Blue Monday? Not on the rather pinkish BBC. A new Open Thread.
OPEN THREAD
Bookmark the permalink.
Search Biased BBC
Recent Comments
- Zephir April 20, 2024 at 12:40 am on Weekend 20th April 2024[img]https://i.postimg.cc/2y8bNsdG/images.jpg[/img]
- Zephir April 20, 2024 at 12:37 am on Weekend 20th April 2024Our charming immigrants, fleeing war and persecution, once they get into our countries in Europe [img]https://i.postimg.cc/cJ4VYTcj/...
- JohnC April 20, 2024 at 12:28 am on Weekend 20th April 2024Man sets himself on fire outside Trump's Manhattan hush money trial https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-68858408 The political persecut...
- Zephir April 20, 2024 at 12:26 am on Weekend 20th April 2024Marathons have got smaller, and Mars bars.
- Deborah April 19, 2024 at 11:51 pm on Weekend 20th April 2024Foscari, you mean that temperatures were similar then to now? In spite of global warming.
- Deborah April 19, 2024 at 11:48 pm on Weekend 20th April 2024I noticed whilst watching Bangers and Cash on whatever channel it’s on, adverts for Big (?) Bottom with Ade Edmondson...
- Nibor April 19, 2024 at 11:15 pm on Weekend 20th April 2024Last week the show was circling the wagons by "humour" against Angela Rayners critics .
- Foscari April 19, 2024 at 10:42 pm on Weekend 20th April 2024As an appendage . Although there a slight degree of embellishment in my last contribution. It is around 85% accurate....
- Broadcasting-on-Behalf-of-the-Caliphate April 19, 2024 at 10:23 pm on Weekend 20th April 2024You have flooded this website with your views on Netayanhu and Israel straight from the George Galloway school of thought...
- Mustapha Sheikup al-Beebi April 19, 2024 at 10:21 pm on Weekend 20th April 2024Revenons a nos moutons, as the French say. "The Now Show" on Radio 4 reached its final episode after 25...
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
The disgrace of the BBC http://voiceforchildren.blogspot.com/2012/01/stuart-syvret-and-fourth-estate.html
How good of the PM programme to give Ed Miliband yet another bite of the cherry to tell us how “responsible” he is being in piping up against his paymasters at Unite/GMB etc.
Nick Robinson his faithful sherpa and guiding him through, lest he self-destruct as he does.
If this is news, then the Guardian and the BBC are in a suicide pact…or political homosexuality as someone puts it earlier!
Oh…they are…no longer news is it?
Re last night’s Republican debate – I’ve been listening to US talk radio and reading US conservative blogs this afternoon and, unsurprisingly, the BBC’s take on the debate didn’t even mention the points which appear to have made the biggest impact among potential Republican voters: Giingrich slapping down Juan Williams over political correctness, and Gingrich making Ron Paul look weak over the business of killing America’s enemies.
Time and again the BBC proves that it simply doesn’t get conservative America. But then, the BBC only employs people who hate conservative America.
Evidently Gingrich’s slapdown of Juan William’s political correctness got a standing ovation – the first one at such a debate since Reagan’s time. But that isn’t news to the BBC ? Or that Gingrich hit it out of the park several more times last night ?
Did the BBC even watch the debate ? Or are they just cribbing stuff from leftie media and websites ?
The BBC just go to Media Matters and the Daily Kos for their ‘facts’
The politican gets the better of the media figure. This is so un-Paxmaneske it deserves to be ignored by the BBC. Politicans should know their place and be humble before the lords of the media. Shame on Newt!
The BBC just go to Media Matters and the Daily Kos for their ‘facts’
Plus Wikipedia, if properly editted by a Hari.
So today they must be floundering.
Do disability rights cost too much? – http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-16596799
To save you the bother of reading through this article, here’s its starting conclusion:
‘DLA costs billions and the Treasury is committed to finding an alternative that will see the rising bill reduced by a whopping 20%.
No wonder there is such concern among disability campaigners. A struggle for rights which began half a century ago is threatening to go into reverse.’
Jeff
If inflation had risen more than at any time in the last couple of years, then I don`t doubt that Milband, Gareth Peirce-good to have her cheery countenance back eh?… or that Italian Birdseye bloke would have been bumped, by the Beeb to weep and gnash about the Tories.
Sadly for the BBC it has fallen more than the last two years-so it goes way down the billing with the comment that “it only goes to show how moribund the economy now is…under the Tories!”
Ah well-apparently Ed Miliband will be inheriting a mess.
How unlike what Cameron was left with when Ed and the fellow Jumblies left office in 2010!
Mark Mardell tweets about “dog whistles”. The “dog whistle” theory of politics goes like this: hidden racist messages are being used by Republican Presidential candidates (who else?). Newt Gingrich calling Obama the “food stamp President” is drawing attention to African Americans. If you are a visitor from the planet Zog this connection will take too long to explain. However, here are some articles on the subject:
http://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2012/01/on-race-dog-whistles-and-the-old-confederacy/251497/
http://campaignstops.blogs.nytimes.com/2012/01/17/newt-gingrich-and-the-art-of-racial-politics/
I’m sure the BBC’s extreme susceptibility to question of race can be traced back to a seismic event from about 20 years ago. A politician (perhaps someone can remind me who) was a guest on R4’s Today Programme speaking about integration of minorities looked around the studio and said on air, “Well, look around studio – I see only white faces.”
Memos flowed, meetings were held, reports were written. It was an earthquake inside the Beeb. Mr. Mardell – though he doesn’t know it – has inherited this gene passed on through generations of BBC personalities
There’s some great comments under that NYT article (great video, Newt does a good job).
The article writer is called Charlie Blow…so appropriate…
“Mr. Blow seems to have the “art of racial politics” down pat.”
…actually, reading a few more, most of the comments are pants! Par for the course there I guess, trying to be the CIF of the US.
Remember, Mardell told the BBC College of Journalism that, despite the fact that he saw no evidence of racism at Tea Party events, he just knew the movement was driven by crypto-racism.
The Beeboids spent the six months leading up to the 2008 election looking for racists under the bed, and they’re back at it now, since that’s the ONLY reason they can think of for not voting for Him again. There can be no logical objection to His policies, according to Mardell. It’s only your inner racist telling you to vote Republican.
David Preiser, by attacking the objectivity of the BBC you reveal yourself to be a thought criminal. Maybe you ought to feature on the next five minutes (make that 24 hours) of hate on the BBC.
Next stop the re-education camp? In the UK we call these re-education camps universities. Correct thinking is believing that people on low incomes who struggle to pay their bills by working for a living should be forced – through the tax system – to pay the wages of middle class Leftists. This system is called “social justice”.
In my opinion anybody who attacks Obama is ipso facto a racist and should be ritually stoned to death. I am a professor of Comparative Literature at Harvard. My next academic paper is going to be “Why anybody who votes Republican should not be allowed to vote”.
I won the Nobel Prize for Literature last year for my novel (which has since been translated into Sewdish) about a 21st Century holy man from Chicago who dreamt that Jesus was persecuted by the Jews because he was black.
LOL 🙂
LOL @ wild. That’s plagarsim, that is. As we all know, The Obamessiah’s mentor (before he was thrown under the bus), Rev. Jeremiah Wright, said that Jesus was black (video messed up a bit, but the audio is crystal clear).
As for your Nobel Prize, I do hope you keep the body count to a minimum, as opposed to you-know-who, who must surely have the highest body count of any Laureate.
For a quick guide to race and the Democratic/Republican Parties, this is really good. It’s well worth a look.
No wonder the Democrats love their ‘affirmative action’ – they’ve got a lot to compensate for.
Great video Reed!
“The Obamessiah’s mentor…Rev. Jeremiah Wright, said that Jesus was black”
The Left are beyond parody!
Up next. Dan Rather gets exclusive footage of Obama walking on water.
‘despite the fact that he saw no evidence of racism at Tea Party events, he just knew the movement was driven by crypto-racism. ‘
Luckily, the spoken and written thoughts of BBC Editors on the BBC airwaves can in no way be deemed to relfect actuality or any endorsement by the BBC.
Making one rather wonder what good any of their analysis is, or why we are paying the BBC for it.
Just seen Jon Snow paste poor old Ed Miliband on Channel 4.
I never thought that I`d live to write that.
Snow is extremely hurt and disappointed in all ways…and it`s this that seems to wound poor Ed.
Clearly Labour will be coming apart at the seams very soon over this…and I reckon Snows skewering of Ed has started the countdown to the end of Ed.
He’s a liability, and the glee club for Labour’s mission know it.
The question is how overt those in theory objective on the media squad will be in assisting the shfat and replace operation.,
Given the alternatives, it may not be edifying, but funny, if a bit depressing in hwo politico-media process ‘shapes’ the way this country is run.
Getting a Leader of the Oppo , or PM, or governing party, based on Jon Snow or Paul Mason being happy is not a UK I relish.
The History of Musicals has been pretty good as far as I could tell.
Yet tonight they had to tell me about Jerry Springer-The Opera, and I realised once again, why I hate the BBC.
It`s that smugness-neanderthal Christians protesting about their taxes being used to slap their faces…preventing the hilarious Stewart Lee from getting a living…that kind of thing!
That the opera was crap and never even managed to crawl out of the West End, despite the BBC bankrolling it: seemed not to be an issue.
Just can`t help themselves can they?
“That the opera was crap and never even managed to crawl out of the West End, despite the BBC bankrolling it”
The BBC didn’t bankroll it – they broadcast one performance. And after JS:TO closed in the West End, it did go on to tour the UK:although the documentary said a tour was cancelled, that’s not quite true – some venues pulled out but the tour went ahead. The TMA Awards, which cover all non-London theatre, even awarded the show Best Touring Production.
And given that the lion’s share of protests were orchestrated by Christian Voice’s Stephen Green, I’d suggest the wording of “slap their faces” is rather unfortunate…
I look forward to the BBC funding “Muhammad & the Islamic Crusade: The Opera”. That “Stone all the Infidels to Death” number by Muhammad is a real show stopper.
‘The Prophet and his Little Princess’ =-O
Kaboom! =-X
You telling me that the BBC haven`t got it right then?
You say a tour of the provinces wasn`t cancelled, but the BBC said that it was!…you cn`t BOTH be right can you?
I believe the BBC on this one.
As for the “slap their faces” bit Scott?…what on earth are you saying?
They did use Christians money to buy the rights I`d imagine Scott using that license fee of theirs.
AS to your other points-delighted you recognise that the BBC can get it wrong…could be contagious!
Ah hell!
I used to like The Long View.
Yet today it manages to use the Stephen Lawrence case to show that nothing has changed since Kelso Cochrane was killed in a similar way in 1959.
Yes-you`ve guessed it-we`re all racist and it`s a cancer that our old Empire will never be cleared of.
End of story…apparently 93 people have been killed in a similar way according to some black bloke well paid to be whiteys scourge(Colin Prescott-no relation surely!). Wonder if he`s including any whites among the body count?
Only asking!
“Wonder if he`s including any whites among the body count?”
1993 to 2004 only: Fred Carter 64, 13 July 1993. Mark Sharp 39, 1993. Annie Castle 74, 22 August 1993. Billy Bryan 71, 22 August 1993. PC Patrick Dunne 44, 20 October 1993. Philip Gosling 13, February 1994. Emmanuel Hand 35, 15 May 1994. Richard Everitt 15, August 1994. Leslie Watkinson 66, 9 December 1994. Frank Dempsey 56, 7 February 1995. PC Philip Walters 28, April 1995. Thomas Kidd 61, 6 May 1995. Michael Dooher 19, 2 September 1995. Ted Howell 75, 9 November 1995. Danny Westmacott 16, 8 February 1996. Andrew Steventon 17, June 1996. Elizabeth Pinhorn 96, 9 June 1997. Nina MacKay 25, 24 October 1997. Louie Wade 53, 1998. James McParland 49, 4 April 1998. Brian Harvey 31, 1 August 1998. Peter Harvey 26, 1 August 1998. Winifred Sills 79, 1 May 2000. Elizabeth Amlot 39, 1 February 2001. Daisy Fenton 88, 30 March 2001. Rosie Ross 16, 12 May 2001. Hilda Lockert 86,15 May 2001. Anne Cypher 42, 19 May 2001. Amanda Clarke 32, 26 May 2001. Ross Parker 17, 23 September 2001. Kevin Jackson 31, 1 January 2002. Anthony O’Brien 24, 27 January 2002. Owain Leeson 17, 14 February 2002. Gavin Hopley 19,16 February 2002. Kriss Donald 15, October 2004.
Some stories just crawl onto the PM show in the hope of getting put out of their misery.
Ian Rankin reckons that writers need tax incentives-he`s a rich writer, but does worry about JK Rowlings care pension provision.
He points to Ireland that seem to have it all sorted, and so he advocates less tax for the writers…not enough people writing books and such!
Because he wrote it(clever eh?) for the Guardian, it therefore gets to be an item on some old BBC outlet…had Evans partner read it over the Special K this morning it would have died on the 8.50 fill-in slot.
It had to moulder another nine hours…and still smelt pretty Rank.
Still-the luvvies got their plug…and like euthanasia, it will be back again no doubt!
Maybe Ian Rankin intends we blogging types to get our taxes reduced too!
Maybe there ought to be a tax on anybody who works for a living, so that they can pay people to sit around complaining about capitalism. Oh wait a minute, that is the current system.
Just watched Gavin Essler giving Ed Balls a hard time on Newsnight.
His angle was very much that of the betrayed and disappointed Labour supporter, “..but Labour are supposed to protect the weak and vulnerable………. why aren’t you listening to reasonable & intelligent union leaders” – moving stuff – I could swear he almost wept, but he did manage (just) to avoid using the Naughtonian “we” for Labour.
Occasionally, at moments of high emotion, the mask slips a bit and we see the Beeb for what is is – the media branch of the left establishment.
Dame Nikki will verbally ‘suck Ed off’ on Radio 5 tomorrow
If they dump Ed BBC journalists will be on the lookout for the next hero of the Left. Who else can they find to promote the interests of public sector workers such as themselves?
The BBC are celebrating Muhammed Ali at the moment but Gavin Essler versus Ed Balls at the Newsnight arena was hardly a Thrilla in Manila.
If the Beeb had billed it as a girl’s pillow fight I’ll bet Saint Trinian’s would bulked.
I agree with other comments here – Essler came over like the spurned mistress left wondering now nasty Balls has moved on.
Always rely on the BBC to only ever attack Labour from the left.
At least Labour has brought its position generally into line with the Beeb…..
Agree with the concensus that the Government deficit needs to closed – but whinge about every cut.
Regarding the reporting of government moves to tighten up disability allowance (DLA) on Newsnight and BBC News on 17/1.
My understanding is that DLA costs have tripled to £12Bn pa over recent years – largely due to widespread fraud by people faking disability. Claimants need only fill in a form to receive DLA for life – with little or no assessment. Witness hundreds of news stories and TV programmes on disability benefits cheats. So it’s good news the government is finally moving to tighten up the system – by introducing face-to-face interviews and regular re-assessments.
My question is this: How come every BBC report on this story shows continuous VT of *genuinely* disabled DLA recipients? Why no footage of benefit cheats? Surely the story is about preventing fraudlent claims. Therefore shouldn’t the VT contain *at least some* footage of benefit cheats. God knows the BBC have plenty of VT of convicted cheats – eg. from the Panorama on this very issue. Wouldn’t a balanced report show both genuine claimants and the cheaters?
This is blatant bias: The BBC are misleadingly painting the government’s sensible proposals as an attempt by the evil Tories to steal the essential payments from helpless disabled people. In this case the bias is quite subtle – while the spoken script of the report may address the issue of benefits cheats – the images don’t. So one is left with an unmistakable visual impression of disabled people being persecuted.
“This is blatant bias”
Just wait until the BBC think there is an election coming. A day or so after the last election the BBC were so desperate for a Labour-Liberal pact government (anything to keep the “Tories” out) they forgot to invite a single Conservative politician onto a rolling news broadcast on BBC One during a crucial afternoon and evening. A performance that would have had even Stalin applauding. Just before as the programme ended a Labour ex-Cabinet Minister told them to stop being so biased and accept that the Labour Party had lost the election!!!It comes to something when the Labour Party start complaining about the pro-Labour bias of the BBC.
Chilling.
I remember sometime last year when the BBC News did a feature on the nasty Tory plans to make disability benefits means-tested. They had on a completely blind woman – not “legally blind” or partiially blind, mind, but someone totally blind since birth – who was made to worry that she’d lose the benefit which paid for her seeing-eye dog. The BBC seriously wanted you to think that the vicious Tories would make an actual blind person suffer because of their horrid ideology. Nothing to do with means testing, as the woman would have passed with flying colors (poor choice of words there, sorry.)
Total agenda-driven broadcasting, dishonest on purpose.
‘How come every BBC report on this story shows continuous VT of *genuinely* disabled DLA recipients? Why no footage of benefit cheats?’
Newsnight has considerable form in this especially.
Liz McKean is under the spotlight for her totally one-sided ‘report’ on the poor loves who are not accorded private help with their lap-dnacing and teacher thumping degrees at academies, which is why they should all be shut down to get back to the lowest common denominator ideal the BBC espouses…whilst all its staff look rather sideways at where they came from or their kids are going.
I am in process of telling my (Tory) MP straight that this is going on, too often, and not serving proper political process. And the lure of a josh with Andrew or Jezza on various sofas is no more representing my interests than the BBC represents the will of the country.
His call. Unlike the BBC, I at least have the option to withdraw supprt if he doesn’t get it.
A point that BBC Newsnight appeared to be at pains to emphasise was that the existing benefit gave the recipient their ‘independence’.
I’m sorry if I’m speaking a heresy here but how is the payment of a benefit equated with independence?
Following the Beeb chosen example of a working recipient of the payment we were then told that the withdrawal of the benefit would mean that friends and family would have to pitch in to help.
This is clearly a bad thing from the BBC perspective.
SOPA protest update:Surprised by that protest message on Google this morning? Only if you rely on the BBC for your news on US issues, as I’ve been warning you more more than a month. It’s because Google is againast the draconian, RIAA/Hollywood-funded Stop Internet Piracy (and the Senate version, Protect-IP) Act, as it would force them to recode their entire search engine to not only block search results for current website featuring illegal content, but to block future websites they don’t even know about yet from appearing in search results. At their own expense.
BBC: ZZZZzzzzzz We only mentioned Wikipedia, Reddit and Boing Boing. We never bothered to pay attention to this before, as it doesn’t support The Obamessiah’s re-election campaign, or help us produce lightweight, magazine-style segments to attract more unwashed, mouth-breathing US eyeballs.
I have a screenshot in case of stealth edit that News Sniffer or The Wayback Machine don’t catch it.
Where is Rory-Cellan-F#$%ing-Jones, husband of a BBC Trustee, on this? He frowned on US internet censorship back when Amazon decided not to sell a paedophile handbook, but now? ZZzzzzz. WTFF, BBC?
PS: Forget about this being a partisan deal. The author of the bill is a Republican Rep., Lamar Smith, fully bought and paid for by Hollywood. Partisanship is entirely beside the point on this one. Funny how the BBC didn’t frown on the US extending its authority overseas when it was poor Roger Tattersall having a blog on which somebody posted a link beyond his control to the CRU emails.
More relevant background context in a few paras than the BBC ‘news’ by omission machine can manage with millions, at a cost to me of £145.50pa.
Is anyone in the BBC not related to someone else within or with influence over its running, that does not feel they all ‘get it about right’?
And no, CPSMTV’s (Cherry-picking, Strawman-toting Vultures), leaping to the archive is not necessary.. it is meant to be satirically rhetorical.
My Site, as David Gregory has tweeted, the BBC costs you nothing.
It’s hedgehogs, now, apparently, suffering from”Climate Change” We’re all being encouraged, from February to spy on the spiny buggers, because with the mild winter, their habits have changed a bit, and they’re not spending so long hibernating.
So, from that we gather that a mild winter (so far) is a sure sign of catastrohic climate change, and it’s all our fault, as usual.
What I found amusing, was it was only the BBC (newsreader and presenter) who mentioned climate change, and not the interviewee, who was more interestd in the habitat of hedgehogs being disturbed by we selfish bastards, rather than the sudden, dreadful warming of the globe.
Getting a bit tired of this…
So, fortunately, is Joe Public.
Yes well you all know the old joke: what’s the difference between a hedgehog and the BBC?
…
…
The hedgehog has the pricks on the outside.
This morning on the 8am news was a report on how hedgehogs are being affected by climate change. Guess what, it is good for them. Warmer weather means that they hibernate less and produce more offspring each year thus increasing their population. Good for hedgehogs but clear unbiased scientific proof of global warming.
Heard this morning that the whole town of Dulverton (know it well) is being blacked out by the BBC for the stargazing programme with the poster child Cox. What absolute power! All hail the BBC! Maybe it’s part and parcel of their secret agenda to turn the lights off throughout the land. I bet you need to keep the telly on, though…
How exciting! If you want to stargaze, you go to places with less light intereference (the moors in that vicinity are ideal for that, as I recall)), you don’t take over a town. I bet, despite the crowing of the participants, that not all residents are over the moon with this arrangement.
It’s going to be cloudy, tonight…
I await the epidemic of burglaries under cover of this well-publicised darkness.
Add this to the BBC’s ‘No Independence Day’ files:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/today/hi/today/newsid_9680000/9680489.stm
Today manages to interview an activist opposed to the law on ‘joint enterprise’ without mentioning that the charmer in question has a brother who was convicted of murder under this law, let alone giving the victim’s family a right to reply.
Oh…. and that’s without raising the question yet again, what’s the BBC’s cut-off point for being treated seriously as a representative group of citizens? Where’s the proof that Little Miss Mayhem’s group represents more people than could fit in a phone box? Is there any evidence for a groundswell of public opinion in favour of going easy on lynch mobs?
A representative citizen group on the BBC is a group of Guardian readers who just happen to believe everything the BBC wants you to believe.
INBBC uses Ms CHAKRABARTI’s ‘Liberty’ in defence of jihadist Abu QATADA.
INBBC’s Ms KEARNEY adopts the anti-British government political line of ‘Liberty’ in speaking up for Qatada in this interview (audio) with ex-Labour Home Secretary, David (open-door mass immigration) BLUNKETT, who is treated as though he is the present Home Secretary (but without the interrruptions reserved for Tories by INBBC)..
“David Blunkett: Abu Qatada ‘extraordinarily dangerous'”
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-16601800
‘Daily Mail’:-
“Unelected euro judges are bringing terror to the streets of Britain”
By James Slack
Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/debate/article-2087831/Abu-Qatada-human-rights-Unelected-euro-judges-bringing-terror-streets-Britain.html#ixzz1jnzTIlCl
The latest in my ever more prolonged exchanges with BBC’s finest on a matter of initially biased and then stealth edititorial below. Interesting given the speed of reply, but also plethora of ‘we are right becauase we say we are’ rationales still being punted out as if the ‘most trusted’ tag is credible still. I am being patronised by a whole new, more senior level now:
I understand you have asked for a further response on this complaint and your comments on our web output which I was interested to read.
That you found my comments ‘interesting’ is noted, when pointing out most I’ve had back so far, whilst charming, have been factually incorrect, didn’t answer specifics or spun in circles. Especially on a ‘it’s fine because I’ve looked and I think it is’ basis.
I have looked through the original story you complained about and I do not believe that there is anything in it which is misrepresentative or in need of correction.
And there we go again. Repeat something often enough… I in turn ‘believe’ there is a saying around that which is apposite in the circumstances.
The story developed, like many others, over the course of the day with new comments and reaction to the original.
The ‘story’ was about events from decades ago. Whilst reactions to it now may have varied, the substance was a matter of historical fact, and well known to the the BBC.
What ‘developed’ was how it was spun, which was indeed based on reactions. Not very favourable ones to how the BBC editorial had tried to present things, and then cover their tracks. As is still the case.
The two updates we wrote reflected these and there was a balance of opinion offered.
What was reflected was a highly subjective interpretation of the story substance initially and not much better in terms of slant later. Updates are dangerous ground, when the difference between accuracy at the point of delivery, and subsequent ‘changes’ at the point of review when most audiences have moved on, is key. Retroactive correction may appear a box-ticker’s dream, but in the internet age hardly reassuring on trusted news delivery standards. Especially when compromises are routine on the basis, it appears, more of being made ‘to fit’.
Neither of the two headlines were changed in the course of the day but as xx has explained we run headlines of two different lengths to cater for the different platforms we serve.
You can run whatever length of headline you like, but if the story is to be served properly it is as well that they remain accurate and consistent. Trying to blame internal BBC formatting for ‘platforms’ is rather missing the point on basic good practice and impartial reporting of news.
As to your remarks about comments, there are no set durations for comments threads to be left open.
Making the variation that occurs, especially to such vast extents, all the more intriguing. Again, no answers, especially to my questions on such as Nick Robinson blogs opening and closing within the working day, thus denying the vast majority of licence fee payers any voice.
It varies with the story as has been explained.
It may vary, but that is not an adequate excuse for the reasons, which remain vague.
Adverse comments being made about the BBC would never be a reason for us to close a thread.
Mandy Rice Davis would also certainly find that one amusing, as a way of looking at things. I, however, would still beg to differ. Ever more senior BBC persons telling me that the BBC would never do things is because they think that and say so… is consistent, at least.
We welcome comments on the way we cover stories as well as on the stories themselves
That is good to learn, if often hard to credit.
although clearly the primary intention of the threads is to allow our readers to share comments with each other on the story in question.
Well, if the story in question being reported is not the story in question that exists in fact, the primary intention the threads should perhaps be welcoming is shifting focus to correcting that. Not, as happened, pulling the plug.
Many thanks for your feedback. It is always much appreciated
You’re welcome. There will I suspect be more, and there are already some in the system which you may like to take an interest in as here.
I turn appreciate replies, though would prefer them to be more substantive to be of value beyond serving as a further evidence of boxes simply being ticked to file away.
These include most recently a Newsnight report failing to note an expert commentator quoted was in fact an activist with a clear bias in the story they were cited for expertise in, a Newsnight Ecomonics Editor offering a personal qualifying view on a decision of the UK Government that was inappropriate in the first place, but also unrepresentative of the UK public’s views as well. And online editorial making the extraordinary claim that all Israelis are Zionists. All less eagerly addressed as yet than the above.
Plus many more that have either been brushed off or remain, as yet, unaddressed at all. Oddly, the more egregious and indefensible the breach inspiring the complaint, the longer the delay or the more vague the reply/brush off, if received at all.
Hence I will be pursuing all that have not been brought to a satisfactory conclusion, I presume through necessity up through further BBC internal labyrinths and, of course, beyond, in hope there may be some entity beyond the corporation not uniquely still bound to or controlled by it.
Have you noticed how long the BBC take to reply about any complaint – then claim anything they like to justify why the complainer is wrong – and then their employer ie us cannot get the information we need to prove they are lying?
Certainly it is frustarting when what you are in process of complaining about vanishes as a reference as the issue lumbers on.
I can manage page grabs, but sadly newssiffer searches and iPlayer recordings are beyond me at the mo. The latter is an issue because when they say ‘we didn’t say that’ and the A/V is no longer there, you are left fighting over a transcription.
And they are not above playing around with that fact. Or kicking in the FoI exemption to hide behind if you persist.
What a pile of meaningless waffle. (The BBC reply, not your post, My Site!)
That sound you can hear is me biting my lip:)
lucyhandley lucy handley We’re chatting to the BBC’s marketing director tomorrow – anyone want to ask her a question? Tweet me today and it might get printed. Thanks
I think I just bit it off…
BBCNewsnight BBC Newsnight Thankfully Twitter up and running – #Wikipedia co-founder Jimmy Wales defends 24-hour shut down. Watch bbc.in/xDwHgM
I see the bBC are reporting on the story of an Israeli air strike on Gaza. All bright headlines with very little news. Here is what everybody else is saying (Including the Pals)
“Israel Air Force aircraft in conjunction with IDF tanks opened fire on a group of Palestinians attempting to place explosive devices near the Gaza Border fence near Beit Hanoun on Wednesday, the IDF Spokesman’s Office reported.One of the devices exploded, but no soldiers were injured in the incident.”
Strange how the bbC which reports each and every attack on innocent pals in Gaza hasn’t reported this stroy from yesterday:
“A Palestinian rights activist in Gaza who criticized the Palestinian government and “resistance” in an article has been stabbed after receiving death threats, his NGO said on Tuesday.Mahmud Abu Rahma, international relations director at the Al Mezan Centre for Human Rights, was stabbed multiple times by several masked attackers on Friday evening, the Gaza-based centre said in a statement released on Tuesday.”
The BBC’s reporting is becoming farcical. When they quote from another source they are allowed to repeat the word “Terrorist” as long as they enclose it in (double) inverted commas. But they don’t dare to do that in the headline. Instead they use their euphemism “militants” but enclose it in single inverted commas. It’s almost as though they are being sarcastic about their own political correctness.
DavidACGregory David Gregory More fresh programming from ITV. guardian.co.uk/media/2012/jan…
Mind you, ITV’s programming costs folk..?
“DavidACGregory David Gregory More fresh programming from ITV. guardian.co.uk/media/2012/jan…
Mind you, ITV’s programming costs folk..?”
Let’s look at BBC One and Three, the two main BBC ‘entertainment’ channels.
BBC One last night – The One Show, EastEnders, Holby City, MasterChef;
BBC Three last night – Winter Wipeout (a gameshow, apparently), a repeat of Don’t Tell the Bride (a “series in which weddings are planned by the groom” alone”.), Coming Out Diaries (a “documentary following the conflicts and dilemmas faced by three young people as they navigate their way through telling their family and friends that they are gay or transgender”), EastEnders.
Riveting stuff. Very ‘fresh’, ‘vibrant’, ‘original’ and ‘new’. Paid for by the licence fee.
I’d say that when it comes to new and original drama, ITV is smashing the BBC at the moment. Sherlock and Birdsong may rescue the BBC but two swallows do not a summer make.
This is how big-government statists think: The license fee is their money by right, not yours. From that perspective, it costs you nothing that once actually belonged to you.
I misread the tweet in haste there. DG did not say anything about costing folk. My error, and apologies to him.
‘misread the tweet in haste’
Can happen. Kudos for the rapid acknowledgement and not stealth editting.
Some folk could learn from that.
I interpreted other David’s Tweet as a slight against ITV, David. Maybe David G is a big fan of Jesus Christ Superstar and wasn’t being sarcastic at all. In which case, I apologise to him.
By ‘eck, he’s a good bloke so let’s all apologise to David!
But my original criticism stands: much of prime-time BBC programming comprises lowest-common-denominator tosh and rather dull drama-by-numbers.
Jeremy, I originally thought the bit about ITV programming costing folk was part of his tweet, as if the BBC doesn’t cost people anything. I assumed an intent that wasn’t there. That was my error.
DG can safely be sarcastic about ITV as he’s got that sanctioned get-out-of-bias-free disclaimer.
All my bad, sorry :-[ I added the line to make a arther obvious point perhaps, and the formatting did not add a line break as I usually do between the quote (in italics) and my comment.
I think was in, out and meant by all was pretty clear still mind.
It’s my own fault for not clicking through in the first place.
Can we all just agree to blame Blair. Your fault! Blair!
Merseyside Christian census rebel fined
A Christian who boycotted last year’s census form because of its links with an arms firm has been fined £75.Derek Shields, 57, from Wirral, said he objected to the Office for National Statistics (ONS) using Lockheed Martin as a technical consultant.Liverpool magistrates convicted the unemployed motor mechanic of failing to comply with the census.
How many article headlines have you seen from the bBC which inform you of the faith of other people in court in which the faith of the person in the spotlight is pertinent to the story,you know like this story:
‘No problems’ with anti-gay leaflet, men tell court
or this one:
Grandfather pays tribute to dead Bolton baby boy
Both articles have strong reasons for the faith to be included in the title, quite rightly they haven’t, yet when the person in the dock is a Christian , then the bBC feels the world should know.
Funny that?
BBCNewsnight BBC Newsnight Agencies and agency – getting the sequence right in the euro crisis @paulmasonnews blog on how events could play out bbc.in/AurUIn
BBC>Newsnight>Paul Mason… and what ‘could’ happen.
On past evidence, ‘news’ it will not be.
My Site, re “What could happen…”
“News itself is a sort of fantasy; and when you actually go collecting news, you realize that this is so. In a certain sense, you create news; you dream news up yourself and then send it.” – Malcolm Muggeridge
My local ‘news’ station, has been reporting with glee, the totally pathetic, faux outrage, surrounding Aardman and its alleged insensitivity towards leprosy. Apparently, the limb of a model made of clay, falls off. Oh the horror, the horror. The hackneyed expression, ‘beyond parody’, does not do justice to this piece of BBC drivel. Stephen ‘I think I’m Oscar Wilde’ Fry has also added his two penneth worth. Fry espouses on every topic known to man and the BBC gobbles it up. I’m tired of Fry being described as a genius, because he isn’t. Clever? Yes, but not the fount of all knowledge.
Agree with you in regard to Mr. Fry – a fine memory, a good regurgitator of facts, but is he really that ‘clever’? Clever people are problem solvers; scientists, mathematicians, engineers. People like Fry are a modern, poor man’s version of the philosopher, an academic type who sits on the sidelines and pontificates about the work of the clever people, in the hope of borrowing some of their greatness. He never actually contributes anything of real value that might get his hands dirty.
Oh Lordy…what`s the betting that there is a Leprosy support group already beign formed now….and if anyone without leprosy feels that he needs to be treated as if he has it, then he`ll be getting Gareth Peirce to ensure this in Strasbourg or somewhere nice.
Stephen Fry is only the caricature of a clever perosn as imagined by a thick one…so says Peter Hitchens, and I can`t top that!
CJ, the Peter Hitchens quote is priceless. I find that Fry is always so pleased with himself he leves no room for you to pleased for him. God, I wish I’d said that – but credit goes to the late theatre critic Jack Tinker speaking about the luvvie Tom Conti. By the way, another great quote about Fry – sorry, I can’t remember who said it -was “He woke up one morning and decided he was going to ‘clever'”.
Of course Tinker spelled “leaves” correctly.
ROBERT BROWN; Leprosy Support Group? How can you support such a debilitating disease? In any case, if lepers try to contact such a group, they will probably shed fingers, hands, ears etc… in the process. Just a thought.
Indeed, Reed, that’s quite a good distinction between grades of “clever”, I have often argued that many “clever” university goers are often far less clever than many of their contempories but that they merely had a better short term memory.
I share one or two things with SF, I was also born on 24th August and my father was a physicist (and inventor of sorts)
SF went to Cambridge and IMHO is exactly the sort to have betraye dhis country and been in a spy ring…maybe he is.
The current bBC headlines:
UK rendition and torture collusion inquiry scrapped
Shock , horror and the way the bbC write it up you get the impression that the British have something to hide. Which explaines the convoluted way the bBC write up the article, because even with knowing why, even I am left confused by the bBC version of events. However as this is the bBC they leave the best for last and right down at the botton. Cue drum roll……..
“Here’s Shammy “
“Shami Chakrabarti, director of the civil rights group Liberty said: “We welcome the sensible decision to end the embarrassment of a so-called inquiry in which neither torture victims nor human rights campaigners had faith.”
Gosh you’ve just got to love how Shammy will drop everything in which to sound off on the bBC (Apart from the time when she remained silent on LSE, lots of money and a degree for some innocent person)
The VERY CAMP Richard Bacon interviews YET ANOTHER useless left wing comedian (Mark Thomas) who gets into the usual jew baiting and of course his Tory hate. Bacon does his usual trick of unzipping Thomas’s trousers live on air (verbally of course) and performs verbal oral sex with him. “Oh Mark I could talk to you for hours” swoons Bacon.
Mark Thomas – I absolutely detest this man. This is the guy who, just days after American troops had accidently fired upon their own and caused fatalities during the first Gulf War, appeared at the Montreal ‘Just For Laughs’ festival and said glibly and with great satisfaction “…and if there are any Americans in the audience, don’t worry – it was only friendly fire“. Thankfully, he got boo-ed quite loudly and looked very awkward, as if it was completely unexpected – too used to being around the lefty clique in his own country. I was hoping there would be some fecking great US Marines in the audience, waiting for him to leave the venue afterwards for a little bit of not-so-friendly fire.
What an absolute bastard. This is what I’ve loathed most about so much of the British comedy scene for decades – people who are just out to make a point in the most snide and cynical fashion, without assuming that they actually need to be funny. Left-wing politics, delivered with a sneer, often with the sole intent of offending. I’ve said it before – where is the new REAL alternative comedy.
Old brownhatter Bacon, does it again, another “socialist worker party”
twat, to read the Guardian with.
The only attempt at anything even approaching being factual, is that he calls himself an
“extreme rambler” = ie an extremist, rambling … on & on & on 😀
Reminicing about “talking politics loudly with religious radicals (imams?)” , bleating on & on about the … occupation. .. sheesh!
give me a break, & take the f-cking chip off your shoulder
this idiot sounds like a bloody hamas rep.
oh and as you surely guess … he s not full of hilarity 😀
laugh i thought i d never start
Thomas is a professional leftie. His audiences pay to have their bigotry reinforced. We also know who his friends are, don’t we?
“Mark successfully cycled from London to Paris in September and raised nearly £4,000 for the IMET 2000 charity.
They do amazing work in Gaza (working with the burns unit) and West Bank. The best doctors mean that instead of enduring the arbitrary horrors of the wall people get treatment on the West Bank.”
http://www.markthomasinfo.co.uk/
BBC News Channel talking with Amy Dalrymple about Scottish unemployment. “What can the Scottish Government do?” asks Sophie Long.
Answer: there are things the government can do. Uninterrupted, unchallenged waffle, no substance offered, the woman looking around, searching for answers, then… hire more public sector workers.
No further questions, thank you.
It’s a first principle that Richard Bacon is an overgrown adolescent and a twat.
Also no surprize that Mark Thomas pops in to plug his anti-Israel show. Afterall he was previously busy at the BBC plugging the book. Watch out for him again because he is planning a film – and Richard Bacon would like to see it.
All well and good – wonderful entertainment for lefties and those who oppose Israel.
Hey BBC, when will you broadcast anything for me, conservative and pro-Israel?
“Hey BBC, when will you broadcast anything for me, conservative and pro-Israel?”
anything for me … check
conservative … check
pro israel … check
so that will be no, no and er … no in that order.
thankyou for your comment, the corporation
appreciates your views.
Yesterday, a story emerged of how a talk on Sharia law at Queen Mary college London was abandoned after a bearded fellow walked into the lecture theatre before the start filmed everybody inside and then issued the threat that if anybody spoke ill of Mohammed he would hunt them down and kill them and their families.
Did anybody hear mention of this attack on free speech in the Uk by the bBC?
Funny enough at another uni in London there is a talk hosted by an Islamic group which is going to debate if Jesus Christ died on the cross as depicted by a bBC 4 Film asking that very question which will be played for all those that will be attending.
Double standards of free speech in the UK, strange how while the bBC remains silent on the former, they are being used to promote the latter.
Funny that?
Pounce, I love the warning you get…just can’t think for the life of me what sort of person would complain…scrap that, I know exactly who…
“Content Warning
Some readers of this blog have contacted Google because they believe that this blog’s content is objectionable. In general, Google does not review nor do we endorse the content of this or any blog. For more information about our content policies, please visit the Blogger Terms of Service.
I UNDERSTAND AND I WISH TO CONTINUE I do not wish to continue”
😎
The anti-Jesus people never give up. In the course of my life I have heard how Jesus didn’t exist; and if he did he was just one of many prophets and struck lucky with celebrity; and if he wasn’t then he was a Jewish terrorist; and if he wasn’t then he must have been a magician and a fraud; and if he wasn’t then he was a gay activist; and if he wasn’t, then he was never caught and tired; and if he was caught he never died; and if he was arrested then he never rose from the dead but his body was stolen; and if it wasn’t then he escaped and fled to Argentina…and so on and on and on. Now, I may be wrong but I think all the above were BBC documentary films and radio shows. (Probably produced by the religious department)
The threats at that University and the ‘content warning’ that must have come about by a similar campaign are the obvious reason why the BBC (and many others) have an unspoken double standard where religion is concerned. EVERYONE knows what’s going on in this country in regard to freedom of speech and ‘that’ religion, but the media refuse to stand on principle and address the threats and intimidation. If they were courageous, they would be honest about this. They opt for the cowards way out – continue to look the other way and pretend there’s no problem.
Stealth edit alert: as predicted, the BBC added a line about Google supporting Wikipedia’s blackout in protest of SOPA. Why wasn’t this in the original? Did the multi-billion dollar, international BBC not know? How is that possible? News Sniffer reveals all.
Equally amusingly, the sub-editor removed the bit about the White House allegedly criticizing the bill. What’s that about?
At last the BBC is reporting in another piece that Google is supporting Wikipedia’s and other sites’ protest against SOPA. Google isn’t going dark for the day like others are, but they’ve put a black bar over their logo on the US homepage. Google.co.uk is unaffected.
The article by technology reporter Leo Kelion is pretty good, covering both sides of the issue, although it rather offensively leaves out the fact that the House has put the vote on hold due at least as much to massive pressure from ordinary citizens as well as lobbying pressure from wealthy donors from the technology sector.
The Beeboids know this is a bad deal, and I’m sure there’s an internal struggle between solidarity with Hollywood and their desire to protect their content and a reflexive juvenile stance that the internet should be free everyting to everyone. Amusingly, Kelion assures us that, even if the bill passes, the President might not sign it into law. Well, maybe.
Now we’ll see who’s going to support His re-election the most: Hollywood and the entertainment industry, or Silicon Valley and the technology sector of Wall Street. Seeing as how the President has gotten more money from the latter than anybody in history, and Hollywood fundraising is down, we might be able to predict where His principles lie.
But like I said, this must come as a total shock to BBC audiences. It’s only been brewing for months, and they had a perfect opportunity to bring it up last week when covering the Richard “F*ck The Police” O’Dwyer story. Maybe the astute BBC News Online editors had these pieces prepared in advance, waiting for the right moment? Then why no mention of Google’s participation in their first report?
I’ve known about SOPA for quite a while, and knew for more than a month that this protest was going to happen at some point. Why did none of the 55 Beeboids working in the US, or any of the technology mavens in Salford say anything until now?
It’s an Indy Editor tweet, but just to check it’s not April 1 already..
burrell ian burrell John Fashanu’s daughter to present BBC3 doc on Mon 30 Jan on Britain’s Gay Footballers – they don’t seem to have found any though
BBC News Channel just did a quick report on the anti-SOPA blackout and protest. Covered the basics, but didn’t quite go far enough in my opinion, leaving out that the bill would give the Government power to shut down websites without due process of law – unlike what happened to Richard “F*ck The Police” O’Dwyer.
But the report ended by saying that the President will probably save the day, as He’s been against it from the start. Complete with stock footage of Him striding confidently across an open field, waving to the camera. It seems the BBC has found a way to use this story to promote Him after all. Well done.
No mention, of course, of conflicting sources of campaign cash.
Might be about to get interesting in the Huhne household.
http://www.thisislondon.co.uk/standard/politics/article-24028841-cabinet-reshuffle-if-court-case-goes-against-huhne.do
I wonder if they’ll give the go ahead. It’d be bloody typical if they don’t – slippery bastards.
Whatever happened to the mission to inform, educate and entertain?
Why has the BBC switched to: air greivance, enforce PC and dumb down?
“City wins bid to evict Occupy London protesters”
Giles Fraser comments…again.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-london-16592534
http://owsblog.blogspot.com/2012/01/occupy-ousted.html
I hope everyone is enjoying the BBC’s coverage of rising unemployment (except in Wales, so don’t mention that too often, eh?) being all blamed on Cameron’s policies. The current economic situation is due to Tory policy, and no Beeboid is suggesting he inherited a bad situation and needs time to fix it. How very unlike their reporting on the US, where none of The Obamessiah’s policies are at fault, and everything is due to the bad situation He inherited, or Republican intransigence against His Plan to fix things.
Even though Cameron has been in power half the time the President has.
I notice that Germany has downgraded it’s growth forecast as well, if Germany is struggling it’s not surprising we are.
The BBC of course just prattle on about “Tory cuts” yet the Liebore party were signed up for massive cuts themselves.
As for cutting VAT, sure just what we need a tenner off a flat screen TV made in China.
What I want is a pcut in taxes paid for by cutting wasteful public spending.
I half expect “Two Eds” Flanders to come on and blame Osborne for the US economic troubles.
Actually Stephanie Floundering Flanders has flown all the way to interview George Osbourne in Tokyo. Why she couldn’t interview him when he was in London is a question for the licence fee payers…
Also there was no mention of Ed Balls’s policies so proof that he doesnt have any…
The bBC reporting on Ruusia’s stance on Syria and half the story:
Russia threatens Syria resolution at UN
Russia will block any move at the UN Security Council to impose sanctions on Syria or authorise the use of force, its foreign minister has said. Sergei Lavrov said Russia would not be able to prevent military intervention, but that it would veto any resolution at the Security Council authorising it.
Russia has circulated its own draft resolution critical of both sides in the 10-month uprising in Syria.
And here is what Sergei Lavrov also had to say but for some reason the bBC didn’t mention:
Lavrov also said that Russia doesn’t consider it necessary to offer an explanation or excuses over suspicions that a Russian ship had delivered munitions to Syria despite an EU arms embargo.
And
Sergey V. Lavrov, warned Wednesday that outside encouragement of antigovernment uprisings in the Middle East and North Africa could lead to “a very big war that will cause suffering not only to countries in the region, but also to states far beyond its boundaries.”
Alert! Here comes the ”Mitt Romney uses a tax haven” story:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-16616562
ABC is all over it like a rash:
http://abcnews.go.com/Blotter/mitt-romney-millions-mormon-church/story?id=15380149#.Txb1cW8S2Ah
I can only say two words: “The Kennedy’s”
Some plain and simple pro-EU bias on the Today programme at 8.50, interviewing wetherspoons CEO Tim Martin. “You are obviously a notorious Eurosceptic”
Are there any notorious europhiles? I suppose not.
Well, at risk of unsettling the god-blessed Europhiles at the BBC (yes, you, Mr. Mason.. still waiting for the feedback on your ‘views-as-‘reporting” on this subject), I shall be sampling a guest ale or two at one of his fine venues in about 45 mins.
Good value. Good range. And by my choice.
I can see how that concept may be alien with the Today crew.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/today/hi/today/newsid_9680000/9680652.stm
I gave it a listen. Before and after the interview he actually referred to him as “a famous eurosceptic”. I didn’t pick up the word ‘obviously’.
Academic Study Finds Reuters Middle East Coverage Tainted by Propaganda, Violates Company Principles
Read the whole thing. Reuters: Principles Of Trust Or Propaganda?Henry I. Silverman, Roosevelt University, USA
Surely there’s an academic out there to repeat the study on the BBC?
Or the BBC could just release the Balen Report…
Oh dear.
Seems that the Courts have told the St Pauls lot to pack up their troubles in their blagged kit bags and try Regents Park Mosque for a while.
Eddie Mair on PM is not happy at all-and he asks the spokesman of the City of London whether or not the Cathedral had “grassed up the protestors”…as alleged in effect by one John Cooper who was the legal rep of the protesters.
So-blame the God Squad for the lost case-and maybe hope for some retribution.
Who is paying for John Cooper I wonder…and he`ll be one of the BBCs golden boys,and a Nulabor Attorney general one day.
Hope ,however; that Labor are consigned to oblivion for a couple of generations until all Miliband genes have been bred out of the pool…and at least Eagle, Mandelson, Cashman and Bryant are doing their bit to ensure we never repeat the mistake of voting for their ilk!
Bad news on the Keystone front: the State Dept. is going to block the pipeline construction. There go a couple hundred thousands of jobs down the toilet, not to mention lower fuel prices which would help the economy no end, as well as another step towards weaning the country off OPEC.
It’s very clever to have the State Dept. take the heat, This distances the decision from the President just a bit. The decision itself will excite the far-Left base, restoring their faith in Him at a crucial time. This decision, though, was forced on Him by the Republicans in the House. He was going to punt it into 2013 so He wouldn’t have to make a decision that might anger the base or be used against Him in the election. This is going to be used against him now, but I don’t know how effective it will be.
But now it looks like He has made the decision anyway, and He’s taken the extremist route. This will please the far-Left, and plays into His plan to “transform” the US economy away from oil and into that Green utopia.
The BBC will report this as a triumph, which it is for Him and the environmentals, but it’s a loss for the country and the economy. But remember, folks, it will be yet another Obamessiah policy that shall remain blameless when it comes to asking who’s responsible for the economy.
http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/culture/harrymount/100059745/hell-hath-no-fury-like-a-proud-oxbridge-reject/
I was about to move on when this became obvious as clearly a slo-news day piece of class-crass PR drivel, when a comment prompted me to click on the link that shows how this ‘story’ was originated.
Is the BBC really going to be running with every self-promo attempt from a right-on student who has figured glorious careers are not made by working hard and making stuff, but by stamping feet and trying to diss others whilst playing to the usual suspect gallery.
Penny Red has clearly got serious irony-free competition in the Newsnight special correspondent stakes.
Wow! She really admires herself, doesn’t she. So much self-regard at such a young age.
From the BBC article…
“It was while I was at interview that I finally noticed that subjecting myself to the judgement of an institution which I fundamentally disagreed with was bizarre.”
…she wants to study law, and doesn’t approve of ‘judgement’. I wonder how that went down in the interview.
“I spent my entire time there laughing at how seriously everything was being taken.”
…and she accuses this University of having a superior attitude. God forbid any student should take their degree seriously, especially a law degree.
“Being a successful student should depend on the student, not on whether or not a couple of academics have deemed you to shine in a twenty minute interview.”
…great logic there, ma’am. Of course, if the student is successful, they’ll have no problem shining in the interview, will they. Goodness, those awfully elitist academics might have to ‘discriminate’ by ability. Call the diversity police!
She’ll probably end up like Rev. Fraser, called on by the BBC to comment on all matters relating to ‘educational elitism’. Probably already on their Rolodex.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-oxfordshire-16604050
She’s 19, she’s entitled to be young and dumb.
One suspects that she knows she did badly at the interview and wanted to cushion the blow to her ego with a ‘preemptive rejection’.
Still, in this monochrome age, good to see someone her age willing to be different and show a bit of pizzaz, no matter how stupid her opinions!
I think it’s different to Laura Spence, she wasn’t trying to have a laugh, she really was up her self and threw a hissy fit for getting rejected. A rather ghastly brat.
Still, reassuring to know that Oxbridge still has quite a good selection process, despite bending over backwards with the times.
I used to work in a kitchen at one of the Oxford colleges. The north country head chef had worked their since the 60’s. He said in his broad norther accent: ‘When I started here 90% of ’em were from public schools, now half of they are rubbish like you n me!”.
There was a weak Occupy DC protest yesterday, and one of the Occupiers – darlings of the BBC – threw a smoke bomb or two over the White House fence. News of this has been censored by the BBC in favor of attacks on Romney and the usual assortment of lightweight magazine-style pieces.
Just posted – reporting tace on the BBC
I see he gets the Express, The Daily Mail and Murdoch in the first half minute! leaving the impression that these publishers are bigots and racist?
Love the comment that Peter Hitchens sent in as the reason for his NOT attending.
Watch the body language of the guests.
Thought they gave the Max fellow a good amount of time. I can hardly hear the other guy…by his expressions I think Max can! (and body language)
FFS they both gave 6/10!!
LOL, still only 2 views, that’s you and me Louis…unless you were actually there!
Span Owls, we share a minority interest. (no pun intended)
Oh god anyone else watching Newsnight? Mark (I was a soldier once honest) Urban telling us that we did have soldies in Libya.
No shit, of course we had special forces in there.
What a shock the BBC dreams up this non story to divert attention from Red Ed failing at PMQ’s once again and being in a right mess.
Back when The Obamessiah was “leading from behind”, we were told that the military attack on Libya was all done without boots on the ground. All the more to prove that He’s not George Bush, no invading Crusaders to piss off the Muslim World, etc. Some of us wondered at the time how those missiles got targeted without advance forces, and how intelligence was being gathered without them. Funny how the BBC got that wrong.
I can’t remember where it was mentioned- possibly on Debka but it seemed pretty obvious that is why Tripoli fell so swiftly in the end. A non story once again from the BBC
‘Urban telling us that we did have soldiers in Libya. ‘
As I recall, at the time the BBC and wee Dougie were doing their best to drop military and diplomatic folk right in it even when still in positions of hazard, simply trying to outscoop and outpontificate each other.
No bomb fuses were recalibrated in the creation of this post.
Question Time panel :
Baroness Sayeeda Warsi – professional Muslim, when it suits
Stephen Twigg – shadow education, grinning Portillo slayer
Caroline Lucas – Greenie, po-faced economy-killer
Germaine Greer – makes Hattie seem delightful
Charles Moore – Telegraph & Speccy, lone voice of sanity here
It’s going to be bloody awful then. We’re going to need to stick together on this one during the LiveBlog. Those of you who are drinkers had better double up on supplies.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/programmes/question_time/9680825.stm
So Newsnight has two guests on to talk about the proposed Thames airport and BOTH are against it.
That’s BBC balance?
Of course. But you have to see it in context.
It’s not just balance, it’s BBC balance.
Unique, but they get it about right.
The BBC running a story about demands by a couple of Labour MPs to get Cameron to apologise for a ‘dinosaur’ remark aimed at Dennis Skinner (very apt for the silly old class war buffoon).
Why the story now? I seem to recall Cameron using a similar putdown of the old git in the past at PMQs. It then becomes apparent that the article is a good cue to renew the Flashman narrative in regard to the PM. They also provide a link to an old ‘related story’, where their hero Ed Miliband throws out the same accusation. I guess Cameron’s been doing too well against their man for too many consecutive PMQs – time for the ‘public school bully’ labels to come out of storage in the hope that they might stick this time.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-16622894
This is a comment I put on Facebook and couldn’t be bothered retyping:
Labour MPs who openly mocked a Conservative MP with Cerebral Palsy and who have a blatant racist on their front bench should just keep quiet. All they are doing is embarrassing themselves.
Skinner is a vitriolic old fart who has never made a valid contribution to the country, as far as I can remember, should feel complemented to only being called a dinosaur. His question today was completely stupid and should have been directed, more appropriately, towards his own front bench.
If Cameron does well in PMQ’s he is a public school bully, but if he does not do well it is a victory for the Labour Party.
The BBC, spinning for Labour, as usual.
The Public Sector Broadcasting Corporation.