliciting the murder of MPs who had voted in favour of the Iraq war. Bilal Zaheer Ahmad, 23, from Wolverhampton, was also sentenced for other terrorism offences.Prosecutors at Bristol Crown Court said Ahmad had used a website called revolutionmuslim.com to encourage others to attack MPs. The website has since been closed down by the authorities in the US. Sentencing Ahmad, the judge, Mr Justice Royce, described him as a “viper in our midst” and said he was “willing to go as far as possible to strike at the heart of our system”. The website, which was hosted in America, was closed after Mr Ahmad was arrested last November.
So reading the above do you get the impressiont that Ahmad was treated somewhat harshly? Here is what the bBC doesn’t tell you about our peace loving muslim:
A man linked to a website named as an influence by the woman convicted of stabbing Labour MP Stephen Timms is to appear in court in London today charged with ‘soliciting murder’. Bilal Zaheer Ahmad, 23, of Dunstall, Wolverhampton, was arrested last week and his computer equipment seized.
The charges against him are reportedly in relation to a website which published a hit list of MPs who had voted in favour of the Iraq war in 2003 and urged attacks against them. The US-based website RevolutionMuslim.com is among those cited as influences by 21-year-old Roshonara Choudhry, who was sentenced to life imprisonment earlier this month for attempting to murder Labour MP Stephen Timms because he voted in favour of the Iraq war. The website, which is thought to be maintained by a number of different authors in the US and Britain, was closed by US authorities after Britain complained.
After Choudhry’s conviction, RevolutionMuslim.com published a list of all British MPs who voted for the Iraq war in 2003 and called on Muslims to “raise the knife of jihad” against them: “We ask Allah to keep [Choudhry] safe, to hasten her release and reward this heroine immensely.”
Funny how the bBC kind of left that snippet out.
The BBC has been replaying the President’s speech today that Congress must reach an agreement by Tuesday or we will have our credit rating lowered. He says that we need an agreement so that we can pay our bills, which “include Social Security checks”. This is a lie.
We have $2.7 trillion in government bonds to cash in to send out Social Security checks, and these checks will go out whether we raise the debt ceiling or not. It’s guaranteed, and the President is lying when He says we might not be able to write those checks. The BBC doesn’t know, or doesn’t care.
Also, the President has the power to tell the Treasury to selectively pay bills regardless. He sort of admitted that we do have the money to pay our bills, right after He said that we need to raise the debt limit so we….er…have the money to pay our bills. The BBC, unfortunately, allows all the lies, and refuses to question a word He says.
Kim Ghattas instead tries to defend Him by saying that He’s just trying to “calm everybody down”. When it was pointed out to her that the President is trying to isolate the Republicans whom “He thinks are the the problem”, she told a story about how Speaker Boehner couldn’t get enough votes for a stronger plan, which was “an embarrassment for him”.
Then she defended the President by saying He’s not refusing to sign anything that will force another vote on the debt before the 2012 election for political reasons, but because the country really needs the stability of postponing it until 2013. Another White House talking point presented as fact.
Yet another BBC business segment about how the President wants a bi-partisan agreement. He @#$ing rejected a bi-partisan agreement already because it was politically inconvenient for Him. The BBC denies it, and continues to allow this White House propaganda.
Radio 5 were spouting the same crap with some lefty calling the Republicans ‘extremists’ he didn’t mention blonde and blue eyed but probably not far off.
Female beeboid never thought to ask why Obama didn’t raise debt ceiling when he had control of both houses nor the fact he’s racked up the US debt and created fewer jobs than you’d find in one small Mcdonalds.
The only thing shovel ready is the crap Barry spouts.
The BBC have been in full on anti Sky mode (getting staff to ring in and pretend to be ‘upset’ that Sky the evil Murdoch empire have stolen F1 off the BBC)
What gets me is the smug arrogance of the BBC, who seem to think they should have all sport (for free of course) and that Sky should not be allowed to compete.
If the BBC wanted to keep F1 why not scrap Eastenders? Or scrap BBC 3 or BBC 4? Or better still scrap the TV tax and go subscription.
All I’ve heard on the BBC all day is BBC employess ringing up (yes we know you do it BBC) spouting ‘Murdoch’ ever 5 minutes.
Sky is as much a British company as the BBC.
Martin,
More British, surely ?
Yes more British!, the BBC are hopeless, all the BBC does it moan. Some bloke was just interviewed about Sky and he was moaning about it not being on the BBC, so if I turned up at Silverstone and demanded to get in for free would those who have paid £100 think that’s OK?
Sport is not free, it has to be paid for, the BBC has 4 billion a year it could easily cut wages and staff and have F1
I blame the sharing deal with Sky on that BBC berk Jake Dickhead.
Catapulted from CBeebies to BBC’s Football Focus he achieved what I thought was impossible, he took the dumb viewer to new depths of simplicity.
But he must tick all the right BBC boxes as he’s been allowed to take F1 coverage to (yes you’ve guessed it !) new depths of simplicity.
Strange really, it’s one of the few things this country does rather well : F1.
Contrary to the President’s class war demagoguing, raising taxes on the evil rich and their corporate jets WILL NOT appease Moody’s and S&P. Their AAA rating is about long-term spending reductions, not the piddling pennies of “revenue” from the expiration of the Bush tax cuts.
Repealing ObamaCare, on the other hand, would give us about $1.3 trillion in savings over ten years. Which party shoved that through immediately after the last financial crisis, knowing full well we couldn’t pay for it? How about bringing that up, BBC, instead of constantly defending Him?
If the BBC, and the rest of Jersey’s State controlled media, were reporting the truth and evidenced facts, then they would be reporting this exclusive interview http://voiceforchildren.blogspot.com/2011/07/three-goons.html
Well, after much deliberation I cancelled my direct debit to the BBC about 2 weeks ago by instructing my bank.
Within a week I had a letter from “TV Licensing” asking me to reinstate it, which I plan to ignore.
My only concern is for my professional position. Otherwise I feel good. Will try and keep BBBC posted.
You are a very naughty boy Grant.
However, you are in damn good company !
I look forward to the idiot/BBC puppet that turns up to your door with a bit of paper lol! poor sod won’t know what hits him!!
Grant, I admire your bravery, but what is it going to acheive? If its part of a mass protest of civil disobedience, it might acheive something, but as an isolated gesture? Spare yourself the grief and renew your license.
stuff the licence
every mass protest has to begin somewhere
grant
write to Capita and withdraw ther implied right of access to your property
then mr jobsworth can’t come to your house
so they’ll just have to use the famous detector vans to catch you out
*cough bullshit cough*
hippie,
Well if I get away with it, it saves me some money !
And for every one that stops paying is a victory even if the £140 only covers Bacons executive lunch toilet stops !
I gave up my TV nine years ago, never looked back. I watch the i-player if there is something decent from the BBC, top gear, coast, h.i.g.n.f.you, er…that’s it really. Renewed my love for walking, swimming, etc…. the mac gives me all the entertainment i could need. Of course, a lot of people are hooked on ‘reality’ shows and soaps and game shows, but hey,they are beyond help anyway. Yes, ditch the box, deprive the BBC of their £145 and renew your life.
News Corp should just buy twitter.
With all the high horse’s behinds on there declaiming their Times/Sky cold turkey having purged any association, the BBC’s main means of news gathering and flash mob coordination would near evaporate.
And with all bar the interns on duty to switch on Dad’s Army re-runs for the summer hols, even the most forgiving UK public ‘they speak for’ may get a bit miffed.
Funny that 10 million homes have Sky yet the BBC can’t find one person who is happy F1 is going to Sky, odd that isn’t it?
Since when is F1 free to air? So BBC if i buy a TV and no licence that’s OK is it? Tha’ts my definition of ‘free’
“The BBC, Breivik, the EDL and Islam ”
(by Paul Weston).
[Opening paragraph]:
“The BBC regards itself as a politically impartial organisation, but their behaviour in the fallout of the Breivik atrocity shows them to be nothing other than the unapologetic propaganda arm of the hard Left and Islam.”
This is good in that GoV has had a lot of unwelcome attention since the Oslo Massacres but also a lot more ‘general’ attention so this sort of article will be being read by many more than normal. Paul Weston is very good.
Weston is spot on with everything until the part where he seems to claim that the Saudis have bribed BBC upper management with millions. That’s just silly, and is going to be used to dismiss the rest of his otherwise excellent article.
A reprise:
‘Cranmer’ (6 months ago):-
“Is the BBC in thrall to Islam because of a Saudi landlord? ”
http://archbishop-cranmer.blogspot.com/2011/01/is-bbc-in-thrall-to-islam-because-of.html
First comment by you-know-who.
That’s hardly the same thing as buying off top executives. And if this one admittedly hefty contribution to a third-party which isn’t directly going into BBC coffers is the reason for the BBC’s bias, does this mean that the bias wasn’t there until the Salford deal? One business transaction has transformed the entire news agenda, and, for example, made Emily Maitlis alter her behavior in a way that now makes her laugh out loud on air when someone suggests that Al Qaeda thinks they’re at war with us?
It’s hard to buy this theory when there’s a simpler explanation: an intellectual failure caused by their emotion-based political ideology and post-modern relativism.
Hey BBC. You are all over Tahrir Sq. How could you miss this (the LA Times didn’t.
“”I’m really scared of the potential of an Islamic state in Egypt. Islamists like the Muslim Brotherhood don’t allow any democracy within their movement,” said Amira Badr, a 27-year-old administrator. “What will they do to a whole nation in the name of religion?”
The BBC often vox pops Muslim misses with nice soothing words about Islam and kittens.
How about Amira. She’s always known that the Brotherhood and Salafists (whom Jon Leyne insists are ‘conservative’ are bad news.
Or is that tens of thousands misunderstand their religion?
Be that as it may, mistaken or not in their Islam, Islamism is political with a social agenda that would go for Beeboids before me, and it is clear and present.
What is the point of Newswatch apart from Beeboids engaging in mutual masturbation? On tonight’s episode we learned:
1. The BBC’s coverage of the Norway massacre and Amy Winehouse was ok.
2. The BBC is right to exclude climate change heretics from the debate. Here Snoddy allowed Pallab Ghosh to make a lot of dubious statements.
3. And Finally, an email complaining of BBC news presenters asking each other questions and then agreeing with the answers is treated as a lighthearted story.
“1. The BBC’s coverage of the Norway massacre and Amy Winehouse was ok. “
Rather creepily, the Ceefax entertainment extra pages (“Ents Extra” (P521)) have an account, or rather a review, of the Winehouse funeral up.
Can’t say I’d ever thought of cremations as a leisure activity.
Apparently “The atmosphere, like the weather, was calm and cool”.
So pleased to hear that. Nothing brings you down so quicky as a dull funeral.
I watched Newswatch for the first time last night thanks to this VOIP gizmo I have. It really is farcical. There was a very really issue of Paxo’s rudeness and lefty axe-grinding in his interview with the crypto fascist Stephen Lennon, but no – a PR exercise out of 1984.
Well, Newsnight’ certainly lived down to expections, turning a serious subject into the usual agenda-laden knockabout.
The interview between Gavin Esler and “Tea Party activist” Sharron Angle was like a third-rate parody of a Paxman interview. Esler seemed more interested in mocking her – and those who share her views – than asking her substantive questions, repeatedly interrupting her and slinging insults at her (courtesy of John McCain and Vince Cable): “cracked”, “political hobbit”, “you’re living in some kind of fantasy”, “hobbit” and, oh yes, “right-wing nutters.” He also twice reminded her that Harry Reid defeated her in the election.
This is what seems to pass for a serious interview these days on the BBC’s tired old flagship.
He also twice reminded her that Harry Reid defeated her in the election.
Which is why they had her on, as opposed to someone was elected thanks to the Tea Party. Like Allen West, who voted for the Boehner bill.
The whole thing is a sham.
You’re a lot more in the loop on American politics than I am DP, but wouldn’t it be fairer to say that West got elected ‘with help’ from the Tea Party rather than ‘thanks to them’?
West is an outstanding candidate who without doubt is Tea Party through and through, but as a consigliere to Joseph Kennedy told him when pop claimed with the amount of money he spent on his son JFK’s election campaign I could have got my chauffer elected, “The truth is your son’s so good I could have got him elected with a couple of dimes”.
Splitting hairs, surely, hippie, and not the point of my…um…point about having someone unelected on as opposed to someone who won their election with the backing of the Tea Party.
No, just raising a point of interest.
Anybody who claims that the BBC covers US politics in an impartial manner is a liar, a moron, or a lying moron, and Newsnight is a parody of a serious news programme, more concerned with the instant gratification of right-on Twitter buzz than insightful analysis.
In typical Today programme fashion James Naughtie interviewed a loud critic of the Tea Party – reformed neocon turned Obama supporter Francis Fukuyama – on the US debt crisis. Guided by gentle prodding from Naughtie, Fukuyama did as was expected and blamed everything on the Tea Party. No counter argument was on offer and Naughtie certainly wasn’t going to disagree as that would’ve defeated the whole purpose of the interview. I’m increasingly of the opinion that the BBC’s utterly biased coverage of the 2008 presidential election will seem like a paragon of impartiality when compared with what we’ll get from the Tea Party-hating BBC in 2012.
Taking of which, there’s an odd gap on the Today programme’s running order for yesterday’s edition. You can ‘listen again’ to a report on the Pakistan flood at 6.50 and an interview about language impairment at 6.55. If you listen to the full programme though, something is missing (and the timings are out).
What’s missing in an interview at 6.51 between Jeremy Warner of the Daily Telegraph and Jim Naughtie.
Jeremy Warner made an interesting point about the political choice now facing the U.S, namely “whether America stays loyal to her libertarian, low tax traditions, which are the things that have made America great in the past, or whether it moves towards a more European, high tax model of cradle-to-grave welfare and so on.” Jim Naughtie took a sharp intake of breath, said ‘But..’ and then chose the word “antics” to describe the actions on the Tea Party, swiftly remembering to add that that’s how John McCain “would see them” (a neat swerve by Naughtie there!). He then slung McCain’s use of the word “bizarre” into the equation and added that the established wing of the Republican Party “say that these guys to the right of them have gone off the edge of the map. That’s what they would say.” I suspect “antics” and “gone off the edge of the map” are Jim’s own loaded form of words. Jeremy Warner replied that US federal spending levels have got up to European levels in recent years, bringing in a swift interruption, “Thanks to President Bush, funnily enough”. (Yeah, blame it all on Bush, Jim.) “President Bush, then the Obama stimulus after that, ” replied Jeremy, “So we’re very close to European levels of spending as a percentage of GDP”.
Despite Naughtie, it was an interesting contribution from Jeremy Warner. Shame the Today website chose, for some strange reason, not to make it permenantly available to ‘listen again’.
Again Craig, please post. One has next to nil expectations of the Leveson Inquiry with regards to the BBC, but nevertheless, hope is one of the three great virtues.
You’ll actually find the link here. It kicks in just past 0:52:00. Naughtie doing his usual Guardian editorialising, all part of the Beeb’s efforts prepping us up for the 2012 USPE with as many snide digs at the Tea Party as they can get in. They discredit the Right there they discredit the Right here. Funny how they give no exposure whatsoever to Congressman Col Allen West. I get the feeling they fear him like Thatcher.
DB
As soon as that segment started, I thought “Here we go again….let’s slag off the Tea Party. let’s ignore the reckless overspending that has turned the US into a basket-case”.
Jessica Duchen is a classical music writer and Korngold promoter. I will not be patronizing her blog any more, nor will I support any of her future efforts.
Great catch DB, please post.
Watching it now. The lady guest from UEA said the value in a free press is seen in The Guardian breaking the story on ‘hackgate’, and Esler intervenes “And MP’s expeneses as well”. Ermm, no Gavin, that was the Telegraph, but why would a bent leftie beeboid want to give credit where its due to a Tory newspaper.
As tacky as Sharon Angle was in plugging her book, when you see someone like Esler being so partisan and unpleasant, you just want to punch him.
And Michael Crick’s last time on Newsnight is celebrated with Esler saracastically introducing a film of the politicians Crick has ‘made friends with’, and we’re treated to a montage of Tory MP’s he has goaded and Clegg.
Thanks to this VOIP gizmo I’ve got, I see that Newsnight is as bent as it ever was.
“London 2012 Olympics: BBC to follow torch relay ‘every mile of the way’”
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/sport/olympics/8670386/London-2012-Olympics-BBC-to-follow-torch-relay-every-mile-of-the-way.html
The thing has to pass through Maidstone (Slogan: “We’re almost as chavvy as Cha’-um“) at one point, and so the chances of it emerging intact on the other side are surely no better than one in ten.
I’m pretty sure the locals will have no trouble “disappearing” various Beeboid wonks accompanying the relay, especially if they’re wearing something bright and shiny: though sad, this must be regarded as collateral damage.
Let the games begin ! 😀
Just entertaintment?
Harry Potter actor Nicholas Read flashed girl on train
Who could it be I asked myself? Harry, Ron, Hermione? Maybe one of the supporting actors, Dumbledore, Snape, Malfoy?
I would never guess that An actor who appeared as a goblin in a Harry Potter film has been given a 20-week suspended sentence for indecently exposing himself on a train. STOP THE PRESSES!
He also appeared as an an ewok in Return of the Jedi. Ah, the penalty of fame – constant media surveillance.
To be fair, “Goblin actor flashed girl on train” would conjure all sorts of unfortunate images.
Ok hands up, how many people have watched the bBC news reporting on how their Islamic heroes (the Taliban) will never be defeated and then they trot out the latest death toll. So in light of that huge death toll, you switch off and feel, well maybe we shouldn’t be in Afghanistan and maybe we should just pull out and let the jundies kill each other off. Well here’s a few facts the bBC doesn’t share with you. While the bBC love to shout out that the Afghans have never been beaten. (Actually they have and the last to do so were the Brits) And that they defeated the British, the Russians and now ‘Allalh blessing’ The Yanks. Here is how it actually stands on the ground:
Russia invaded in 1979 and stayed until 1989. In that time they lost 14,453 troops.
In a similar time frame (10 years) ISAF have lost a total of…2611 of which 1680 are American,377 are British and the remaining 26 countries account for 544 deaths.
So while I feel sadness at even 1 lost life (military or civilian) the fact remains , the current crowd (ISAF) have lost less than 1/6th of the manpower than the Russians did and actually not only do they cover more ground, but they have brought more benefits to the people than the Russians could even have dreamed about. So back to those deaths the following picture is a breakdown of where all those deaths transpired. Now that list is extant as of Friday the 29th of July 2011. Now is the country really at the hands of the Taliban as the bBC makes out? Remember folks that picture is the cumulative figures over 10 years.
In almost 30 years of troubles in NI 1049 Military/police lost their lives to the troubles that works out at just over 349 every ten years. The current tally for the UK in Afghanistan over 10 years is 377.
Actually not that far from the NI figure, I wonder why the bBC doesn’t mention that, Instead they give us stories about the worse fighting since the Korean war, but actually the death toll isn’t that much different from fighting the IRA.
The bBC, the fifth column for Islamic terrorism in the UK.
I don’t suppose the bBC would ever debate this:
(PS I admit its a little propoganderish)
You can see clearly how the BBC and its Arab islamist allies have twisted and perverted the facts to portray a totally false reality.
Danny puts over a simple truthful case that cannot be contradicted, the BBC will never allow the true facts to be known, as with the CAGW fraud the true facts will always be hidden so the BBC can be free to peddle its lies.
It’s not perfect but I am so pleased to see the Israeli government, finally, defending itself in the Public Diplomacy war.
TURKEY.
INBBC -which, along with PATTEN, campaigns for entry of 80 million Muslim Turks into E.U. -CENSORS out fact that Erdogan’s government is ISLAMIC, and that this is key issue as what this conflict is all about.
1.)
‘Telegraph’:
“Turkey’s entire military command quits over row with government. Turkey’s entire top brass quit on Friday night leaving one (of) America’s strongest military’s allies leaderless as the country’s Islamic government confronts senior officers for conspiring against the prime minister.”
2.)
INBBC report, with all references to ‘ISLAM/ISLAMIC’ censored out:
“Turkey: Military chiefs resign en masse”
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-14346325
It’s a major story as the Turkish armed forces, however incompetent and brutal, have been the one thing consistently protecting ‘secular’ Turkey. I couldn’t find anything about the political/religious stance of Gen. Necdet Ozel but as he was the only high officer who didn’t resign one would have to surmise that if he is not an Islamist he is at least an opportunist.
This doesn’t look good for Turkish democracy.
Islamism has won in Turkey. The generals know it, and are getting out while they’re still free men. Whether or not all this could have been prevented by letting Turkey into the EU a decade ago is probably going to be the topic of endless discussion next year. All evidence says that it wouldn’t have prevented Ertogun, but who knows.
If the top brass have resigned instead of staging a military coup, it does suggest that the military officers who are facing trial are doing so on trumped up charges.
Even on the liberal MSNBC channel, the penny is dropping – Obama is not a leader, he has few political skills to manage the Congress, he is indeed disdainful of others. And even the Dems in Congress are losing faith in him.
He is a loser.
http://www.realclearpolitics.com/video/2011/07/29/peggy_noonan_obama_is_a_loser.html
The BBC will ignore this. To them, Peggy Noonan is just another white Southern racist. Even worse, she used to work for Reagan.
Do the BBC have any sway in US politics? Are they not just preaching to the converted?
They have no affect on the US, thank goodness. But they have an enormous influence on the opinions of the British public, who do business with the US, buy US products, and elect the government of our greatest ally. Anti-American sentiment in Britain harms the US. Especially when British politicians and civil service mandarins get their information and opinion on US issues from the BBC.
The BBC is harmful to the relations between the two countries.
Sadly, except for certain long-vanished defenders of the indefensible, we all saw this coming back in early 2008. Public speaking doesn’t equate to leading. The Obammesiah is an instigator, not a leader.
as we found out in this country with Tony Blair
What’s on your mind…
I see that the BBC will be following every mile of the journey of the olympic torch. And I shall be following every minute !
Long article on a health project to study the child health issues in Bradford.
Clearly if there are particularproblems in a particular area of Britain, a study to get to the bottom of the problem, to find out why, could lead to addressing these problems.
A good thing.
The BBC tells us:
“It is an attempt to get to the bottom of why illness blights the lives of so many families in Bradford, which is home to some of the most deprived communities in the UK.”
The report introduces us to a positive response to the survey.
“Making his first appearance at this year’s picnic is Jacob Robinson, born at the beginning of June to Nicola and Duncan.
Jacob is the last recruit to the study and his parents are thrilled to be taking part.
“I just think it is an incredible study,” says Nicola.”
The bouncing baby is pictured.
So after a considerable body of text until this point no mention has been made of any other factors that might present in Bradford.
All are mums like Jacob’s mum.
Then ‘whoosh’ ethnic diversity and the PR begins to lift ever so, ever so slightly.
“The Born in Bradford families reflect the city’s ethnic diversity and around half of them are from an Asian background, a community that has some distinct health problems.”
So there are some distinct problems for the ‘Asian’ (read Pakistani) community.
Let’s look at the study. The best place to start is the abstract.
Abstract to ‘Born in Bradford’
Background
Bradford, one of the most deprived cities in the United Kingdom, has a wide range of public health problems associated with socioeconomic deprivation, including an infant mortality rate
almost double that for England and Wales. Infant mortality is highest for babies of Pakistaniorigin, who comprise almost half the babies born in Bradford.
The Born in Bradford cohort study aims to examine environmental, psychological and genetic factors that impact on health
and development perinatally, during childhood and subsequent adult life, and those that influence their parents’ health and wellbeing.
The literature cited at the end of the Born in Bradford is heavily weighted. It includes studies of consanguinity and diabetes.
Now the BBC presents this as a study for Bradford. Sure there will be some benefits for the whole issue of maternity locally.
But the main thrust is not Jacob Robinson but Rayan Agha.
You wouldn’t get that from the BBC.
BBC tells us that ‘Asians’ have distinct health problems.
They certainly do.
Quite distinct.
But this fact is not presented as the reason for the study.
BBC does not want to highlight a health issue which derives from a cultural practice of an immigrant community.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-14202950
Well, one could call it balance.
I was not aware of this until brought to my attention…
DavidACGregory “@Geomorphologist: I just joined lets get the uk tv licence abolished on @causes! causes.com/causes/276396-…” Gee, thanks!
Just going back to what Martin was describing yesterday, there was an interview on the BBC News Channel last night (about 6.45pm) that was pushing the anti-Sky line on the F1 deal.
BBC sports correspondent Dan Roan began by blaming funding cuts for forcing the BBC into the deal with Sky. Then, in the studio, another BBC soorts correspondent, Amanda Davies, mentioned the “whole host of tweets and e-mails” she’d been getting all day from F1 fans and Dan Roan agreed that the “vast majority” of fans he’d spoken to at Silverstone were “both shocked and hugely disappointed.”
This tied in with something I heard on Today as I was driving to work yesterday morning. Golfer Rory McIlroy had got into a Twitter-spat with a BBC commentator, Jay Townsend. So BBC sports presenter Gary Richardson talked about it with another BBC commentator, Conor McNamara. Richardson gave his opinion that McIlroy was “unwise” to respond on Twitter. McNamara agreed with his BBC colleague, saying “Sure.”
Lots of BBC sports reporters and commentators interviewing each other and agreeing with other other, all in defence of the BBC. The phrase ‘incest interviews’ springs to mind.
I read something about it. Apparently McIlroy said he got annoyed because the Beeboid was getting at his caddy and he reached the point of the last straw where he hit back. Anyway, as a result, he blocked the Beeboid from his twitter.
Maybe it was unwise but are Beeboids the ones to say that considering it was an argy bargy with one of their own – and provoked by the Beeboid? I don’t suppose they questioned the nature of Beeboid tweets and whether they should be sending them. Nor have I heard Beeboids complaining about certain Beeboids or Beeboid favourites sending foul and abusive messages.
Incest – YES
Insight- NO
One of the major obstacles to effective reportage from the Middle East not just by bbc but the whole of msm is the inability of reporters to speak and comprehend arabic and hebrew, they rely on stringers and go-betweens and being mostly nice liberal,naive, progressive types they buy the bulshit, known as TAQIYYA,and then regurgitate it for western consumption. Imagine a correspondent in Paris who couldn’t speak French.Heres the cunning plan, confront al bowen and simpson and their coterie on camera with questions in fluent arabic and hebrew and watch them squirm when they can’t answer.PUT THE FOOTAGE ON YOU TUBE AND EXPOSE THESE FRAUDS TO THE WORLD.
For INBBC:
‘Muslim Brotherhood’;
an excerpt from Glenn Beck TV show (Feb 2011, 8 min video clip)
Mark Mardell was the Europe editor for a couple years before Gavin Hewitt took over. I doubt either one of them speaks more than one Continental language fluenty, and a smattering of a couple others in Europe. Mardell may as well be a non-English speaker for all he understands what US people tell him when he interviews them.
Yet, when it was time to cover that “Cauldron of Hope” (© Matt Frei) in Chile, they sent Tim Willcox, who is fluent in Spanish, to talk to the families and officials at the mine. So journalistic priorities are transitory, I guess.
Orla Guerin’s Palestinian husband speaks Arabic. Does that count?
Speaking of which, here’s a little something I found from a BBC public hearing in 2005. It’s a Q&A session with Michael Grade and other BBC mandarins.
The BBC maintains its reporting is balanced and unbiased. Are Orla Guerin, married to Palestinian, and Barbara Plett, who gives her personal opinion when reporting from the Middle East, in breach of the BBC charter?
Richard Tait responded: The BBC Director of News apologised for what Barbara Plett said. It was a mistake. Governors agree it was a mistake. When you make mistakes, you should put your hand up and say so.
As far as Orla Guerin is concerned I don’t think you should judge a journalist’s impartiality by who they are married to, you should judge them on their work. The reality is all journalists have views of their own. Whether they work for a national newspaper for the ITN, or Sky News and the broadcasters are obliged by law to produce impartial coverage. The rules are simple – you leave your private views and connections at the front door when you come to work. I see no evidence whatsoever that Orla Guerin, who is a very fine correspondent, that her work is influenced by the factors you mentioned.
Do you get equal number of complaints from Palestinians as Israelis on how the BBC covers the Middle East?
Richard Tait responded: It varies quite a bit. The reality of the Middle East is that it’s a violent and very difficult conflict. It’s one where both sides would like to win the propaganda war, to win international support and it’s one which divides people among the licence fee payers. There are strong views on both sides of divide. Therefore the BBC has the difficult and important job of trying to be impartial to both sides. That sometimes means that neither side is totally satisfied.
Michael Grade added: The Governors are about to commission some independent research, which will look at impartiality in the whole of the BBC’s coverage of the Middle East . It is obviously an issue which divides and creates a lot of dissatisfaction. This will be a serious and in-depth look at the impartiality of our coverage.
The whole thing is full of such gems. I don’t know if it was covered here at the time.
Love the way Tait avoids answering Q2. Any organisation committed to impartiality would keep stats on whose complaining about what bias.
When the Current Head of Editorial Standards David Jordan was producer or some such on ‘On the Record’, one of the most screamingly bent propaganda programmes that has ever soiled the airwaves, I wrote asking what the breakdown was on complaints for anti-Tory and anti-Labour bias. He replied the BBC doesn’t have the resources to comply such statistics! And now this screamingly bent waste of space is in place to ensure that the BBC maintains its appalling standards of bias.
I think you’re probably right; they should know which side sends the most complaints. However, it may not prove anything as there are pro-Palestinian sites that are monitoring the BBC for alleged “Pro-Israel bias”. Unbelievable but true!
It’s the same as when they claim they “got it about right” when the crazy-hard left complain that their criminal thugs didn’t get equal treatment during the riots of a few months ago. We all know the BBC bent over to portray the thugs in as good a light as possible. So the BBC who present everything from a skewed to the left position think they got it about right because the crazy-hard left make ridiculous counter-claims.
On the Arab/Israel conflict Saudi funded lobby groups may well distort the complaints ratio, but between Labour and Conservative? Maybe its just me, but if I was producing a programme and cared about its impartiality, I would keep these complaints statistics. Whether they tell me anything or not due to one of the reasons you cited, its something you dont know unless you keep them.
I would add that in the 70’s and 80’s the left was extremely vocal about complainging about BBC bias. I dont hear a dicky bird these days. Says it all, surey?
That’s the thing: unless we know what the complaints actually are, it’s impossible to judge whether or not the BBC really does get a balance of complaints. Are their claims based on quantity or quality on each side? We’ll probably never know, especially since the Balen report is locked away from public scrutiny. If the complaints about pro-Israel bias in the comments on Have Your Say topics and various BBC blogs are anything to go by, then I’d say it’s quantity and not quality at all. Which isn’t fair.
Just listening to Radio 4 (first mistake) and they have a programme on about the ice cream industry. They are interviewing the criminal Banksy, and they said “Because of the clandestine nature of Banksy’s work we have disguised his voice”. But it’s not the “clandestine” nature, it’s the criminal nature. Aren’t the BBC aiding and abetting a crime, or obstructing the course of justice, by doing this? Not if he’s on the side of socialism, in their view, I guess.
Banksy is just a ponce art student who nicked a form of street art purely to push his career and the anonymity is just part of the hype for the giggling BBC cretins who have watched V for very dull way too much !!
I think the subject matter of Banksy’s work is interesting, anarchic and often very funny. The problem isn’t Banksy, but the hoodie-rats who think it’s OK to tag every clean flat surface they come across.
Caught one of these lowlifes doing a brand new fence near my home, dead of night, chased him, smacked him to the ground, took his can and sprayed his face and clothes all over, liked to have seen him explain that to his mum in the morning, toe-rag. Police are a waste of time.
You may find it “very funny”, but maybe some of his victims don’t. No matter how good you think he is, he is causing criminal damage which is an arresable offence. The BBC have no right to assit offenders.
Hmm but he is the icon! they all follow his work and fame and use it to legitimises their tagging everything so to me he is part of the problem !
The Beeboids are definitely winking at criminal activity. Vandalism is vandalism, regardless of what artistes think of the content.
BBC-NUJ propaganda is in here:”Who Is Lee Silver? Ask Anders Breivik”
by David Klinghoffer.
Anybody awake early enough this morning to have heard Open Country could only have ended up sympathetic to those poor (Irish) travellers who set up camp in deepest Essex and have now got to leave.
Can someone in the know direct me to what the Irish government did with the laws over there to result in an influx of Irish accented travellers over here, which I believe also coincides with the rise of instant “new towns” over here.
Second point. On Today this morning JH discussing with ? & ? when the subject of removing such as bus passes and winter fuel payments came up. “The Ed Balls test” of an idea whereby he would bleat on about robbing poor people of their birthright etc. was mentioned and then the “John Humphrys test” was also mentioned whereby his first question would be?. I think even JH got the point.
They made trespass a criminal offence in certain circumstances. Also police have powers to order them to move on. The police can also impound items brought on to someone’s land.
In other words, the Irish government did exactly what the BBC is speaking out against here?
Yup – and the much vaunted new “Localism” bill has absolutely nothing in it to change the special treatment Pikeys get from the HM planning inspectorate. Absolutely useless. And no doubt one of the reasons for inaction is the Tory’s fear of being portrayed as the nasty party by the BBC if they so much as raise a finger to rebalance planning laws.
I cut out an item from the DT reporting DC to be going to introduce something like the Irish should the Tories win the election. Perhaps time to remind Tory M.Ps. of that?
“The more information that comes to light about the murder of Abdel Fattah Younes the more troubling the affair becomes.
According to Ali Tarhouni, a minister with the National Transitional Council, members of the Obaida Ibn Jarrah Brigade, an Islamist group allied with the rebels, killed the general and two other commanders and burned their bodies.
This will feed growing doubts about the armed opposition, about its ability to govern and fight as a cohesive group and about the influence of Islamist factions.”
Ian Pannell, BBC Tripoli
Ian, the uprising has been Islamist all along just like the one in Syria. Only the one here is directed against the old Islamist’s enemy, Gaddafi, while in Syria it’s against the Alevite Al Assad group and, funnily enough , against Shia Iran.
Islamist are Sunni.
In both cases Saudi and the Gulf States are providing the cash.
Saudi and the Gulf Cooperation Council crushed the Bahraini Shia.
Egypt, with Saudi cash, seems to be heading for a Sunni Islamist future with the Musloim Brotherhood and its Salafist allies.
So many contradictions and ironies.
Must be tough being a BBC reporter trying to balance the evidence with the BBC editorial line about Islam.
Arab Spring, anyone.?
“D’ye think the BBC might have too much money?”
http://timworstall.com/2011/07/30/dye-think-the-bbc-might-have-too-much-money/?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+timworstall%2FKTZv+%28Tim+Worstall%29
And on the Olympics, INBBC keeps quite about the special treatment afforded to any Muslim women competitors, which goes totally against any ‘Olympian spirt’, which Beeboids will evoke anyway:
On Track: The Great Olympic Cover-up
(Julie Bindel)
Knickers in a twist? So invested are they in the “muslim as victim” narrative, that the BBC can’t even bring themselves to identify the “gunmen” gulity of murdering a number of people in Pakistan. The nearest they get is “a sectarian attack”. Seasoned observers of the mainstream media, skilled in reading bewteen the lines, will have deduced the fact that the “gunmen” involved in the “sectarian” attacks are, in fact, also Muslims. Can someone say so? They would – and do – when its Catholic vs Protestant.
A short phamplet on Orwell’s newspeak is long overdue.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-south-asia-14352164
oft repeated here louise, but nice to hear it again 🙂
bbc better be careful., being such racist, islamophobic, bigots
…wouldn t it be more PC to, to use there own beyond ridiculous
moniker
“Sectarian attack…the P Word…youths suspected.. a FAR right connection maybe considered”
there we are….much better
This is classic BBC online editing: I know ‘Shia’ and ‘Pakistan’ mean it’s clear but you have to get to the very bottom to actually see the word Islam.
Please note they have now added “Muslims” in the first apragraph, I’m pretty sure it wasn’t there before, just “Shia”. No doubt keeping an eye on BBC!
Minor but clear bias.
Bias being a state of mind in which assumptions and attitudes colour the way in which events are interpreted and reported.
The subject is the naming and re-naming of streets to reflect the changing values or interests of society. Many 19th century streets in the the growing industrial towns with rising populations were named in honour of the royal family etc.
There has been a trend to re-name and discard.
The reporters first choice examines the appearance of the ‘Mandela Street’ phenomenon in the 1980’s.
Now watch the bias swing into action.
“In the 1980s, the UK had a wave of renaming places after Nelson Mandela. With then-Prime Minister Margaret Thatcher reportedly regarding Mandela as a terrorist, such namings were often by more left-wing councils and groups. The trend was immortalised in the sitcom Only Fools and Horses for the block of flats the Trotters lived in.
Today, of course, Mandela is an uncontroversial figure, hailed from all parts of the political spectrum.”
There it is. Margaret Thatcher reportedly….terrorist….today, of course….uncontroversial.
So Margaret is history, she was wrong, Mandely is uncontroversial.
Hmm…. Really.
Second point.
“Attitudes to people can change over time. It used to be common to name streets after notables of the British Empire. In 2002, efforts were made to change the name of a street housing a large Sikh temple in Southall, west London. Havelock Road was named after Sir Henry Havelock, who was prominent during the Indian Mutiny of 1857.”
Clearly, Clare, the writer, is telling us that Havelock and the Indian Mutiny were a problem for the Sikhs and that the street containing the Gurdwara was slightly less than PC. Perhaps the council thought so. Who knows.
It is a matter of record that Sikh (and Gurkha) troops remained loyal (to the Queen) throughout during the Mutiny.
But how many readers would know that.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/magazine-14323173
The Beeboid who wrote that is a racist. She pre-judged their behavior and assumed thoughts on their behalf, simply because of the color of their skin. Classic racism. I’m not really joking, either.
“The Beeboid who wrote that is a racist. She pre-judged their behavior and assumed thoughts on their behalf…”
You might want to withdraw that accusation, seeing as there was a campaign about Havelock in 2002. There is absolutely nothing in the article (one tiny paragraph) to imply it was a common view amongst Sikhs – that is just pure invention by RGH.
Dez. tell us who led the drive, and the percentage of the local Sikh population who were for it. Then tell me that the Beeboid who wrote had specific demographic information and was writing strictly from facts and did not make a judgment based on assumptions due to their ethnicity. Please show your work.
Have you read the article?
“In 2002, efforts were made to change the name of a street housing a large Sikh temple in Southall, west London.”
That is just a statement of fact.
Forgive me for my lack of understanding but what “judgment based on assumptions due to their ethnicity” are you referring to?
Scott/Dez, that low hanging fruit that you thought was in your reach appears to be out of your grasp dont you think? She mentions a Sikh Temple and the reason why a name change is sought. The implication is very clear. Poor reporting if what people reasonably adduce isn’t the case.
Of course the BBC is institutionally racist, the BBC employs UAF racists/islamist racists and the most dangerous of all types of racist, the white middle class racist. The BBC has become a Mecca for intolerant racists, they join an insular self referencing group of like minded people where prejudice and racism is not challenged as long as it does not conflict with the group political narrative and ideology.
The BBC has become the voice of the bigoted prejudiced minority, the voice of the elite who having pushed their ideological enemies from the pulpit they now enjoy they have morphed into the very same kind of people they fought so hard against.
Animal farm: And the animals looked from pig to man and from man to pig and yet again from pig to man and could no longer tell which was which.
…they have morphed into the very same kind of people they fought so hard against.
Heh, the irony of it.
For Dez,
“Attitudes to people can change over time. It used to be common to name streets after notables of the British Empire. In 2002, efforts were made to change the name of a street housing a large Catholic Church in Southall, west London. Havelock Road was named after Sir Henry Havelock, who was prominent during the Indian Mutiny of 1857.”
or,
“Attitudes to people can change over time. It used to be common to name streets after notables of the British Empire. In 2002, efforts were made to change the name of a street housing a large post office in Southall, west London. Havelock Road was named after Sir Henry Havelock, who was prominent during the Indian Mutiny of 1857.”
The reader would say, ‘yes, that my be a fact but why mention it. It is not relevant.
But to mention the Gurdwara in connection to a desire to rename Havelock street…a name which had developed negative connotaton with it being linked to the Mutiny of the Bengal sepoys carries meaning as the Sikhs were actors in the events of the time.
To Clare the change of the street name is validated by the large Sikh temple otherwise she wouldn’t have mentioned it.
She assumed that that was reason enough.
One can but deploy logic on lefties in the hope that one day it might rub off on their thinking.
I doubt the BBC know much about it and imagine the whole of Indian “for” the rebellion…they need only go to Wiki: look at the map: those coloured black are the states actually rebelling! Note all the “loyal” states, states actively adiing the British or neutral states. A MASSIVE massive majority of regions and population.
I love it when actual evidence like this is highlighted. The BBC world view is incredibly narrow and displays a breathtaking ignorance of reality.
The BBC are laughably ill informed and wilfully ignorant of history, they take the default position that the British empire was evil and hated around the world.
The BBC collective see films like braveheart/jewl in the crown/Ghandi and believe them to be an accurate representation of history.
You missed out “The Patriot”, which is probably even worse than “Braveheart” : any theories as to the giant chip Mel Gibson seems to have agin’ us ?
“Clearly, Clare, the writer, is telling us that Havelock and the Indian Mutiny were a problem for the Sikhs and that the street containing the Gurdwara was slightly less than PC.”
Erm, no. What she’s telling us is that in 2002 there was a campaign to change the name of the street because of Havelock’s role in the Indian Mutiny.
And guess what, the reason she’s telling us that is not because “The Sikhs”™ had a problem with it, but because in 2002 there was a campaign to change the name of the street because of Havelock’s role in the Indian Mutiny.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/2003119.stm
Scez, try using logic instead of repetition.
you sure you don’t mean scuzz?;)
it’s a fool who looks for logic in the beeboid leftist
Scez = Scott + Dez 🙂
oh I realised that
thought scuzz was more apt
“Scez, try using logic instead of repetition.”
Drunk this early on a Sunday, hippie ? 😉
Who needs Formula 1 when you have all these royal weddings to cover instead?
I’m also sick of hearing the BBC tell me that the President is the only one trying to save us all from ourselves, and is working to get the two political parties to agree on how much more money we need to borrow and please God let’s make sure we don’t have to do this again before it’s time to re-elect Him.
I’ve switched off the News Channel and will just wait until the delayed broadcast of yesterday’s Tristan & Isolde from Bayreuth starts.
Turkey going to hell in a handcart for 2 days now…still not on the BBC.
http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2011/jul/30/turkey-military-chiefs-resign-sledgehammer
“Chiefs of general staff, army, navy and air force take ‘early retirement’ in protest at detention of 250 officers”
Al Jazeera on the ball…
http://english.aljazeera.net/news/europe/2011/07/2011729153617904781.html
STILL nothing on Turkey (I’ve checked all the news pages and last night took screen shots of the the Home, Europe and Mid East news pages in case they tried a stealth edit, shouldn’t have bothered.
The news was in the newspaers here on Saturday (i.e. this is a situation boiling since Friday in one of the most powerful near neighbours, NATO ally, EU entrant hopeful and major Muslim nation.
They have time and space to report a mine blast killing 16 in Ukraine and the opening of an Arnold Schwarzenegger museum in Austria.
A truly excellent article!
The BBC, Breivik, the EDL and Islam
by Paul Weston
http://gatesofvienna.blogspot.com/2011/07/bbc-breivik-edl-and-islam.html
And a question for INBBC:
Muslim encouraged jihadis to attack MPs — where is the investigation of what inspired him?
I heard this reported on R4 yesterday but curiously they didn’t mention once that he was “A brown skinned, brown eyed, dark haired Muslim”
Strange that eh?