Perhaps you may wish to comment on this from BBC DG Mark Thompson to the Leveson Inquiry this morning?
“The BBC is not a business and it might well be that someone running a media business might take a different view from the view that I took as director general of the BBC.
“The BBC is a public service broadcaster. It is committed to be the most trusted, trustworthy source of news in the world and we want to maintain the highest possible standards in all matters, including matters relating to privacy.”
If you look at the headings on the BBC digital text TV News, a sidebar carries the message “all the stories from around the world”. Stories tend to be just that, fiction, which is the original meaning. When dressed up as “news” or statements from the beeboids it is more commonly known as lies!
Heard Mark Thompson on the midday news with the approved soundbite.
His Olympian detachment to the cause of impartiality does-of course-necessitate an in-house enquiry into whether-God forbid-the Leveson investigation might somehow implicate the BBC.
“As if”-but still a good wheeze to scoot around, just in case there are some anchovies in the radiators as left by the previous tabloid regime…but Thompsons objective and dispassionate curiosity about this alien “phone-hacking” phenomenon is commendable is it not?
Will he be checking that nexus of weevils that is where Guardian and Beeb merge…the interface of all truth and virtuous righteousness, that appears only on their maps-but it`s real-honest!
Believe Lord Johann Hari will be leading the enquiry!
‘The BBC is … committed to be the most trusted, trustworthy source of news in the world’
Not quite the same as actually showing any evidence of meeting that commitment.
And the DG cribbing from Helen Boaden on the ‘what we think… is’ notion still is a bit lame.
Seems they do copy Labour more closely, at least in areas of message synergy if not coherent practice…
http://order-order.com/2012/01/23/abbott-says-labour-hq-censor-tweets/
As one commenter notes..
“Some twitter accounts say “thoughts are mine and not those of my employer” but here we have the reverse.”
All part of that rich tapestry that is the variable rule set comprising the axis of weevils ‘How to try to fool all the peoplke, all the time’ manual.
But guys, please… coordinate! Otherwise it just seems… silly. If still ‘unique’.
Unless, of course, like Labour, all tweets are run by Aunty’s upper echelons, which means…. 🙂
“…the most trusted, trustworthy source of news in the world..” Just a thought but where do the needs of those who actually pay for this abomination come into Mr Thompson’s thoughts? Who cares what the world thinks, they don’t pay for it, we do and we’re not happy with what is being dished up to us, incessantly and brazenly, by the socialist clique that is the bbc.
Just two words on the BBC DG’s statement.
Unctious prat.
He KNOWS how much criticism the BBC receives about its nonending leftie bias – right across its programming output.
Those quotes need a bit of truth added:
“The BBC is not a business so we can spend other people’s money as we wish (stiffles snigger); and it is certainlt true that anyone running a media business might take a different view from the view that I took as director general of the BBC.”
“The BBC should be a public service broadcaster. It was once committed to be the most trusted, trustworthy source of news in the world and we now live off the back of that reputation as we know on a level playing field we’d be toast.”
What a load of crap. Of course the BBC is a business. Span Ows’ comment above is more accurate. The Corporation is all about grasping for cash. The BBC may have the unique luxury of having a guaranteed revenue base, which has created the internal culture of bloat, privilege, and excess for the higher-ups, but they’re always looking for ways to increase earnings.
To Thompson, ratings = trust, ratings = public service, ratings = quality.
There are certain elements of BBC News it’s unwise to trust.
The man I watched on BBC this morning (Thompson) could hardly string a sentence together let alone run a billion pound business.
I have run a number of businesses some successfully, some not but for certain I would not have put that man in charge of unloading water out of a sieve. To think that I and my family and millions of other families throughout this land are compelled by law to pay a licence fee so that this buffoon and his dismal left wing nut cases can receive hundreds of thousands of pounds a year to brainwash the population into believing the trashy ides they spout is beyond the comprehension of man.
Anyway.
What time does the next spaceship leave for Mars?
And has anyone got Richard Branson mobile no?
And yes just a one way ticket please!
What time does the next spaceship leave for Mars?
Strictly between us… three words: The ‘A’ Ark.
The BBC have the next one all to themselves.
Just.. a caution on how close you hold the phone for a while.
Just caught a clip of Thompson’s appearance on the News Channel. Doesn’t he shave even for this? What a class act. I like the tie, though.
‘Doesn’t he shave even for this?’
Plenty of opportunity from his unique command position as Captain of aformentioned ‘BBC Ark’ once it arrives at its destination.
This unshaven look is most odd. It does tell us something about him though. If he was driving a taxi I don’t think I would ride in it.
‘If he was driving a taxi I don’t think I would ride in it.’
If you were a BBC employee, but not making them money (part of the ‘unique’ thing, which can also be called double standards), and said that, I think you’d be fired and then hounded by colleagues for scruffybuggerism.
Why wasn’t Johnny Marbles standing nearby with a plate of shaving foam?
Investigating if the BBC ever did phone hacking is asking the wrong question. A much better problem to investigate would be the BBC’s use of license fee money to create stories out of whole cloth, such as the time they paid a kid to pose on camera with guns, or Kevin “Teabagger” Connolly’s recent piece about how his personal lemon tree is drying out the Jordan River.
Well, you know what they say at the BBC – when life gives you lemons, make anti-Israeli propaganda.
Meanwhile, at the Culture, Media and Sport committee…
John Whittingdale: Have you seen the latest article by Kevin Connolly?
Tom Watson: No, what’s it about?
John Whittingdale: A lemon tree, my dear Watson.
It’s OK, I’ve already got my coat.
It’s a pity that Mr Thompson doesn’t listen to some of the programmes broadcast by the organisation that he purports to represent. If he took the time to listen to ‘This Sceptered Isle’, particularly the one broadcast today on Henry the Sixth and Joan of Arc, me he might just discern some of the genetic traits of our beloved countrymen. We, the great unwashed, hoi poloi, don’t back away from some quite nasty actions, when we eventually recognise that our supposed leaders are treating us like shit. And various forms of killing our leaders plays a might great part in determining how we want things to be resolved. Heads on spikes, is not just a humourous skit on English history. And , maybe not, strangely, it seems to work.
“It is committed to be the most trusted, trustworthy source of news in the world and we want to maintain the highest possible standards in all matters”
Who said there are no comedians at the BBC anymore?
Are we living in the same universe I wonder?
“Leveson Inquiry: BBC spent £300,000 on private detectives says Mark Thompson”
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/leveson-inquiry/9033324/Leveson-Inquiry-BBC-spent-300000-on-private-detectives-says-Mark-Thompson.html
‘The Times'(£) reports, front page today, that the Government is looking for a new DG of BBC to replace THOMPSON.
The article notes Thompson huge salary as a target, but there is no indication that the Government will try to stop the BBC’s political agenda of daily propaganda for Islam, E.U., Labour Party, greenies, Obama, and against Israel.
After being involved with a tussle between Mensa members and the morons at the BBC Trust over Climate Change bias, when they gave us evidence that the BBC was overtly biased in its communications with us.
When this was pointed out, they delayed publication of the finding, and then when it was published, none of the communications we had with them that destroyed trust in the BBC for members was mentioned or referred to in the BBC Trust Editorial Standards Committees finding.
I suppose Mark Thompson hopes that the result of the Leveson inquiry is that the BBC media monopoly will become total, which would mean that the BBC hopes to keep secret the fact that the BBC is no longer the most trusted media organisation in the world.
All the Leveson inquiry has to do is force the Daily Telegraph, Daily Mail and the Express to go the same way as the News of the World. Then they would have to silence the internet including BBC Bias and then introduce the death penalty for those people who refuse to pay the licence fee. Only then can the peoples growing mistrust of the BBC be successfully hidden.
‘they delayed publication of the finding, and then when it was published, none of the communications we had with them that destroyed trust in the BBC for members was mentioned or referred to in the BBC Trust Editorial Standards Committees finding.’
Now what was it I read from Ms. Harris recently in Jeff’s posting about him being told by her his complaints would in future be given the ‘la, la, la…’ treatment. Oh yes… good faith.
Interesting to also note the determination that nothing gets out that may enable others to be aware or dots to get joined..
‘we would be grateful if you would refrain from contacting them regarding specific complaints,’
This… is a concern. Especially for a £4Bpa publicly funded organisation that already sees itself as unaccountable.
I have also just had to ask my new Newsnight producer friend which Monday he meant for his more considered reply, as it seems he has missed his own new deadline.
I am sure he will now be even sorrier. If perhaps not meaning it.
“we want to maintain the highest possible standards in all matters”
Er… Can some dogs read their owners’ minds?
Particularly like the BBC hack’s use of “Cambridge-educated research scientist”. Ooh, Cambridge-educated! Must be true, then.
Ah, Cambridge University, home to the traitors McLean, Burgess, Blunt, Philby and goodness knows how many more who haven’t been discovered. But I suspect they are to be found in the bbc, the CofE, the Civil Service, the Courts of Law, the government, the HoL and just about every other corridor of power in our country. And by their actions shall they be known.
That quote should have been: “we want to maintain the highest possible ratings….”
Is that Cambridge Poly by any chance?
“The BBC is a public service broadcaster. It is committed to be the most trusted, trustworthy source of news in the world and we want to maintain the highest possible standards in all matters, including matters relating to privacy.”
Privacy, of course, includes keeping the BBC’s report into its own antisemitism secret from the public.
Why does Mr. Thompson hold himself and the BBC to a different standard to other broadcasters?
“The BBC is a public service broadcaster”, he says.
I say: define “Public Service”.
Does he claim the BBC has a higher calling than the commercial sector? Do other news organizations, too numerous to mention; all commercially produced TV; the film industry; the recording business; the publishing houses; theatrical and music venues – all operate on a lower level of excellence?
Why does the method of FUNDING of a body and its self-proclaimed superiority make it “holier than thou”?
I’ve just watched the short video on the BBC web site in which Thompson answers the “what was behind the thinking?” question. This is what he said:
The thinking was, errr, we, we, I, I took the decision to, ummm, with colleagues, erm, erm, and, errr, erm, after discussions with the, with the Chairman of the BBC Trust to, to do a review, ummm, because the BBC is, is the biggest journalastic organisation in this country, ummm, ummm, evidence had come to light, errr, of, ummm, this practice being used by other, ummm, errr, organisations, at least one other organisation, or individuals in that other organisation, and it, it seemed to me that, erm, that as part of the BBC’s overall desire to assure the highest possible standards of its journalism it’s appropriate to ask the question, errr, errr, errr, errr, is there any evidence, errr, errr, errr, that that, what, what, what we are told, errr, was happening at the News of The World has ever been done at the BBC. Hardly instills confidence, does it? Or justify his £675,000 salary… http://lunchtimeloather.blogspot.com/