Monday morning and time to tell me what you think of Big Broadcasting Brother….
OPEN THREAD
Bookmark the permalink.
Search Biased BBC
Recent Comments
- Broadcasting-on-Behalf-of-the-Caliphate April 19, 2024 at 4:29 pm on Midweek 17th April 2024He was trying to break the Chinese national record for the half marathon and missed out by under two seconds....
- Zephir April 19, 2024 at 4:28 pm on Midweek 17th April 2024The cream of the page 3 girls on the Islamic Times, to titillate the readers [img]https://i.postimg.cc/rssYLrRP/main-qimg-544d32ea42...
- Broadcasting-on-Behalf-of-the-Caliphate April 19, 2024 at 4:20 pm on Midweek 17th April 2024Thoughtful: "Israel gets to save face to the world for those who look no further than a headline, and we...
- MarkyMark April 19, 2024 at 3:34 pm on Midweek 17th April 2024Comment "She has no recollection of ever being married to Mr Murrell." https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wmr5sgdWjXw [img]https://pbs....
- MarkyMark April 19, 2024 at 3:21 pm on Midweek 17th April 2024Congressman Trey Gowdy | This House Would Vote Blue No Matter Who https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EquF22OeqIA "Let's let the grown ups handl...
- MarkyMark April 19, 2024 at 3:19 pm on Midweek 17th April 2024So as Gamesa executives see it, they made the right bet by coming to China. And they insist that they...
- Fedup2 April 19, 2024 at 3:17 pm on Midweek 17th April 2024Thoughtful - wearing my armchair General hat I wondered if Israel used the missile thing as a distraction whilst it...
- Thoughtful April 19, 2024 at 3:13 pm on Midweek 17th April 2024Some really confusing messages comming out of the media regards the alleged attack on Iran by parties unknown. I say...
- MarkyMark April 19, 2024 at 2:27 pm on Midweek 17th April 2024Constable Savage: Racist Police (Not The Nine O'Clock News) https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=teSPN8sVbFU
- MarkyMark April 19, 2024 at 2:24 pm on Midweek 17th April 2024Funny Police Sketches https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4PTMO1qIyCY
Categories
agw anti-American anti-conservative anti-Israel anti Israel. pro Palestinian Antisemitism BBC - sickeningly biased at all times. BBC agenda BBC bias bbc bias and balance. bbc bias by omission BBC censorship BBC Question Time BBC selectivity bias Biased BBC climate change dhimmis general thread immigration Islam israel Mark Mardell obama obama bias Obamalove open thread pro-labour pro-palestinian pro EU pro Hamas pro Islam pro Labour bias pro Obama PRO OBAMA AT ALL COSTS. pro Obama BBC agenda question time question time live Richard Black save gordon. USA politics US economy US News US politics US presidential elections
Deliberately suffered the torture of News24 at 10am: First story Europe 10mins, second story RBS 6 mins. In the second story a 3 second reference to Brown ‘light touch’ regulation. The whole banking fiasco can be layed at Brown’s feet with appalling regulation he set up. So bBC emphasise the FSA role as not being adequate, who setup the FSA and it’s lack of powers.
You cannot operate a bank without a license, the gov of the day has considerable power over them, it would be reasonable to hang them out to dry for their complicity in the debacle, 3 seconds mention of Brown, thats all no comment even mentions Labour.
No hint of new labour mistakes, no mention of Gordon Brown and his pivotal role in RBS and his relationship to the RBS board of the time.
A completely labour free report that makes no sense unless the last labour regimes role is highlighted.
Peston’s 1st programme on the Collapse of the Western Economies (not the title, along those lines) apparently failed to mention Brown or indeed Labour as part of the problem. Instead it was the banks – who did what Brown and Labour enabled them to do.
Beyond one-eyed
The last time I looked, Brown’s mansion house speeches were still be available online. Fat cat lunches with his banking buddies and most definitely hung by his own petard!
He really is the one eyed idiot and hypocrite he has become.
Reported eArnings in the last six months, despite saying he’d concerpntrate on Charity Work are close to half a million quid!
What the BBC fail ot point out is that when the bansk were supervised by the BoE PRIOR to the one eyed idiot they ran well. Brown broke something that didn’t need fixing.
Only a quick one: Caught this whilst chanel hoping on the Radio.
Classic FM’s 0930 news laid the blame of RBS’s collapse on RBS (in many ways), Labour Gov’t Regulators and the FSA acknowledged it’s mistakes.
BBC Radio 2’s 0930 news, blaimed the FSA (gov’t first natch) and RBS. What no Labour?
BBC Frozen Planet filmed in zoo (allegedly!): http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/top-stories/2011/12/12/frozen-planet-fakery-row-polar-bear-filmed-in-zoo-115875-23628713/
David Attenborough alleged to be animatronic puppet, with AGW pre-programmed chip.
Last night the BBC insisted: “The commentary accompanying the sequence is carefully worded so it doesn’t mislead the audience.’
***************************************************
Or to put it another way, ‘the commentary was carefully worded so as to convey impression A, although a forensic examination of the words used would allow us to argue that we really meant to convey impression B.
Sometime hero of the BBC, and sometime barrister, Tony Blair was an oftime user of this tactic.
I think it’s called, ‘lying through your back teeth’.
I watched that show. I was particularly impressed with a sequence in which Dave finished a piece to camera, which than panned across the Arctic landscape as the snowfields miraculously melted in a matter of seconds.
Imagine my dismay and disappointment when I learned this was time-lapse trickery!!
Again, you’re being obtuse. 🙂
Do you watch Darren Brown?
He engages in trickery, but he’s quite open about the fact that it’s trickery, so no-one feels conned.
But there’s a difference between that and showing a picture of a polar bear in a zoo, whilst giving the impression that it was filmed somewhere near the North Pole! LOL!
Nice try, though! 😉
Jeff
Well, anyone who feels conned by such techniques, especially with regard to a nurturing polar bear and her cubs – in the depths of an Arctic winter – deserve to be consumed by a pointless and ineffectual resentment.
Re – ‘Well, anyone who feels conned by such techniques, especially with regard to a nurturing polar bear and her cubs – in the depths of an Arctic winter – deserve to be consumed by a pointless and ineffectual resentment.’
Er, why?!?
I’m genuinely bemused by that comment!
Jeff
Is this where using the word ‘obtuse’ is allowed?
Whenever one sees sequences underground in nature programmes -be they little rodents scurrying about in their burrows, or ferocious polar bears hibernating- it’s a set-up. How can it not be?
In the case of a polar bear, I dare say the insurance alone was enough to make resorting to a zoo worthwhile, to say nothing of the technical challenges, or indeed the welfare of the animals.
Not really – it’s false representation! LOL!
It’s a bit like doing a programme about NASA’s missions to the moon, and getting some actors in a studio to pretend to be astronauts walking on the moon, without telling the viewer that the footage was shot in Hertfordshire, not in a lunar crater!
Sorry, but it’s you who’s being obtuse! 😉
Jeff
Come now. Your example is disingenuous. There’s is a finite amount of Apollo footage -all of it very familiar, as well you know.
Or perhaps you making veiled accusations as to the veracity of that Apollo footage, eh? You’re not one of those ‘Apollo was faked’ moonbats, I hope!
Seriously, though, it strikes me that the main advantage -as far as fee-payers are concerned- of shooting that footage in a zoo, is that the producers knew <i> where to find a nurturing polar bear</i>
Imagine the cost of scouring the Antarctic in the hope of somehow locating a bear’s den, hidden from view under the snow, in mid-winter; neigh-on impossible, I’d say, even with some kind of heat-seeking technology. For what was five minutes broadcast time. Not commercially viable, I’d have thought.
Anyway, as to misinforming the viewer. One has to ask: exactly how misinformed have they been? It’s a nature programme. Entertainment, with cuddly bear cubs. Not exactly a voting issue.
Apparently referring to the same bear family, the naturalist said: “But on these side slopes beneath the snow new lives are beginning. The cubs are born blind and tiny. An early birth is easier on the mother.”
His commentary continued: “In two more months polar bear families will emerge on the snowy slopes all round the Arctic.” The camera then moves from the snowy tundra to the dark nest, watching the cubs nuzzle up to their mother, as he says: “But for now they lie protected within their icy cocoons.”
Read more: http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/top-stories/2011/12/12/frozen-planet-fakery-row-polar-bear-filmed-in-zoo-115875-23628713/#ixzz1gKN7dBZw
Waltonwins…this is misleading, obviously so, it would be obtuse not to admit it or pretend it wasn’t so. And remember, this is a lefty rag scoop.
On second thoughts, they did strap a thingy around one bear’s neck in the show. They’d know where to find that one, of course. But still…
Lefty rag scoop.
It’s only news because of David Attenborough’s prestige and popularity. His shows are the BBC’s the state-of the-art flagships. He’s also a red flag to climate deniers at the mo, as well. so yeah. point being had this been some random Discovery show, no-one would give a monkeys.
But if you want to talk about ‘misleading’ by nit-picking the script, then the whole show is misleading! The whole format is up a cul-de-sac. All it wants to do is finese the camera techniques. Isn’t this show just a remake of an earlier one he did in the 80s/90s? With added dollops of self-regard at the end of each epsiode.
I dare say you feel obliged to spin the ‘misleading’ angle, since BBC bias is your game. I mean, wouldn’t it be great if this could reflect badly on his climate change position? I’d say the hand would have to be pretty weak, to need to resort to that.
How would you spin this:
ATTENBOROUGH CREW EATEN BY POLAR BEARS IN ARCTIC STORM
“ATTENBOROUGH CREW EATEN BY POLAR BEARS IN ARCTIC STORM”
Nature doing what it does.,.they should’ve filmed in the zoo…
😉
So it is OK to give a false impression to get their truth across hmm so that mean any TV and paper can use this and you have no problem with it cool !
This site is most amusing. A bunch of right-wing free market fundies bitter that the BBC does not perfectly reflect their views. I can see how the license fee must rankle with you guys!
“Deliberately suffered the torture,” says one, above. Save yourselves the pain and stick with Fox, is my advice. Life’s too short.
What do you mean by the term ‘right-wing’?
By ‘right wing’ I mean right wing. I trust that’s clear.
Re: ‘By ‘right wing’ I mean right wing. I trust that’s clear.’ – It’s clear that you’re being obtuse… 🙂
One man’s right wing is another man’s centre ground.
Some people call David Cameron right wing, for example. I would argue that he’s not, and that someone with his outlook could easy be accepted as a Labour MP candidate these days. His views aren’t that different from Tony Blair’s, when you think about it…
Jeff
So, Cameron is not right wing. interesting… and here I was, presuming he was leader of the Conservative Party!
What would it take to be labelled ‘right wing’ these days, I wonder?
Waltonwins –
You need to broaden your perspective then! 😉
The distinction between left and right in modern British politics is largely artificial…
Things aren’t as clear-cut as you think. Perhaps this blog will open your mind, as it seems you’re a victim of so-called progressive indoctrination…
Jeff
“The distinction between left and right in modern British politics is largely artificial”
Agreed. But it does not follow that the terms themselves have lost their meaning, or cannot be applied.
As for indoctrination, I am no more a victim than you.
‘Victim’ and ‘indoctrination’ are strong words -or should be. Again, the latter is too often taken to mean ‘the means by which any view other than my own is made’.
By right wing you mean anyone who doesn’t sign up to the BBC’s twisted view of the world?
Are you forced to fund this site?
If you bother to stop snorting for a few minutes none of us here mind what the BBC pumps out so long as we’re not forced to fund it.
Fox News can pump out what it likes as no one in America is made to pay for it.
That is always the one thing you thicko’s on the left don’t get.
Don’t confuse it, or tip off the programmers.
It’s a glitch in the Turing bot, simiiiar to the mandatory ‘deniers’ on any (A)GW debate, so their mates can ID a nifty comeback to ‘the man’ and chip in for a 1/2 of shandy at the next gathering to relatives in appreciation for the latest self-detonation in the desert.
Other hints are *yawn* (not used), an appeal to how quaint it all is (used), etc.
Have to say, trotting out the ‘why don’t you go elseewhere’ one is a welcome archive return from the logic, and irony-free zone.
Don’t force me to pay for the bBC and I will stop immediately.
Being force fed left wing ideology, and having to pay for this privilige through the licence fee, is not my idea of fairness.
By your comments, it’s safe to assume that you approve of the BBC’s Marxist leanings; Well good for you.
BUT why should I subsidise you, and your ideology, which I do not agree with, under threat of imprisonment if I do not cough up?
‘Marxist leanings’? The BBC? Are we watching the same channels? You lot seem highly sensitive to the gradations of meaning when they apply to the right side of the spectrum, but more than cavalier when it comes to the left side.
I’m not surprised, mind. It’s the same mindset that labels Obama as ‘socialist’ and so on. Anything, in fact, that is not full-blown free market fundamentalism (FMF) is labelled marxist or communist. Similarly, everything that reflects a view other than FMF is ‘propaganda’.
It is an attitude typical of outliers.
Re: – ‘You lot seem highly sensitive to the gradations of meaning when they apply to the right side of the spectrum, but more than cavalier when it comes to the left side.’
If I were to come across an example of right-wing bias on the BBC, I’d complain about it. However, I haven’t done so yet…
Have a look at the opinion pieces on the BBC news website. They ALL advocate left-wing views! Feel free to prove me wrong! If you can find an opinion piece advocating nuclear power or capital punishment, or saying Britain should leave the EU, I’ll probably faint with shock!
Jeff
Re: ‘It is an attitude typical of outliers’ – It is an attitude typical of the left to engage in name calling because they’ve run out of logical arguments! 😉
President Obama has run up a huge national debt and has partially socialised healthcare in the US, so there’s a case to be made for calling him a socialist. And the BBC is into social Marxism; I’m not sure how else one could describe their obsession with equality and political correctness…
You should stick around; we might convert you yet! LOL!
Jeff
Forgive me Jeff, haven’t got the hang of this place yet. Describing someone as ‘obtuse’ is not name-calling, it seems, whereas the term ‘outlier’ will raise the heckles somewhat. I’m beginning to see. 🙂
Re: – ‘Describing someone as ‘obtuse’ is not name-calling, it seems, whereas the term ‘outlier’ will raise the heckles somewhat. I’m beginning to see.’
Sadly, you’re not… 🙂
I described your comments as obtuse; you described people as outliers.
You might find this link useful – http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ad_hominem
Jeff
I prefer to be called obtuse than to be patronised with dictionary definitions.
If you wish to describe the comment, rather than me, then learn to define the article without using the second-person personal pronoun, as in: ‘you’re being obtuse’.
Re:’I prefer to be called obtuse than to be patronised with dictionary definitions.’ –
What’s patronising about telling someone why they’re wrong about something?
Re: ‘If you wish to describe the comment, rather than me, then learn to define the article without using the second-person personal pronoun, as in: ‘you’re being obtuse’. –
Now who’s being pedantic? LOL!
I sense you’re getting a bit agitated, so in the words of the dragons, ‘I’m out!’ 🙂
Have a nice day. 🙂
Jeff
don’t fret now, not agitated 😎
I prefer to be called obtuse than to be patronised with dictionary definitions.
If you wish to describe the comment, rather than me, then learn to define the article without using the second-person personal pronoun, as in: ‘you’re being obtuse’.
Problem is that left wingers don’t see bias when the items they watch,listen to or read correspond to their ideological viewpoint. It’s like being immunised against infection – it doesn’t affect them. Some left wingers actually believe they hold the centre ground in their poilitical viewpoint. It’s also become routine for them to use the term “right-wing” as a term of abuse against anyone with views contrary to theirs.
I’d venture to suggest that the term “left wing” is more perjorative, seeing as how that ideology has been directly responsible for at least 150,000,000 deaths since the beginning of the twentieth century. It’s not an ideology I’d be comfortable following.
I think you make first class points in defence of ‘Frozen Planet’, Waltonwins. Unfortunately here, there is an unseemly ‘BBCHS’ (BBC hatred syndrome) similar to that which many BBC journalists suffer from in relation to George Bush.
Criticising David Attenborough is a bit like criticising the Queen. One’s instinctive reaction is to see them horsewhipped. The man is a Great British Institution who embodies the best of British. I disagree with him on AGW, but the man’s more than earnt his place in the sun to say what he thinks in a docu.
As for the ‘misleading’ polar birth scene, he’s absolutely right. Why, in the middle of a docu, do you ruin the atmosphere and spoil the viewers pleasure by slipping in ‘This was filmed in a zoo’?
DH and his colleagues made the right call. They were in no way trying to mislead the public. On Frozen Planet’s BBC website they showed how the sequence was filmed.
I dont think we do the case against BBC bias much good by being biased against the BBC!
I tend to agree with you here Hippie. To me this business of whether the bears were filmed in the raw or in a zoo does not show any particular bias; it’s just a programme-maker’s trick.
I watched the whole Frozen Planet series apart from this last one because I knew it was the Global-Warming-Scam one and I’m sick of the BBC hectoring me when I know they are basically lying, and I don’t want to see Sir David Attenbrough embarrassing himself in such a way. That is what people on this site should be criticising, not whether they used a trick to get intimate pictures of Polar Bear cubs.
As far as Waltontwit goes; on the specific point I tend to agree with him, but otherwise he is making himself look a total arse. The others have rightly encouraged him to prove his lack of coherent argument to the point he apparently really believes that the BBC is not biased despite all the genuine evidence on this site.
thumbs up hippiepooter agree with all your points, excepting the fact I agree with him on AGW, naturally.. 🙂
Donning my tinfoil hat, I’d say this current furore is rather too soft and cuddly to be taken seriously. It just reminds everyone how much they love Sir David, and his shows. Funnily enough, the dvd was released only last week, in time for the Christmas rush.
‘I dont think we do the case against BBC bias much good by being biased against the BBC!’
Not sure that makes sense in context, as the issue surrounds factual claims. However, I am in the camp not unduly ‘bovvered’ by the ‘tirck’.
I just notet which paper was pretty excited by it all in the first place.
Not getting its usual front page prominence in the reviews, on will be bound?
‘Does not perfectly reflect their views’?
I’d be happy if the BBC didn’t reflect my views, providing it was balanced.
Instead, the BBC is basically the unofficial broadcasting wing of the Guardian!
This article might open your eyes to the kind of thing I’m talking about: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1349506/Left-wing-bias-Its-written-BBCs-DNA-says-Peter-Sissons.html
Try looking critically at the BBC’s coverage of Mr Cameron’s veto of Europe. Ask yourself if what you’re seeing is balanced. For example, what does the BBC’s use of the word ‘isolated’ every 30 seconds or so tell you?
Jef
When it comes to Cameron’s veto, the BBC appears to be in line with every other major news network/paper in Europe and beyond. I think ‘isolated’ accurately conveys the effect of Cameron’s ‘negotiations’.
Perhaps’ you’d care to argue otherwise?
Besides, isn’t isolation that which eurosceptics desperately crave in regards to Europe?
We always were isolated in the real meaning as we are a island and in the political sense in that we actually said no and give the polls that the b-BBC so love when it gives them the answers they crave but are very low key about when it shows the PM has judged the mood right in both senses !
Oh and given the list of BBC staffers who are left-wing in politics and are ex Labour/lib members and given the many occasions listed on this site of BBC staff publicly stated their anti Tory sentiments I find your blindness to their left wing dogma funny and sad !
I’m not blind to the BBC’s bias. It reflects the establishment view. The leftwing propaganda it peddles on the EU is the same as that peddled by Tescos and other leading UK companies. Dangerous anti-capitalist stuff.
It seems to me that focusing on ‘isolation’ is a way for the BBC to soft soap this whole thing. It’s kinda obvious. Besides, its that which is stressing the coaltion, supposedly. It’s soft soap to prop up Clegg’s wilting base in the face of the Treasury juggernaut.
The Treasury kept Britain out of the eurozone, awkward for you lot since it means crediting Brown. Now the Treasury has struck again. It’s got nothing to do with left or right wing dogma.
Hi Waltonwins
If we take the BBC’s business and economics department we have
Robert Peston son of a Labour peer and Gordon Brown’s biographer and friend
Stephanie Flanders part of the Ed Miliband and Ed Balls set who on Newsnight said she hates George osborne
Paul Mason leader of the Newsnight chapel.
My point would be not that there is a point of view that should not be represented but that all of them represent the same point of view.
Where is the alternative view in the BBC seconomics department?
Waltonloses, and disappears into the sunset…
Patrick J Walton, A.K.A. “waltonwins”, I can see an awful lot of subscriptions to various BBC sites and naturally the Guardian newspaper on your Twitter feed below, but little else in the way of variety.
P.S. can you explain what you mean by your tweet: ‘” Can’t wait to see Jeru the Damaja and his freaky freaky flow controlling the mic like Fidel Castro tonight”….Strange comparison methinks.
http://twitter.com/waltonwins
http://en-gb.facebook.com/patrickjwalton
No problem with the word Isolation and many of the other buzzwords that the BBC and EUrophiles use and make up .
We`re just fed up with the BBC meme that this is a Bad Thing and we should do anything to not be isolated .
Which they dont understand means having our money thrown into this project , unfair trading conditions so we lose jobs , loss of sovereignty, mass immigration , judges implementing looney human rights laws and loads of other proper Bad Things .
Dressed up by the BBC as Good Things .
‘the BBC appears to be in line with every other major news network/paper in Europe’
Not sure that’s helping your BBC as an impartial spokesperson for the nation case, unless you are appealing to a non-UK audience on its behalf.
Waltonwins, Are you American?
Simon Kisby and cisbio are a couple of the handles he has used on here before
I think he’s trying to give the impression that he has just stumbled across biased bbc
😉
hates Israel,Srah Palin etc etc
big Chomsky/Palestinian fan though
you get the picture……..
I’m flattered..
Waltonwins is another QED in the Dez mould.
“This site is most amusing. A bunch of right-wing free market fundies bitter that the BBC does not perfectly reflect their views. I can see how the license fee must rankle with you guys! ”
I doubt anybody would wish the BBC perfectly reflected their views. Why do you think this?
I don;t pay the licence fee, havent for four years, have written to the BBC explaining why I will not pay the licence fee and told them I welcome being taken to court, as I intend to opt for Crown Court – the Beeb can’t stop me, where I get my say and present evidence of the Beebs Bias and charter breaches in front of a jury. If they find me guilty fine, I’ll accept that and pay what I have to, but I don’t think they will. In any case, 4 years and counting – still no summons. Wonder why they’re not bothering
Save yourselves the pain and stick with Fox, is my advice.
You forgot to throw in the obligatory ‘Daily Mail reader’ reference, to complete your lazy, predictable ad hominem. Bore.
How can we “stick with Fox ” unles we Stick with the BBC because we have to buy BBC before we can choose to buy Fox ?
‘How can we “stick with Fox ” unless we stick with the BBC because we have to buy BBC before we can choose to buy Fox ?’
So good, I think worth getting up on the ‘recent comments’ list twice.
Luvviedom in full force on the BBC ‘news’ feed twitter at the mo’, with even a few from the home team conceding that the Graun conceding that, as such, the NOTW may not have deleted emails during the hacking might have put a different public perception on things.
Frankly, that rag was no loss, but it would have been better had it been for valid reasons, along with any others using the ‘techniques’ they adopted, as opposed to babies on bayonet style rabble rousing that serves the cause of public trust in ANY medium not one jot.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-15752002
‘It’s the details which will linger in the mind’
Half the story, especially when guided by editorial decision on whicxh half gets left out, it not journalism.
Words simply cannot express my anger at the BBC…
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-16131200
Evidence that all of us climate skeptics have a very real battle on our hands with the BBC in the fight against biased climate reporting. The above story is so utterly one-sided as to be proof positive of our very worst fears. I am now getting fearful of just how much damage the BBC can do if left unchecked to misreport and load the dice with such clearly politicised stories. It feels to me that the Corporation is now utterly out of control on this issue in particular.
Isn’t it odd that the BBC haven’t picked up on Nick Clegg’s pygmy comment, given that they’ve shown themselves to be good at reporting gaffes (at least when they’re made by Tory grandees)?
Jeff
A bit un-PC I would say. Surprised that the BBC let that one slip by, it’s a bit like how they treat Obama’s series of gaffes with the few that Bush or Palin managed.
Not so much odd as entirely predictable. They’re with Nick 😀
Bit racist wasn’t it, I don’t know if it was an insult to Britain or to the pygmies. And what have pygmies done to anyone to deserve this.
However if it was a Conservative politician who said this, the BBC would bring on some pygmy rights campaigner to complain of descrimination and ask the said politician for an apology!
If Pygmys are so isolated how come Nick Clegg knows about them ?
Here’s a new one which sounds like a mixture of tabloid- and Beeboid-speak: a disrepute probe.
According to The People, The Beeboid Corporation is not happy and has told Jeremy Clarkson to shut up following his comments which led to 31 000 complaints:
BBC chiefs have launched a disrepute probe into Clarkson, 51, following his controversial comments about public sector workers and suicide victims.
http://www.people.co.uk/2011/12/11/jeremy-clarkson-centre-of-bbc-disrepute-probe-after-public-sector-strike-comments-102039-23626301/
And while they are at it, there is plenty of scope for disrepute probes over at Twitter.
The real truth about the Eurozone fracas is that France was leading an attack on the City of London under the cloak of saving the Euro.
Two results.
1 France has fractured the BBC’s precious bloody EU, possible for good.
2 France and Germany have once again failed to save the Euro – the compact fails to match what the markets require.
If a part-time American blogger can see this and report it – at least as one view of the real outcome – why can’t the BBC ?
The BBC runs the biggest website in the world. But its coverage of the crisis has been remarkably shallow, as well as biased.
The US blogger’s take – in a nutshell his post demolishes the whole BBC narrative :
http://www.powerlineblog.com/archives/2011/12/eurocrash-update-2.php
Occasionally I feel sorry for BBC Radio Five. It is a tough gig down there in the trenches trying to persuade the Great British unwashed to loyally toe the line of the BBC agenda.
The hoi polloi prove stubbornly reluctant to shed tears for August rioters. They are just not sufficiently sympathetic to the human rights of illegal traveller camps. There’s not enough support out there for the public sector strikers. They fail to take Toby and Jocasta to their hearts when all the kids are asking is to give peace a chance and to bring Glasto to St Paul’s. They even complain when asked to budge up a bit to make way for more immigration.
And to cap it all we Brits just won’t love the EU.
Radio Four has it easy by comparison. That lot in the posh seats are preaching to the converted. No tricky phone-ins for them. It is all Book of the Week and trendy gay vicars (Literally, I’ve heard Saturday Live).
I gave up as a regular listener about the time when PC invaded Ambridge and R4 embarked on its long and passionate affair with Anthony Blair – only ever criticising his government from the left and only feeling miffed when they were eventually jilted for that George Bush over the Iraq business.
So what has been the main thrust of the Beeb’s attack on R5? Well, the Corporation is instutionally biased toward state ownership, high taxation and centralised regulation – and individually employees lean toward the left – they inherently support Labour (shushhhh I’ve let the cat out of the bag). Trouble is Labour is a busted flush for the forseeable future and a compliant lefty-style LibDem party is required. So watch out….like Michael Caine in 1971 the Beeb are going up North to Get Cleggy.
After fridays shock news that the claims made by the Guardian accusing the News of the World of deleteting Milly Dowler’s voicemails were false, will the BBC now give the Guardian the same hostile treatment that it gave to the NoW?.
The BBC have had since Friday to report on this scandal yet they have failed to mention it once.
Absolutely disgraceful.
I wonder if its possible for the NOTW / News International to sue the Guardian over this – sfter all it was the spark that caused the paper to close. Now that could be an interesting court case.
Check out this pathetic defense by the Frozen Planet producer of the dishonest polar bear cub scene. Credit to Victoria Derbyshire for challenging him a bit. Although this doesn’t go far enough.
His defense is really weak. It’s impossible to film a den scene like that in the wild, he says, so they chose to fake it and not “break the mood” of the show by telling the audience what they were doing. Language dodges all over the place, dance, dance, dance. Twitter told him everyone likes the programme, so what’s the problem? He keeps claiming that they didn’t mislead viewers, when obviously they did, which is why he plays the pronoun game. He knew perfectly well what he was doing.
The problem wasn’t that they shouldn’t have shown the scene done in captivity, but that they should have been honest about what it was. But the producer didn’t want to see it that way, and instead claimed that their choice was whether or not to film such a wonderful, important scene in the polar bear’s life cycle at all. That’s not actually the choice they had, of course.
Lessons learned, new guidelines in place, I’m sure.
Our delightful friend Boris Johnson has gave his opinion on the BBC’s recent EU coverage and its fair to say he’s summed it up perfectly: “For some days, the BBC has been telling us in sepulchral tones that we are “isolated” and “marginalised” – as if a decision had been taken to abandon us in our misty island like a bunch of woad-painted savages.” Read more: http://www.telegraph.co.uk/comment/columnists/borisjohnson/8950101/Were-right-about-the-euro-thats-why-Europe-is-angry.html
In the wake of the Mail on Sunday’s scoop about Tory MP Aidan Burley stupidly attending that stag party, the BBC have done a useful compendium of other similar incidents. They seem to have forgotten one key public figure who actually donned the suit himself though: the Shadow Chancellor.
Guido has caught the BBC out again in bias by omission.
All very stupid agreed, and not surprising the BBC amnesia regarding Mr Ed (the Talking Balls)’ prediliction for wearing SS uniform.
But why don’t they criticise anybody for wearing Soviet style clothes or T-shirts with pictures of Lenin, Che Guevara, Castro etc.? No need to answer, my question was rhetorical. There are some mass murderers that the Beboids worship and others that they treat differently.
Or speaking approvingly of Mao; this from 2009 is a fine example.
The BBC run an article on the wearing of Nazi Uniforms, yet forget to mention Mssr Ed Balls.
http://bbc.in/vsmKqd
1960s TV personality Gilbert Harding watched the preview of his “in depth” interview with John Freeman in a BBC editing suite. As he broke down and cried on screen, he leaned forward and watched his performance intently, admiringly. The “crying moment” has long been accepted in BBC history as a moment of truth on TV. Reality? What’s that?
Esther Rantzen filmed HOURS of vox pops before using 35 secs in her TV shows to illustrate what ordinary people thought about a subject. Reality? What’s that?
Once, when my guest in a local radio phone-in was a (Tory) MP and there were zero calls, during a traffic break he said, “Ask me about fox hunting. I’ll make those damn phones hum”. When I did, he began his answer with the annoyance: “Well, if you really must go there…” he growled, winking, and then made the phones hum with outrageous statements. He was pleased. I was pleased. Reality? What’s that?
Nothing – NOTHING – happens on TV by accident. It is ALL in some way staged. Where do I put the camera? What do I say? What do I cut out in editing? Decisions. Truth is recreated to reflect the views of the reporter/producer.
Haven’t we seen enough faked “riot footage”? Haven’t we heard about producers paying young thugs to burn telephone boxes? Don’t we know that reporters take teddy bears in their luggage overseas so they can lay them on earthquake ravaged houses to create a tragic image? Do you really believe “Who’s Line Is This Anyway?” has no script?
We’re ‘hoodwinked’ every hour of every day, so why does it come as a surprise that nature documentary makers fake footage? Duh!
Sound effects in nature documentaries are faked all the time, have been forever. But there’s a difference between fake footstep sounds in the snow for a real picture and an entire scene not being what it was. Personally, I don’t see how telling the audience it’s impossible to film a den scene in the wild for all the important reasons the producer gave, and then saying, “So we’ve filmed this in captivity, but it’s just as valid, this is what it would look like,” would have ruined the show. Everyone would be captivated by the cute cubs and wouldn’t have objected or felt the mood broken.
It was a poor decision by the producers, and they knew it at the time, so actually worked to play word games in the script to fudge it.
Sound effects reminds me, David. I once worked on a documentary about shipwrecks in which aqualungs were featured. It was only when we tried to add sund to the mute underwater film that we realized there is no such thing as underwater “sounds” of an aqualung. So we did what countless others did before us – we used the sound of a kettle boiling.
BBC-NUJ-LABOUR (inc R.PESTON) censor out criticisms of BALLS-BROWN-BLAIR online in relation to massive failures of RBS and FSA.
In contrast, ‘Evening Standard’ has:
“FSA blames Blair, Brown and Balls for RBS collapse”
http://www.thisislondon.co.uk/standard/article-24020420-fsa-blames-blair-brown-and-balls-for-rbs-collapse.do
It seems BBC-NUJ-Labour could be politically manoeuvering against E. MILIBAND, and E. BALLS in favour of Mrs BALLS:
“BBC Parliament Advert Ignores Ed Miliband But Gives Starring Role To Yvette Cooper”
http://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/2011/12/12/bbc-parliament-advert-ed-miliband-yvette-cooper_n_1143012.html?ref=uk-politics
How the BBC long for a female leader of the Labour party and another femaile Prime Minister so THATCHER is no longer the only female Prime Minister that UK has had.
Yes, Robert Peston does it too. He even shifts blame away from the FSA by saying that it was really the Basel rules which made RBS look solid when it wasn’t, and it wasn’t the FSA’s job to figure it out. Well, who tied the FSA’s hands behind their back, Robert? As predicted, Spot the Missing Chancellor and Prime Minister.
Peston also tries to tell everyone that having the taxpayer buy RBS was a qualified success.
Ah Bless, we have a new friend.
Welcome Johnboy or whatever your name is.
Anyway, the point about the Polar bear bit is quite simple.
The deception is small but it is no less a deception.
Its like discovering a famous singer is miming or a van gogh used painting by numbers.
Good old ‘national treasure’ Dave is a brilliant broadcaster with many decades of fine program making behind him.
Here in Frozen Waffle he is trading on his past to push his political agenda, namely the watermellon Chicken lickin sky fairy theory of CAGW.
What is sad is that he is caught out in a little white lie while expounding a big dark one.
I am a carbon based life form. In fact all life as we know it is carbon based. Without CO2 we would all die. CO2 is essential for the growth of plants and without it our tenure on this planet over.
So Al Gore has managed to evangelise the old fart and now my teletax is being wasted on a High Definition £1,000,000 pound per hour puff peice . Why do we have to pay for this shite?
We have no choice in the matter or Hobsons choice.
I really like his shows but i dont agree with his politics. Just like Stephen Fry.
When Fry is being a tubby funny gay bloke then its TV gold but when he becomes a hectoring whinging islington luvvie then my piss becomes boiled.
Equally when doddery Dave hugs a gorilla or gets all excited about a Stag beetle its compulsive viewing but when he sits and pontificates it changes from compulsive to convulsive.
BTW please dont fling the right wing thing about. We represent a broad ‘church’ here.
Cassie is a bit close to Genghis Kahn in her views but they are always well expressed and erudite whereas I was , up untill the last couple of years a fully paid up member of the Cleggerons.
We all have one thing in common, we hate the way the urban elitist left has taken over our national broadcaster.
With the beeb, with the exception of Clarkson and Neil you get a homogenised smug junior common room sneering socialism. I dont mind the true left getting airtime, like Benn and Burnham infact i find there views refreshing. I would just like the rest of the spectrum to be catered for.
Misanthropic textbook trots like Milliband junior Ed Ballsup and Harriet the harpy are given disproportionate airtime. Canape communism by armchair revolutionaries who care no more for the proletariate than their own self importance. Point scoring agitprop pushers who think of life as some sought of intelectual game.
Well its not a game its real
Real jobs
Real hopes
Real Lives,
and while they play politics real people lose jobs.
Continuously badmouthing the government will do nothing to increase confidence in the markets or consumers.
Devisively contrarian reporting only polarises the nation at a time when we need to pull together.
Auntie is a corrosive blight on the nation fostering division and discontent where progressive always trumps practical and essential and where Castro and Chavez are always heroes and churchil and Reagan are always villains.
Where islam is always the religion of peace and Christianity is always the religion of repression and child abuse.
Where profit is always a sin and tax is always a virtue.
Where rioters are oppressed and misunderstood but the forces of law and order are always oppressors.
Where minorities always trump the majority.
Where being a kiddy fiddling movie director means you’re artistic where being a kiddy fiddling priest means your a devil.
Where prolifers are loonies but where treehuggers are all experts. Where the USA is bad in everything but popular culture but Barry O is the bloody Messiah. Where normal middleclass families protesting about tax are Teabaggers but the great unwashed rent a crowd at Saint Pauls are somehow akin to Ghandi.
I could go on. Please carry on posting but try to be civil
Paddy – that was a glorious rant. And all of it true.
Agreed, the list in the final paragraph was great!
also( I have posted this before but alwats worth a repost)
http://www.wnd.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=28222
<img src=”http://www.wnd.com/images/section.BTL.gif” alt=”between the lines”/> <img src=”http://www.wnd.com/images2/farah07.jpg” alt=”Joseph Farah”/><img src=”http://www.wnd.com/images/header_exclu_comm.gif” border=”0″/>Palestinian people do not exist
Posted: July 11, 2002
1:00 am Eastern
By Joseph Farah
© 2011 WND
A provocative headline? It’s more than that. It’s the truth.
Truth does not change. Truth is truth. If something was true 50 years ago, 40 years ago, 30 years ago, it is still true today.
And the truth is that only 30 years ago, there was very little confusion on this issue of Palestine.
You might remember the late Israeli Prime Minister Golda Meir making the bold political statement: “There is no such thing as a Palestinian people.”
The statement has been a source of ridicule and derision by Arab propagandists ever since. They love to talk about Golda Meir’s “racism.” They love to suggest she was in historical denial. They love to say her statement is patently false – an intentional lie, a strategic deception.
What they don’t like to talk about, however, are the very similar statements made by Yasser Arafat and his inner circle of political leadership years after Meir had told the truth – that there is no distinct Palestinian cultural or national identity.
So, despite the fact that conventional wisdom has now proclaimed that there is such a thing as the Palestinian people, I’m going to raise those uncomfortable quotations made by Arafat and his henchmen when their public-relations guard was down.
Way back on March 31, 1977, the Dutch newspaper Trouw published an interview with Palestine Liberation Organization executive committee member Zahir Muhsein. Here’s what he said:
The Palestinian people does not exist. The creation of a Palestinian state is only a means for continuing our struggle against the state of Israel for our Arab unity. In reality today there is no difference between Jordanians, Palestinians, Syrians and Lebanese. Only for political and tactical reasons do we speak today about the existence of a Palestinian people, since Arab national interests demand that we posit the existence of a distinct “Palestinian people” to oppose Zionism.
For tactical reasons, Jordan, which is a sovereign state with defined borders, cannot raise claims to Haifa and Jaffa, while as a Palestinian, I can undoubtedly demand Haifa, Jaffa, Beer-Sheva and Jerusalem. However, the moment we reclaim our right to all of Palestine, we will not wait even a minute to unite Palestine and Jordan.
ctd
That’s pretty clear, isn’t it? It’s even more specific than Golda Meir’s statement. It reaffirms what I have written on this subject. And it is hardly the only such statement of its kind. Arafat himself made a very definitive and unequivocal statement along these lines as late as 1993. It demonstrates conclusively that the Palestinian nationhood argument is the real strategic deception – one geared to set up the destruction of Israel.
In fact, on the same day Arafat signed the Declaration of Principles on the White House lawn in 1993, he explained his actions on Jordan TV. Here’s what he said: “Since we cannot defeat Israel in war, we do this in stages. We take any and every territory that we can of Palestine, and establish a sovereignty there, and we use it as a springboard to take more. When the time comes, we can get the Arab nations to join us for the final blow against Israel.”
No matter how many people convince themselves that the aspirations for Palestinian statehood are genuine and the key to peace in the Middle East, they are still deceiving themselves.
I’ve said it before and I will say it again, in the history of the world, Palestine has never existed as a nation. The region known as Palestine was ruled alternately by Rome, by Islamic and Christian crusaders, by the Ottoman Empire and, briefly, by the British after World War I. The British agreed to restore at least part of the land to the Jewish people as their ancestral homeland. It was never ruled by Arabs as a separate nation.
Why now has it become such a critical priority?
The answer is because of a massive deception campaign and relentless terrorism over 40 years.
Golda Meir was right. Her statement is validated by the truth of history and by the candid, but not widely circulated, pronouncements of Arafat and his lieutenants.
Israel and the West must not surrender to terrorism by granting the killers just what they want – a public relations triumph and a strategic victory. It’s not too late to say no to terrorism. It’s not too late to say no to another Arab terror state. It’s not too late to tell the truth about Palestine.
BBC Arab League condemns Gingrich’s remarks on Palestinians
highlighted “If an Arab or Palestinian official said a racist comment that was one-millionth of what this US candidate said, the world would have been in continuous uproar” Mohammed Sobeih Arab League hmmmm
also highlighted ‘Vulgar, hurtful and ridiculous’ … hmmm el beeb forgets to mention in its ire that it is TRUE though
a reality check
the Badly Invented People Sultan Knish blog
Look how the Beeb changed this story about the Adam Smith Institute and Green energy claims:
http://www.newssniffer.co.uk/articles/467718/diff/0/1
pathetic.
Good catch. That really should have been two separate pieces, no? Instead they basically replaced on with another viewpoint entirely.
Jerusalem: The Making of a Holy Ci… :
makes you wonder how the el beeb re writers will pan this out :-DJerusalem: The Making of a Holy Ci…
Now that the parliamentary debate is over, is there any chance that the BBC will stop making the veto the main story on their website?
You’d think that the veto had the same significance as 9/11 or the collapse of the Berlin Wall from the way the BBC are going on and on about it!
I know this is a novel idea, but why not talk about yesterday’s news yesterday, and today’s news today?
Jeff
You would have thought the BBC, loving all things Obama and loving all things islam, would have really put the bunting out on this.. alas
“nay nay and thrice nay”
Obama Administration Welcoming Islamic Group to Washington for Discussion on erm … ‘Tolerance?’,”
CNSNews
“A Shameful State Department Initiative,”
American Thinker
el beeb?, i wonder why??
“From the original article…
..the topics and the agenda — and those meeting in Washington — have not been released to the public. Several attempts to obtain this list by Traditional Values Coalition (TVC) have been refused or deferred. Additionally, two formal written requests to observe the proceedings as well as participation on an NGO conference call were dismissed… “
There’s also the new “All-American Muslim” show, which sounds like it came straight out of the BBC, filmed in the Michigan equivalent of Tower Hamlets. There’s an outcry about a big DIY chain pulling its ads.
today on R1 newsbeat.(Ok they may not be heavy weight but they still employ over 50 people)
They managed to say “isolated”
they managed to say “Designed to rescue the european economy”
They managed to mention cleggy disapproved but they did not mention
if Call me Dave had agreed that we would have been made liable for many millions more in European Taxes at a time when we are already a large nett contributor. If he had agreed he would have hobbled the city with an untried untested tax which would have made us uncompetitive compared to the far east and the US.
Germany wanted these financil rules because the finance industry is only 5 % of their GDP but 30% of ours.
Non of this was explained.
The Euro is their club their private fifedom their own problem. We can help a little if we have any cash spare but they cocked up, therefore they should share the greatest burden.
Why would anyone in their right minds sign away more powers to Brussels? They havent had their accounts signed off in over ten years. They are built on a lie. Giving them more money would be akin to giving a compulsive gambler your life savings hoping that hed pay you back out of his winnings
Did anyone hear a report from the drug smuggler Johnny Dymond this morning on the Today programme? The dope fiend was in Alabama (minus his reefers I hope), to report on a recent state law cracking down on the employment of Hispanic illegals. He interviewed a farmer who couldn’t harvest her crop, and a construction boss who couldn’t hire any workers. It seemed native Americans did not want the work, and only the illegals kept the state going.
It has now gone past the stage when I doubt anything the BBC tells me; like a Soviet citizen reading Pravda, I now assume that anything the BBC tells me is a lie, and the direct opposite of the truth. I don’t believe a word of Dymond’s report, I assume that he, like most Beeboids, is a left wing shill reporting through the lens of his own political prejudice.
Isn’t it strange how the UK and USA managed to develop into such powerful economies over the years, with all those lazy gits who didn’t want to work. You know, before all those “hard working foreigners” decided to take up residence. Equally strange is how the countries all these “hardworking foreigners” come from are, almost without exception, impoverished shit-holes.
Must be more of what Mark Mardell described as “fantastic stuff”.
You’d be correct to assume that any BBC report on the US is misleading at best, and to check facts for yourself.
I find it easiest to focus on a few basic tenets in connection with the news from the BBC and their wordy bletherers in Socialist Utopia.
1.Every problem we now face is due to Labours thirteen years in Government…they had three terms to turn this country into the cesspit of slime and creepy massages that it now is. From banks to immigration, student tuition fees and Murdoch…blame Labour.
2.Therefore, unless its Gisela Stuart or Kate Hoey…not one Labour liberal licker has ANYTHING of worth to say about anything…they caused it.
3.If their paid padded patsies at the Beeb want to cheerlead for their Labour luvvies…let them. But I`ll not be paying for it, and they have got to compete with Rupert for my money-not pimp off the poor and the complacent.
4. Put up all the issues that the BBC hawks on about-invert them all in terms of real relevance, and take your steer from 180 degrees to the BBCs approved line to take. You`ll be correct only if you do.
In the meantime, Geert Wilders might be good enough to put himself forward to be the new BBC chairman…how come the Russians get Putin, and we don`t even get to vote for our Top Beeboid?…democracy right here-right now!
This may explain Clegg’s no-show. Perhaps he wasn’t up to sitting down for any length of time:
http://www.funnyordie.com/videos/40f7fdb1c2/kunt-and-the-gang-use-my-arsehole-as-a-c-nt-the-nick-clegg-story
That was awful in the best possible way!!!!! =-O 🙂
More outright BBC-NUJ political propaganda for ‘OCCUPY’ in London (via leftist Americans):-
BBC-NUJ ‘Magazine’ has this one-sided unacceptable piece-
“The Americans occupying the London Stock Exchange”
By Rema Rahman
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/magazine-16077529
Who is this immature RAHMAN? How did BBC-NUJ editor let this tosh through?
I like how one of the poster boys worked for Merrill Lynch and Lehman Brothers – two of the worst transgressors going, both of which went bankrupt. Lehman’s collapse in particular was a main catalyst in the financial crisis. And this guy was an analyst, no less. Part of the problem, not the solution.
Simon Heffer on BBC-NUJ’s dozy poster boy, CLEGG:
“Blinded by a fanatical obsession with the EU”
[Extract]:
“Mr Clegg used the BBC’s Andrew Marr programme yesterday to engage in a very public therapy session after what had obviously been a traumatic couple of days for him. Expressing his pain, the Lib Dem leader said the veto – which he had been described as endorsing on Friday – was ‘bad for Britain’ because, in the words of the familiar euro-federalist cliché, it left our country ‘isolated and marginalised’.
“So much for the constitutional doctrine of collective Cabinet responsibility that is supposed to bind the Government together publicly on all points of policy.
Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/debate/article-2072919/Nick-Clegg-blinded-fanatical-obsession-EU.html#ixzz1gLRzaf2Z
BBC 6PM news.
Toneils spouting lies about the Government
The BBC reporting on the hacking story ignores the Guardians lies (the Guardian has lied many times about hacking) about the hacking of Milly Dowler’s phone
Penis Peston somehow forgets to mention that Gordon Brown and Tony Blair are also to blame for the failure of RBS (not to mention the destruction of a good bank – Lloyds)
Another normal pro Liebore day on the BBC.
LIBYA.
More INBBC ‘Arab Spring’/Islamic Winter:
“‘Cleansed’ Libyan town spills its terrible secrets”
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/magazine-16051349
I’m not a hardline Eurosceptic, but even I can see that the BBC is biased in its reporting of the eurozone crisis – http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/news/cristinaodone/100123471/im-not-a-hardline-eurosceptic-but-even-i-can-see-that-the-bbc-is-biased-in-its-reporting-of-the-eurozone-crisis/
So how does the BBC handle the scandal of the faked Polar Bear video? Well other than a very short statement from John Wittingdale (glossed over) the BBC spins it totally from their point of view.
Typical BBC.
BBC Radio Four-and-a-half presenter Peter Allen on the euro debate just now (the table he wishes he was at is the Today Programme – but he was black-balled for that job – and you can see why – he is an Essex boy who, although privately educated, never went to Oxbridge).
Dipping in and out of the debate in the Commons Allen finds it ‘a shame’ that we missed Denis Skinner. It would have been such fun hearing him call the PM ‘a plonker’.
Top marks for Allen from his bosses I am sure because neither he nor Pienaar flinched or indeed batted so much as an eyelid (I know it is radio) when a Tory MP questioned the bias of BBC coverage.
Stiff upper lip Peter, keep bashing the Tories and well you never know – Humph can’t go on forever.
Peter Allen isn’t a plonker…he’s a dick-head
The FSA report. What penis Peston and the BBC won’t tell you. From the report.
The then Chancellor, Gordon Brown, on several occasions in 2005 and 2006,
made it clear that there was a strong public policy focus on fostering
the ‘competitiveness’ of the UK financial services sector, and a belief
that unnecessarily restrictive and intrusive regulation could impair that
competitiveness. For example, in a Treasury press release dated 24 May
2005, at the launch of the Better Regulation Action Plan745, Gordon
Brown said ‘…the new model we propose is quite different. In a risk
based approach there is no inspection without justification, no form filling
without justification, and no information requirements without justification.
And the FSA operated within the context of frequent political demands
for it to avoid imposing ‘unnecessary’ burdens which could undermine
the competitiveness of UK financial firms. In Section 3 of Part 2, we
refer to a letter of June 2005 from Callum McCarthy, then Chairman
of the FSA, to Prime Minister Tony Blair, assuring him that the FSA
applied to the supervision of its largest banks only a fraction of the
resource applied by US regulators to banks of equivalent size and
importance.
Thus, for instance, in response to a speech by Prime Minister Tony Blair, also
in May 2005747, which expressed concerns that heavy-handed supervision
by the FSA was impeding innovation and business expansion
The beeboids may have pushed it too far this time as the MSM seem to be taking notice of the bias that has long been noticed by readers of this site.
Here’s another one:-
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/debate/article-2073233/The-Brussels-Broadcasting-Corporation-pins-failure-save-euro-David-Cameron.html
“But the remarkable thing is
that given the reach of the BBC, it has not brainwashed the public. Despite all the BBC’s propaganda, according to the latest poll, roughly half the British public want to quit the EU and two thirds want a renegotiation and a referendum. Neither the BBC nor Westminster to date have dared risk reflecting that.”
Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/debate/article-2073233/The-Brussels-Broadcasting-Corporation-pins-failure-save-euro-David-Cameron.html#ixzz1gMMl6rgK
Imagine if the BBc actually gave us news and not “opinion” – I think those numbers would be higher.
So much bad news from ….I mean… for the Beeb today.
Aside from all this Euro malarkey it looks as though the key claim about deleted messages in the phone hacking scandal was false.
Some ‘Birmingham bookseller’ (of no known creed) is sent down for promoting terrorism. Now that sort of thing doesn’t go on does it?
Scottish news: A couple of would be Facebook rioters from north of the border are sent to jail. Don’t start a campaign for a pardon for these misguided tartan innocents yet or get up the Aspergers defence – one BBC report slipped out the fact that one of them had previously broken bail conditions. Not geeks then just criminal galoots.
In sport: Celtic fans in trouble about IRA chanting.
Weather report: a normal British winter.
And finally….an animal story: it appears that not everthing that Beeb tell you about Polar Bears is true.
Oh dear, the BBC world seems to be crumbling around their ears.
Islamising EGYPT: as reported by INBBC’s Pollyanna KNELL .
“What will Salafists’ election success mean for Egypt?”
By Yolande Knell
BBC News, Cairo.
This extract needs an addendum (applied):
“The Salafists’ success has been one of the biggest surprises for their fellow Islamists, as well as liberals and some political analysts”
(-like me and my collegues at the INBBC Cairo bureau.)
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-middle-east-16112833
Of course, ‘Jihadwatch’ has been analysing the Islamising Egyptian situation accurately for months; but INBBC ignored it.
Ms Knell, without analysis mentions the fears of the Christian Copts. She could learn a lot more here, but will she bother?:-
Raymond Ibrahim’s Written Testimony on Plight of Egypt’s Christians
Spring has sprung?
She’s baaaaack…
http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/theeditors/2011/12/the_challenge_of_reporting.html
And this is how you score the big bucks:
“We’ve had some criticism of our coverage over the weekend claiming it was too “pro-European”. I’ve watched, heard and read a great deal of what we did and without any sense of complacency, I think we reported events fairly and accurately “
Ray… hold the Newswatch Front Page! We have a heavy duty ‘think we got it about right’ to run on the in-house navel gazing system!
The first comment sets the tone.
I may join in tomorrow, assuming they don’t hit the panic button and close it at 1.
I wish I got to assess my own output at work. And got paid as much as her for doing so.
“I think we reported events fairly and accurately “ So she is not sure then?
It is not our job to hail any summit on any subject as a “triumph” or a “disaster”. Our role is simply to report and analyse events and their fall-out.
Except the “fallout” was defined by the BBC as a disaster, sweetheart. Hence the outcry. What a silly intellectual contortion.
PS: I love the slamming of Mardell in that first comment as well. I saw it when this site was live-blogging the BBC’s coverage. He openly expressed his astonishment that all those non-Left MEPs were getting elected, and said that he expected the whole of Europe to go stampeding towards Socialism after the failure of Capitalism caused the financial crisis. It was a clear preview of his behavior as the BBC’s top man in the US.
Even the word “fallout” surely has conotations of doom. You do not have “fallout” from a good outcome.
To me and I suppose to many others “fallout” is used to describe something negative.
“Even when used figuratively “fallout” always has a negative connotation; my dictionary defines it as “the adverse side effects or results of a situation.”
http://www.soulfulspike.com/heroes/heroes_fallout.htm
So then…Clegg not sitting next to Cameron?
Attenborough fiddling polar bear footage and Dowlers phone NOT hacked by Murdochs gang?
No prizes for guessing which of these three stories will be getting top billing from the “serious and responsible” liberal press and BBC.
The BBC have got to go-they presume to approve of news items and give us the same old fatuous slop and pinkie marxist slops, and call it news…or analysis.
Funny too that Cameron “insists”, whereas his opponents “say” or “state”…and the last word always goes to the Labour gobshite…always!
You can imagine how it will go. The non appearance of the petulant lightweight Clegg- just how did he end up with that fine old north country name?- will dominate their twitterings and witterings.
Most of us in the shires just don’t care. Not interested. What will it take to get this through to them?
Clegg is of sero importance. Surely Dave could send him on a fact finding and very long mission to Moldavia and let the whole bunch of Helen Boaden’s top interviewing talent go with him.
They can interview each other to their heart’s content and get it all just about right.
The only snag is what has Moldavia done to deserve this.
Isn’t “Cleg” the Scots word for a horsefly ? Small, irritating, buzzy thing that sucks your blood given half a chance ?
Not that I’m suggesting any sort of parallel you understand.
Yes. Also clag in some parts.
Surprised no-one else has commented on Toady’s absolute hatchet job on Gingrich this morning:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/today/hi/today/newsid_9660000/9660191.stm
Shameless. Not one positive – or even neutral – comment about the man.
Mardell can’t believe his luck; he doesn’t even have to pretend to be balanced anymore.
I did, on this thread.
Sincere apologies, Roland; I missed that.
It is reassuring that others picked up on it too; even down to using similar language. It’s a big call, but I think this is the most biased piece of BBC output I’ve ever known. I can’t wait to see how Helen ‘xx’ Boaden et al justify it!
No apology necessary. There’s so much to talk about regarding BBC bias that no-one can keep up with all the comments.
I put in a complaint. We’ll see how it’s fobbed off this time. But Helen Boaden never justifies anything. She states an opinion with no evidence and then walks away.
The key point here – that you of course picked up on – is that there is absolutely no positive comment about Gingrich in the whole piece. This is damning.
News24 9.00pm: The big story was Europe and Clegg not being in ther chamber. They never reported that Balls cleared off out of the chamber before the presentation of the RBS report, in which he is specifically named as one of the three labour politicians whose incompetance led to the RBS debacle.
No mention of the news that Milly Dowlers voicemail messages were NOT deleted by the NOTW but were deleted automatically after 72 hours.
Actually, I’ve heard it mentioned a few times. It came up on PM a few weeks ago too and strangely vanished from public consciousness.
“A group of around 80 newly elected Tory MPs, alarmed at Nick Clegg’s determination to block significant changes to Britain’s relationship with Brussels, is planning to forge links with the large number of Labour Eurosceptics
Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2034900/Tory-plot-ambush-David-Cameron-join-forces-Labour-Eurosceptics.html#ixzz1gMPviSkL
But the Labour Party are as one on the EU – they all want Brussels to run our country, don’t they? That is the impresion you would get if your only source of “news” was the BBC. Today on the radio there was phrases such as the “tory right”, “the Tory eurosceptics”. etc.
Lets set the record straight:
This is a list of the Labour MPs who backed a referendum.
“Ronnie Campbell (Blyth Valley), Rosie Cooper (Lancashire West), Jeremy Corbyn (Islington North), Jon Cruddas (Dagenham & Rainham), John Cryer (Leyton & Wanstead), Ian Davidson (Glasgow South West), Natascha Engel (Derbyshire North East), Frank Field (Birkenhead), Roger Godsiff (Birmingham Hall Green), Kate Hoey (Vauxhall), Kelvin Hopkins (Luton North), Steve McCabe (Birmingham Selly Oak), John McDonnell (Hayes & Harlington), Austin Mitchell (Great Grimsby), Dennis Skinner (Bolsover), Andrew Smith (Oxford East), Graham Stringer (Blackley & Broughton), Gisela Stuart (Birmingham Edgbaston), Mike Wood (Batley & Spen).”
http://www.newstatesman.com/blogs/the-staggers/2011/10/north-mps-south-referendum
Did you know that BBC? Even Peter Allens star MP Skinner is on this list.
If the BBc are not biased then I am a Chinaman.
‘There are a lot of Labour MPs who didn’t want to join the single currency who feel the same way about the EU as a whole.’
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2038508/Labour-Tory-MPs-unite-devise-plot-Britain-leave-EU.html
‘That is the impression you would get if your only source of “news” was the BBC. ‘
Hence, my definition, whatever it is, it isn’t ‘news’. And should not be accorded credit as such. By anyone.
What happens in the BBC when a public figure, especially one that the BBC hates, makes a controversial action?
Answer – they will interview as many other public figures, who they prefer to advance, to try and discredit that action This is readily apparent in the way the BBC have used the recent Cameron EU treaty veto.
But what happens when it’s a controversial statement – but the statement is true, and also goes against the BBC agenda?
Answer – Then it’s a case of bias by omission, and they will try and ignore the story, despite it being covered by every other media outlet.
In this case it concerns Newt Gingrich, the Republican President Candidate hopeful, who made the statement that the “Palestinians are an invented people – “Remember, there was no Palestine as a state — (it was) part of the Ottoman Empire. I think we have an invented Palestinian people who are in fact Arabs and historically part of the Arab community and they had the chance to go many places,”
When I read this story in an AP article a few days ago, I wondered how the BBC were going to cover it, especially as we’re here all too aware, they hate Republicans to the same extent they love Palestinians.
Nothing appeared in a search of their website on this story, then or yesterday, despite it being covered by all the main outlets. I then realised that they couldn’t really run this article without also showing that his statement was true – as the AP article has done, and more fully as Melanie Phillips explains here Hey, stop this dangerous candidate! He’s told the truth!
However, once another body has shown outrage at his statements, the BBC are then free to run the story, and then avoid the need to explain whether the statement is true or not. Just giving us various counters without any historical relevance or truth. (‘Hey – we didn’t say it – they did’ – if it ever comes up)
So today we have this article from the BBC.
Arab League condemns Gingrich’s remarks on Palestinians
‘…they will interview as many other public figures, who they prefer to advance, to try and discredit that action’
Then it’s a case of bias by omission, and they will try and ignore the story, despite it being covered by every other media outlet.
However, once another body has shown outrage at his statements, the BBC are then free to run the story, and then avoid the need to explain whether the statement is true or not.’
Classic BBC editorial triple whammy.
Distort. Omit & finally hiding behind ‘1 degree of separation’ selection of ‘expertise’.
Helen… the BBC’s Mendelian attempt at rigging the genetic make-up has created a situation that the Pharoah’s discovered was less than convincing, optimal, or worked out well in the end.
Here’s something the BBC will rush to censor so you don’t know about it:
Indiana Democratic Party Head Resigns as Fraud Probe Heats Up
The chairman of the Indiana Democratic Party announced his resignation Monday, as investigators probe allegations of election fraud stemming from the 2008 Democratic presidential primary.
Dan Parker, who served for seven years, did not cite the scandal as a reason for his decision. But the uproar over possible fraud in a race for the White House has already claimed the job of one county Democratic Chairman, who sources say was forced out because of the allegations.
Numerous signatures on petitions that placed then-candidates Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton on the party’s primary ballot were allegedly forged and then certified by the St. Joseph County Voter Registration Office in South Bend.
Remember, boys and girls, according to Greg Palast and Newsnight, only Republicans engage in voter fraud, and even though ACORN has been convicted of shenanigans in the past, there’s no proof their fraudulent activities ever affected an election. Nothing to see here, move along.
On Friday, before he went into ridiculous spin mode in order to placate his Euro-fanatical party, Nick Clegg said that the safeguards requested by Cameron were “reasonable, and modest in scope.” I’ve been listening to the BBC on and off since but they haven’t given me an inkling as to why Cameron’s reasonable proposals were unacceptable to Merkozy. Anyone heard anything on this from the BBC? It seems to be a case of the EU is always right and we are always wong so let’s just talk about ‘isolation’ and ‘coalition splits’.
The fall in respect for David Attenborough over the Frozen Planet documentary has taken another dip due to some Polar Bear fakery.