Well folks, it is just over a week since the new site went “live” and I have to say that I am very pleased with it so far. There is always a stress that accompanies such change and of course one expects teething problems. Traffic levels are great, I am finding this much easier to navigate that on the old blogger site. Hope you also like it.
There are two quick points that I want to make; Firstly, I notice some new names commenting which is great and a big hello and warm welcome to you. A few older names don’t seem to have made it here yet but I do hope they will migrate. Second, can I ask fellow writers to please send their brief bio to ASE so we have a comprehensive authors page?
And apart from that, the floor is yours….! I declare this open thread…OPEN! Enjoy.
Hi folks, sorry to repost this again but its importance and reflection of the bias of selective reporting endemic not just within the BBC but across the MSM gamut cannot be understated. You’ll all remember the ‘revolutionary’ twaddle spewed out on BBC news headlines and the pretentious fawning Newsnight ‘debate’ during which Galloway polished his halo whilst Paxman held it aloft with servile glee. One came away thinking that a wide cross-section of the voter-base in Bradford was apathetic and disenchanted with mainstream politics; alienated because of the farcical and corrupt nature of British politics. However, they might of been less selective and shown some of the below. Then the public might have been able to make up its own mind about why such a large percentage of one particular ethnic group voted for ‘gorgeous’ George.
I think I missed this edition of Question Time.
And in a similar vein:
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2125892/Tory-Cabinet-ministers-ordered-attend-Eid-Diwali-festivals-appeal-Asian-voters.html
I predicted this on a previous thread. That our so called political elite should make extra effort to brown-nose one particular voting bloc shows the disproportionate influence immigrants have on our electoral system.
Is this pandering to the immigrant/Muslim vote good for democracy? I think not! I think it will drive many more voters into the arms of the extreme fringe parties who at least put on a show of speaking to, and for, the disaffected voters of this country.
Still, those chancers of the three main parties never pass up an opportunity for vote grabbing and short term self interest.
He truly is a remarkable piece of work, a hypocrite and a scoundrel. Talking out of both sides of his mouth at the same time. Press TV must delight in having him among their presenters
Along with Ken Livingstone of course (until London Mayoral campaigning started). The hypocrite who told us we should always respect the human rights of others whilst working for Press TV, the mouthpiece of the Iranian government, a regime not noted for its concern for human rights.
How he gets the votes isn’t Rocket Science, but perhaps the ‘back-pack’ variety:
Grgeous George stoops low.
Been following the Ken – Tax issue on bbc. http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-london-17622189
The problem is the bbc say Ken has published is tax details. However, the others have audited papers, Ken’s was done by one of his old conies. bBC does not seem, or wants to, understand this fact.
Exactly right, they would be all over Boris’s figures if there was any hint of them being wrong. They don’t want to know when Ken’s figures are suspect.
What I also find strange is that yesterday afternoon the only story about the tax figures was one that focused only on Boris’s figures with no mention of anyone else. Of course there were some innuendos to infer that there was some wrong doing. Now I can’t find the story and it has changed into what we see now. Maybe even the BBC recognised how biased it looked earlier in the day.
…and last night in the Newsnight follow up to the disclosure challenge, thrown down to candidates, they did not focus at all on Ken’s failure to produce a complete set of figures and his tax avoidance arrangements (which were at the heart of the argument that has been raging), they instead seemed more interested in Boris’ earnings. There was also a sly exchange between the new (ex Guardian) Political Editor Allegra Stratton and (Labour connected) Wark about Boris and the 50% tax rate.
This morning, ‘Today’ went a little further but their guest confessed to not being a tax expert. I’m sure they would have found one if Boris had been avoiding tax .
The Newsnight treatment of this story is, to my mind, the most troubling and obvious example of blatant bias, or lack of balance, in recent times. This cannot be allowed to continue. Something has to be done about it.
This may amuse, along with Newsnight also ‘learning’, sans irony, that folk can, on occasion, use complicit internal systems to absolve them of any wrong-doing. I may run that by ECU & The Trust as they claim Allegra and Kirsty were ‘getting it about right’ muttering drakly about what ‘we’ ‘know’ about Boris.
@Allegra Stratton –
We reported #newsnight govt gearing up to charge for “frivolous” FOI requests…
Asked the good lady if shoe could think of any other august public sector, and funded bodies who had any other wheezes to avoid ‘fessing up under FoI when it doesn’t suit.
Oddly, so far, ‘questions aren’t being answered’.
Just watched BBC lunchtime news and , hurray, they reported in the tax argument between Ken and Boris, however being masters of deception they used a TV debate where it appeared that Ken had just caught Boris out, there was no reporting that Ken is paying 14.5% and Boris 40% of income as tax, just pure biased misdirection, it could have been written by Kens campaign team. I have complained but expect no proper response. Shameless.
What about the Beeb publishing the balen report,its about time the state broadcaster became accountable for what they do and don’t do.
We pay their wages punishable by law if we don’t but they can do what they want and p+ss on us without any comeback………
Between using public funds on legals to get to talk to terrorist activity they like, and using public funds on legals to ensure no one talks about terrorist activity that may not suit, the BBC is truly, a culture of ‘having it all ways’, and ‘unique’.
of amusement value, ‘BBC adopts Sharia policies’:
http://www.thepeoplescube.com/current-truth/bbc-adopts-sharia-policies-stones-gay-staff-t876.html
Brilliant Zemplar!
The Peoples Cube looks great on first showing….loved the PC Rubiks Cube…red on all sides, so that no kid in school need experience failure!
The organogram at the bottom is good too, may I suggest David Vance adds it to an open thread/Islam thread.
Mark Steyn on feedom of speech, Australia Feb 29
It’s not his talk but a short interview…15 minutes
My eldest son is out there and I told him to go along to one of the talks (he didn’t in the end…all sold out!)
sorry folks, cant imbed it
Tom Utley at the Daily Mail exposing BBC bias from this week here:
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/debate/article-2125845/I-wont-treat-Good-Friday-sermon-I-story-avenging-angel-BBC-hypocrisy.html?ITO=1490
Worth a read.
Thanks Mr P.
Lansley is a useless lump, like the rest of the useless Tories: but it seems only the BBC is able to adjudicate on the “good enquiry” (Savile, Scarman, Mc Pherson, Leveson)…and the “bad enquiry”(Balen and now this one).
There aren`t many “bad ones”…but to dare to find wrong doing without Jenni Murray or Naomi Wolf in tow is…well…sexist and patronising…what else?
That he is the Government Minister looking into truly evil abuses of the abortion lobby to kill girls, to presign forms and therefore offer no counselling as the law demands…on his own patch and in response to a national scandal dicovered by undercover reporters…this is not enough.
How very dare he?…give them a couple of years to flush the foetuses down the loo, leave the files in a skip and move Furedi, Leather, Bower up and across and out of harms way….and only THEN will Montague or Anne Robinson look at the outrages, before deciding that “lessons will be learned”.
Lansley is crap-as all these Tories are-but he was right on this one…and to expect Bowers CQC to act inj defence of the unborn is as desperate and ineffective as expecting that useless scumbag to protect the old in their care homes(and they are alive,and might have a relative to speak for them-so that Cynthia B sentenced THEM to death or to torture only shows how evil and inept she and her stooges actually are!)
What a circus…but no-ones laughing at these posturing clowns like Dame Jo and Baroness that…they cost lives by the day, and the BBC would rather we not worry too much about these non-voting licence fee payers-the unborn or the very old.
The only reason the BBC got the boot in on the whole illegal clinic issue is that those ‘progressives’ on the left always have supported abortion.
Amusing comment on this from one colin harrow:
I recently had the following response from the BBC after I’d asked them under the Freedom of Information Act for a break-down of the complaints they received comparing those accusing them of showing a liberal/left bias with those accusing them of being too right-wing. I observed, I thought quite reasonably, that such a breakdown was fundamental in providing the essential proof they were fulfilling their charter obligation to impartiality. They replied: “The BBC has chosen not to volunteer information relating to the subject of editorial complaints for several very good reasons, chief amongst them being our desire to maintain our independence and impartiality” In other they won’t give you information that might prove the public thinks they’re biased because they wish to maintain their impartiality! How can anyone write such stuff? But that is what those who have problems with the BBC are up against. The “doublethink” Orwell’s wrote about in “1984” seems mild by comparison.
‘In other words they won’t give you information that might prove the public thinks they’re biased because they wish to maintain their impartiality! How can anyone write such stuff?’
Becuase… what’s stopping them? The ECU? The Trust? No. Because that’s who is saying it!
Which is makes them… and you know I am going to say this… so unique:)
I must confess that I don’t tend to watch many BBC programmes, I let the good people on here do it for me. Anyway, I watched a couple of documentaries this week starting with Natural World (The Real Jungle Book Bear) which was mercifully free of global warming propaganda. Narrated by David Attenborough (who is one of the worst when it comes to the warmist cult) it was a good natural history programme of the type they used to make in the old days (pre AGW bollocks). Castle Commando, a documentary about the origins and the training of commando special forces in Scotland, was another good programme. I didn’t detect any of the usual bias although it did touch on the controversial Dieppe raid (which historians of most hues tend to question). On the flip side we had Wolley Mammoths: Secrets from the Ice, a programme that worshipped at the altar of climate change. Within the first few minutes there had been references to global warming and climate change exposing ice covered mammoth carcasses in Siberia. The aim is to drum this crap into the viewers watching and this is why we here oppose the BBC’s pernicious agenda. I’m sick of their propaganda, whether it’s global warming, the EU, mass immigration and the rest. Ironically, it didn’t seem to occur to Alice Roberts that whenever she referred to the end of the last Ice Age, she was referring to climate change/global warming without the human/industrial element i.e. the earth regularly goes through periods of warmth and cold.
INBBC sees no mass Islamic immigration from Syria, via Turkey, to E.U and Britain.
Of course, INBBC, broadcasting in the interests of Islamic people of the world (and not in the interests of British people), neglects to even mention that the mass immigration of largely Syrian Muslims into Turkey is but a temporary stage for an onward mass immigration into the E.U. and Britain, via Greece’s porous borders.
INBBC report:
“Syria crisis: Turkey refugee surge amid escalation fear”
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-middle-east-17635434
ChrisH,
Glad you enjoyed it. There’s plenty of other great stuff on there. Just stumbled across that site.
Today is Good Friday in the Christian calendar-and when I saw that Owen Jones had decided it should be renamed Black Friday, I looked at the Indie to check.
Silly me…turns out that working tax credits will be lost by some people today…so sod that Christian stuff…THIS is worth dying for.
Unfortunately for me, Owen (Shoutie) Jones is the very apotheosis of the thrusting amoral, bone-headed future of media broadcasts for some time yet(unless he commits Hari Johann).
I imagine now that the worldwide virus of racism means we`re not redeemable…added to climate change deniers and fascists like UKIP, and we can see why it is indeed a Black Friday.
Sometimes I wonder what Jesus bothered dying for…for Owen Jones and Johann Hari?….he probably did as well!
Now THAT`S the Mystery of Easter to me!
Seeing this article in the Daily Mail today – The BBC has a duty to represent the British nation…but is it doing so? you immediately think of so many issues where this failing by the BBC could be applied.
Seems this journalist hasn’t spent much time researching her subject very well. Seems to think the BBC is pro-government.
Has there been an election in the last 24 hours where Labour got in, or am I in a parallel universe?
There are of course many views outside this blog that the BBC is pro- government of the day and more broadly pro- establishment. I think there’s a lot in this. Sonia Poulton goes over the top, but that is not unknown aming those purporting to have winkled out evidence of BBC bias. I think the BBC do a decent job of being impartial in the round.
Jim, never has the phrase, “You should have gone to Specsavers,” been more apt.
It’s so pro-islam, I’m wondering just how many paedophiles work at the BBC !
Oh yes, I remember JUST how pro government of the day the BBC was when Thatcher was in power…
I think the BBC do a decent job of being impartial in the round.
As I’ve seen with you Jim, you are somebody who either has an agenda here, or is blind to truth. Either way you are brainwashed, but I don’t expect you to realise it.
Here’s a question for you just to test yourself – Mark Thompson himself admitted to a MASSIVE LEFT WING BIAS by the BBC – Show me where you see that it has been addressed and in what way.
My guess is you will find a way to avoid answering THE DIRECT QUESTION.
So Mark Thomson 30 years ago (aged 24, and a production trainee) thought there was a massive *left-wing* bias in the BBC. ‘But now it’s different’.
Imagine he’d said; “30 years ago there was a massive *right-wing* bias – ‘but now it’s different’ ”
Would that not support your argument even more, even though it involves Thomson saying the exact opposite?
Nobody, not even the most deluded left-wing Defender of the Indefensible, like you Dezzie, could ever have said that the BBC “used to have a massive right-wing bias 30 years ago” because that would be plainly stupid. (Please prove me right about you by saying that very thing Dezzie.)
And there’s no way that anyone with any modicum of intelligence could argue honestly that they are supportive of the present government when they spend broadcast after broadcast attacking them, and always pushing the Labour Party message with very little qualification.
Contrary to what Jim Dandy says, there is no evidence of the BBC supporting the present government, and thousands of unarguable examples on this site of the BBC being anti-government (the present one).
I will agree that the BBC is now quite pro-establishment. Apart from the Monarchy most of the establishment has been infiltrated by the left and is pushing left-wing messages. The BBC, the judiciary, the Church, even the Police now all talk openly with left-wing points of view. Not forgetting the Campbell-politicised Civil Service.
‘unarguable’!
Could you seriously have watched coverage of last year’s royal wedding and thought the BBC was anything other than pro-monarchy. And while I’m very pro-monarchy myself, Andrew marr’s recent documentary on the Queen was pure hagiography. Brenda deserves no less, but it was entirely pro our beloved monarch.
This was the same BBC who were trying to get quotes from as many anti-monarchists on the very day, including trying to get negative responses from various Australian politicians. The same BBC who had some anti-monarchist lefties to piss on the pro-monarchists parade (so to speak). I didn’t watch too much of it myself but I did see some of that.
Surprising really as the monarchy is supposed to be above politics and represents the state not a particular political leaning. Therefore the BBC should be pro-monarchy if it is truly the “British” Broadcasting Corporation. The amount of attacks on the monarchy in so-called comedy programmes by Beboids rather proves your point to be, well, completely wrong.
I suppose a snide republican coverage of Royal events would represent balance? Come on lefties, you have coverage of every other issue your own way at least let your BBC cover Her Madge with a little respect until she has seen out her days. By all means pile in with the republicanism then. You might as well be patient, every thing else is going your way.
And I wouldn’t watch Andrew Marr, as we all know how extreme-nutjob leftish he is. Without having watched it; I find it extremely unlikely that Andrew Marr, with his anti-decency stance on everything, would present a fair and positive programme on the Queen without filling it with sly, snidey digs. That’s what he does: I can’t imagine this would have been any better.
You didn’t watch it? Good job. Very tricky to reconcile it with the boilerplate b-BBC dogma.
Reply to Jim. No I didn’t watch it. I have seen him far too often before and know in which pool of poison he sits. I don’t have to see a particular dog, to know it barks – I’ve seen many other barking dogs, and none that moo. B-BBC dogma is that biased, red in tooth and claw lefties like Marr are always biased, red in tooth and claw lefties. I don’t have to watch every programme he’s in to confirm what he has already proved on countless occasions.
As I have a daughter I am sometimes fortunate enough to see some of the BBC’s kids propaganda/brainwashing, call it what you will. Newround on Wednesday had a lovely piece on religion during their 40th anniversary edition. No news on Wednesday was there? What’s that, muslim rapists? No no no, on with the show… Anyway, judge for yourselves, the VT starts at 3mins. Big hairy leftie archbishop, and a lovely muslim boy reckoning it he doesn’t discriminate against non muslims. All well in the world then. http://www.bbc.co.uk/newsround/17582018 Strangely not on iplayer.
Mark Thomson (right or wrong) was talking about 30 years ago! He is explicitly not talking about the BBC now.
What don’t you understand by
Show me where you see that it has been addressed and in what way.
How might I do that Teddy?
And that Jim is the problem. You cannot show how it has been adressed because you know it hasn’t, what’s more it has got worse – more knee-jerk. As soon as the government says something about anything the first reaction is to find a way of attacking what was said and to contact the Labour Party to provide a spokesman to attack it – probably to discuss how to co-ordinate attacks as well.
I’ll address this both to Jim and Dez above as they both have taken a similar tack.
Notwithstanding that others besides Thompson who have worked for the BBC, like Peter Sissons and admitted the left-wing bias prevalent at the BBC, besides this acknowledgement, if somebody wanted to show that it had since changed they would have to demonstrate how.
Has the BBC advertised for staff from more right-wing sources, like the Telegraph, The Times, The Daily Mail?
And before you guys tell me that they also advertise positions there, be sure I’m going to come down hard on the fact that the percentage of job adverts is FAR GREATER at the Guardian – which is not known for attracting right wing readers. One would think with The Telegraph having a far greater readership than the Guardian, if the BBC wanted to attempt balancing their admitted left wing slant, that it would be better to advertise mostly there.
When you see Question Time, with its almost consistent 4 left to 1 right panellists, there’s no question that the BBC know how to recognise somebody from the right side of the spectrum. So perhaps you can show how the BBC have balanced their lefty journalists with known ones from the right. Name some that show balance.
I won’t hold my breath.
I can also tell you both I’d respect you far more if you admitted that IT HASN’T BEEN ADDRESSED and there’s NOTHING you can show, since that’s the truth.
What you can answer for me that I’m curious about, is what is your REAL personal interest in trying to defend the indefensible BBC?
“How might I do that Teddy?”
Quite.
‘What don’t you understand..
Blimey, how long have you got?
On top of which it appears Samantha Brick had at least two offspring with similar pyschoses, possibly on a created on a Pharaohic basis.
Love the flip from not answering to demanding answers by our hero, especially after a claim strafe… textbook. But I can see the genetic inability to resist the limelight mitigated against a safer retreat to the bunker, as wiser heads have perfected, if with a [sigh].
Having trouble seeing you guys down that hole now, mind.
With added grammatical value in headline:
the BBC are not happy about the teacher’s pensions
…but they never go into detail. Who loses what? What pay grades re effected? What are the pension provisions? They never go into detail because that destroys any case they may think they have.
Having never had the misfortune to hear ‘thought for the day’, perhaps those of you that have might appreciate this appraisal…
The Rev Dr Peter Mullen:
“There is nothing authentically religious about TFTD. It is an anodyne, multi-faith political pep talk from the soft Left and so bum-clenchingly politically-correct as to be beyond satire. It is the social gospel – only without the gospel.”
http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/news/petermullen/100149644/thought-for-the-day-is-a-multi-faith-pep-talk-from-the-soft-left/
He`s near on 100% correct.
The only Godly input is when Jonathan Sacks is doing it…and he`ll be off soon!
Abandon ship!
awaiting a BBC documentary about gay ‘marriage’ in Egypt
I suggest you don’t hold your breath while waiting. Sooner or later the INBBC is going to have to square the circle of gay rights versus the islamic stance. How much longer can they go on avoiding it?
I haven’t seen any coverage of this result yet…
Thurrock referendum historic result
Numbers voting AGREE 13,111 (89.9%)
Numbers voting DISAGREE 1,479 (10.1%)
The People’s Pledge campaign in Thurrock closed yesterday at 5pm. 47,995 ballot papers were issued by Electoral Reform Services Limited, and 14,590 people have returned them by post or voted electronically. That is a turnout of 30.39%
“This turnout is astonishing and vastly exceeds anyone’s expectations, including mine. Two months’ very hard work by our small highly dedicated team has paid off in spectacular style. Earlier this week, when we were finding so people had already voted, it was clear something very exciting was about to happen. These numbers were simply unimaginable.”
Full info here…
http://us2.campaign-archive1.com/?u=cd87abaa476ddb40d85de000d&id=1c3a06dd56&e=df4cc20d3c
http://www.peoplespledge.org/
The BBC did give this poll a brief mention in February…
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-16904321
I wonder if we’ll see any coverage of this result…after all, they did cover ‘the historic result’ in Bradford last week.
George Osborne ‘happy’ to reveal politicians’ tax data – http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-17642736
That headline is contradicted by the article itself, which says that Mr Osborne has merely indicated that he’s happy to consider publishing said data. The BBC are sacrificing accuracy to generate a sensational headline…
Jeff
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-17642736
That headline is contradicted by the article itself
Yet another example of ‘accuracy won’t fit’ in their headlong rush to shoehorn twitter and FaceBook onto mobile screens… with added ‘narrative’ enabled.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/theeditors/2012/03/a_new_way_to_access_bbc_news_on_your_mobile.html
Worth clicking links (as senior editors don’t ‘do’ interactivity on blogs being, as they are, at the cutting edge of social media) and see the epic collection of ‘we are getting it about right’ delusion from moppets in the hive lower down the totem, blithely ignoring (when not modding out) actual valid critiques.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/politics/georgeosborne/9191222/Osborne-very-happy-for-government-to-consider-publishing-MPs-personal-tax-returns.html
‘Osborne ‘very happy’ for government to consider publishing MPs personal tax returns’
And SKY anchor just read that out, in the full form, as I type.
Vs. ‘George Osborne ‘happy’ to reveal politicians’ tax data’
What gets run through the BBC Editorial filter is no longer to be relied upon.
Can’t wait for the next ‘but if you click the link and read on it is made clear….’ reason but no excuse from a Director of GIAR (Getting It About Right) Director.
Bang to rights.
Rare, but welcome. For which, thank you. Now, take it to them too! It is not a silly partisan issue, but goes to the heart of professional integrity, and no amount of ‘only x% of complaints to the BBC are found valid… by the BBC’ will dig them out of the clear evidence of our own eyes, and captured screen grabs that get re-edited before some Young Mr. Graceseque duffer in the Trust gets to say they are ‘all doing very well.’.
The BBCs view on this is very eggy indeed.
Tells me that they have an awful lot to hide in this wonderful Arab Springtime of accountability and transparency…you know,” letting sunlight in upon the magic”.
Osborne would do very well to get this done…safe to say that there`ll be a lot more Kens to flush out from the top of the BBC and the Guardian/Channel 4….we know the Tories are greedy, but to see Toynbee and Balls, Snow and Montague etc squirm would ensure my vote to the Tories and an even better reason not to pay a license fee.
Come on BBC….let`s see Balen whilst we`re at it!
Reckon the verb “To Livingstone”…will do it..or even name the bill after him..the footnote in history the caned toad would have craved since 1981!
British Trades Union Broadcasting Company? I hear, because BBC radio tells me, that teachers unions are GOING TO criticise Government policy on academy schools today. Union press releases going straight to air or have the BBC signed up Mystic Meg?
These two teacher union conferences are a staple for the BBC and the Guardian-reading class that infest the staffrooms of schools.
Following on from ASCL and ATL gripes that have been going on all the while these last two weeks, it` s all of a piece…basically the unions are loving custodians of childrens life chances, and the nasty old Government seem intent on actually DOING something to prevent the next slew of misfits and dummies from steaming down Mare St with the posse of `uman rights lawyers and BBC journalists behind them.
Don`t remember the BBC ever bothering their arses with the unions views on anything during Labours “Lords of Misrule” era…but they must have found that address book from under the dust bunnies…
Standard GCSE Media Management. Issue a copy of speech in advance: “David Milliband will today criticise the Coalition. Show David Milliband live “criticising the Coalition” coverage two. Then report retrospectively “David Milliband today criticised the Coalition. Take three.
Three times the coverage of one speech.
News management.
Yet again we see Sarah Pennells being treated as an authourity on finance matters on BBC Breakfast news. Her website claims she is on frequently and it certainly seems to be true.
What is it about their ex-colleague and possibly friend that means that BBC staff have her on speed-dial for an appearance? After all she has now received oodles of licence payer funded free publicity.
Is Shami Chakrabarti of “liberty” a closet nazi?
Saw her being interviewed on News 24 – after equating the wearing of a cross to the full body covering burka …. if people want to wear a turban, or a star of David ….. – to my knowledge, it was not an option for the jews of national socialist Germany (also earlier in muslim countries) to “show their faith” by wearing a star of David. Not a right, but an expression of antisemitism equated with the choice to wear religiously significant dress.
John Rentoul might have a view.
Actually the Jews of Nazi Germany were forced to wear a star of David armband whether they wanted to or not and whether they considered themselves Jewish or not.
The BBC uses every opportunity it can to push its favourite left-liberal campaign issues. Salford Local Radio (BBC 5 Live) are covering golf. So what do I hear on 5 Live? Lots of moaning about the Augusta Golf Club. I don’t give a damn about golf – a good walk spoilt. But on the radio channel that tries to mix sport and lefty opinion it is the sort of thing that I have come to expect.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/golf/17622150
Here is the BBC On Line article complaining about Augusta’s ‘no women rule’.
I guess when Beeboids see their raison d’etre to be setting the world to rights then this is a nice easy target.
To paraphrase Tony Handcock: I didn’t tune in for a lecture on communism.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/9189380/BBC-accused-of-TV-licence-rip-off.html
The corporation has been making up to £25m a year through the little-known loophole, which has been condemned as “unfair” and a “rip off”.
Any viewer buying a TV licence for the first time is charged £145.50 for a year-long permit.
But under current arrangements, the new licence expires 12 months from the first day of the month in which it is purchased. This means that an ‘annual’ licence bought on April 30 2012 will actually run out at midnight on March 31 2013.
Licence fee payers have complained that the payment quirk means they are getting as little as 11 months’ worth of licence when they have paid for a full year.
==================
Interesting angles – advertising a year but supplying less than a year – that’s illegal.
What does the law state? If it states a year, a year is what it should be. Time in that case for lots of refunds.
Have to love that ‘it can be disclosed’, which is up there with ‘we have learned’.
Why, was it a secret before that the BBC was stiffing folk every bit as badly as a suspect in Watchdog?
Anyway, why the fuss? Simply file as another aspect of ‘unique funding’.
I got caught out like this – bought and paid for a 12-month licence, as far as I knew, but it turned out to be for 11 months. Quite a shock.
‘A spokesman for the BBC’s TV Licensing division denied that the corporation is short-changing consumers.’
I reckon I’ve had emails from that same spokesman. Unless, of course, there is more than one BBC employee who lies through his teeth when caught in flagrante delicto.
The excuses are absolutely pathetic and basically reduce to “we do what we want so it’s just tough shit, proles”.
So what does the BBC say about this rip-off?
A spokesman for the BBC’s TV Licensing division denied that the corporation is short-changing consumers. “Setting monthly renewal dates minimises collection costs and means more money is invested in the BBC’s programmes and services. This issue affects a small proportion of payers and only affects them the first time they buy a licence.
“To give each a daily renewal date would cost hundreds of thousands of pounds which is not good value for the majority of licence payers,” the spokesman said.
That might be acceptable if we didn’t see how the BBC have squandered MILLIONS of pounds on the ridiculous decisions they make, and for their own perks, many or most of which are highlighted on this site.
So what does the BBC Trust say, the supposed guardians of the licence fee payer?
It said that changing its policy “would not be in the interests of licence fee payers as a whole”.
I doubt that licence fee payers would agree with that, though it’s easy to see that it’s not in the interests of the BBC to change it. Just one more thing that highlight the complete disregard for real service by the BBC. Most private companies have found a way to pro-rate partial month payments without it costing £HUNDREDS OF THOUSANDS.
QUOTE: This issue affects a small proportion of payers and only affects them the first time they buy a licence.
—-
The latter statement is not true. It affects them if they buy a licence after a gap without one, having previously held one.
Is this the BBC’s Laurie Penny ?
What an idiot !
http://dailycaller.com/2012/04/05/maybe-ryan-gosling-shouldnt-have-saved-that-woman-from-a-cab/
Blimey, good job she responded quickly and at length in all necessary poor grace, otherwise next time she and her mentor Paul Mason are out on the town, ‘sourcing stories’, the words ‘cab’, ‘thrown’ and ‘under’ may have taken a different, and more sinister turn. And now we have Mr. Gosling to thank for the BBC green rooms from Breakfast to Newsnight being stuffed with this oxygen thief until they can figure a way to give her a show of her own.
Ah, you beat me to it, GW.
The New Statesman’s Laurie Penny, really. Although she’s the one whom Paul Mason encouraged to go herald…sorry….get stuck in reporting on Occupy Wall Street.
Sorry – I simply remembered her name from this site. But what a loon she sounds, though – right up Paul Mason’s street. And she does get invited on to BBC progs – I saw a YouTube clip of Emily Witless agreeing with her ridicul;ous arguments about the mountains of publuc debt.
From the Daily Caller article…
Even oft-insufferable New York Magazine columnist Jonathan Chait writes that Penny is “one of those leftie-types so sanctimonious they make you want to vote Republican out of sheer spite.”
Here’s to hoping the US media give her all the coverage she clearly thinks she deserves.
First comment…
Stuart Parker:
Like most of today’s journalist, she’s incapable of looking both ways.
Reed, thats an absolute classic comment. Wish I’d thought of it.
Since the BBC seems to have given up reporting on the Occupy movement in the US now that their little darlings have failed miserably to perform up to their lofty expectations (but have adhered to mine pretty much exactly) and the BBC’s original portrayal of them has proved to be patently false, I bring this latest news in the spirit of amusement rather than a fisking of BBC bias.
From the “You Know Your Movement’s Over When…” Dept.:
OccupySF’s failed theft of Catholic Archdiocese building: An insider’s view
A group of these darlings of the BBC temporarily took over a vacant building owned by the Archdiocese in San Francisco. The cognitive dissonance of the following welcoming instructions is hilarious:
This is our home. We, the residents and stake-holders, are creating/defending a space that deserves respect. Don’t decorate, spray paint, etc., unless you are prepared to join us!
This could have been written by Zaphod Beeblebrox.
“I wonder who this ship belongs to anyway,” said Arthur.
“Me,” said Zaphod.
“No. Who it really belongs to.”
“Really me,” insisted Zaphod, “look, property is theft, right? Therefore theft is property. Therefore this ship is mine, OK?”
For extra laughs, check out the video with the mission statement from their leader about creating a new economy without money by having outside folks who actually work for a living donate stuff to them.
Why haven’t there been any BBC articles or reports asking if the Occupy movement is running out of steam, or all over bar the shouting, etc., like they did for the Tea Party movement?
‘This could have been written by Zaphod Beeblebrox.’
David, one can never go far wrong invoking Douglas Adams’ insights into the mindset being dealt with. Speaking of which, an interesting late stage exchange shaping up here…
http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/bbcinternet/2012/03/bbc_news_mobile_site_refresh.html?postId=112199250#comment_112199250
I do declare Newswatch has had more than its fair share of Vogon Constructor Fleet Commanders in recitation mode, too…
“Those who dare to critique,
Need to understand we are unique,
So when our service is a fright,
And standards so many they are quite out of sight,
We just reach for the guidelines, that say…
“We think we have got it, just about right”‘
Speaking of Newswatch:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/iplayer/episode/b01f01r4/Newswatch_30_03_2012/
Norman Smith reckons ‘the BBC got it about right’ on ‘differential leaking’ (wot, no ‘differential reporting?) vs. the Coalition Govt. being the bad guys on leaking and guessing.
No answer why ‘we’ need to hear what is going to be said before it happens?
Facts…. are ‘mainly true’ according to Uncle Ray. So that’s ‘mainly’ oooook, then? I can see where all the trust in what is broadcast comes from. Not.
Interesting the following topic on coverage of Mitt Romney’s Mormonism. And after the shaft job & reader objections, the Newswatch coverage is… zippy. Nada. It is an ex-topic.
Equally, in response to a critique of the inflaming of the riots in the reporting… something about an independent report… which did admit culpability but then… no more. No moody Editor or Market Rate Manager saying they got it about right this time? Or to ‘fess up and explain? Why not? If it was a Government stuff up and a spokesperson was not around, I wonder how that would have been trailed?
The BBC– misinformation and re-education.
They could at least try to serve up this dross better packaged.
Ohhhh, dear.
Love that reply from “DBOne”. The defense is that the Guardian did the same thing? LOL YCMIUP.
Maybe this can be used in the BBC College of Journalism training sessions for new sub-editors on how not to make a misleading “summary” that tricks the reader into clicking through.
‘….a new economy without money by having outside folks who actually work for a living donate stuff to them’.
I think you have inadvertently found a new mission statement for the BBC.
Tomorrow then is Easter Sunday….so , no doubt Ed Stourton and his zoo crew will be pulling out all the stops to ensure that the resurrection of Jesus Christ and the very foundation of Western Christianity will get due attention.
1. This Keith O Brien “intervening” in the issue of Christians wearing a cross…what the hell does a cross have to do with Easter Sunday…and was his timing political in that it takes all our attention from the national clamour for gay weddings?
2. Was Jesus only a slave of Allah(PBUH)…or was he Muhammads shoeshine boy as well?..here`s George Galloway and Tariq Ramadan to discuss this.
3. Should Ash Wednesday be banned or at least be hidden behind wooden blinds, so that smoking is not encouraged?
4. How could Pope Benedict possibly have left Cuba as he surely must have been in heaven at the time…and did the Regensburg controversy follow him during his grooming tour of the place?
5. Ken Livingstones bid to be Archbishop of Canterbury…would his business acumen both save the church and find a profitable perch for Giles Fraser or Chris Bryant?…here`s Peter Tatchell and Bob Crow to discuss this further.
Saves me bothering to actually listen to the BBC Religious Affairs flagship…a pedalo in a paddling pool more like!
Supplementary (to Nick, at 1:40 pm today, above):-
“BBC overcharging public by £25m a year by selling ‘annual’ licences that last only 11 months.
Loophole branded a ‘rip-off’ by media MP.”
Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2126544/BBC-overcharging-public-25m-year-selling-annual-licences-11-months.html#ixzz1rNsX4SH7
Of course, the E.U-phile Beeboids will not thnk that this article applies to them too.
“Does the Government want to make GCHQ the ‘Big Brother’ for Europe?”
(by Christopher Booker)
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/comment/columnists/christopherbooker/9191486/Does-the-Government-want-to-make-GCHQ-the-Big-Brother-for-Europe.html
As an antidote to the BBC’s and Mardell’s US coverage…
Bill Whittle: Merchants of Despair
Strong stuff.
Bill Whittle is always good value, very clear and concise, very biting. And ACCURATE.
Just the sort of person Mardell et al would avoid
I guess the BBC now have a new regular to call on whenever they need to big-up the class warfare angle. Tells us how much we should hate Tory toffs, citizen Trenton.
“An Australian activist with an anti-elitism manifesto has been named as the man who disrupted the University boat race between Oxford and Cambridge by swimming in the River Thames. ”
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/law-and-order/9192419/University-Boat-Race-2012-towpath-guerrilla-sticks-his-oar-in.html
http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/news/timstanley/100149749/boat-race-spoiler-trenton-oldfield-is-an-intellectual-snob/
Shortly before taking to the water Mr Oldfield posted a manifesto online. Entitled Elitism Leads to Tyranny, he declared: “This is a protest, an act of civil disobedience, a methodology of refusing and resistance.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/sport/olympics/rowing/9192517/Profile-Trenton-Oldfield.html
Quite the wanker, isn’t he. What he really means is – entitled elitism leads to the wrong kind of tyranny – it’s nice leftist authoritarians like me that should lord it over all you plebs. It probably won’t surprise many here to learn that he’s a graduate of the LSE. Perfect BBC fodder. Watch out Owen Shouty, there’s a new rent-a-gob sockpuppet in town.
Trenton Oldfield – proper class warrior, Okay yah.
Do read his ‘manifesto’ for an insight into the self-important narcissism behind his ‘Performance Upon Thames’ and his brave stance against elitism.
“Most recently this has included the enclosure and eviction from the commons, transatlantic slavery, imperialism and colonialism, fascism, holocausts, genocides and dictatorships and migrant labour camps.”
Conveniently, you forgot to mention Communism, f*ckwit.
Here’s some of his suggested tactics for ‘civil disobedience’. Petty petulance is the order of the day…
-If you work in a private company or government department that is helping enclose Our Public perhaps you could work slowly, make mistakes, loose documents, sending large documents to clog up email accounts?
So, business as usual in the public sector – that’ll bring down the system. And I think you mean ‘lose’ documents. That university education really paid off.
-If you are a plumber can you ‘store up’ a problem in the office of a conservative think tank office you have been called to?
Only conservative ones – the lefty ones are the good guys..and small businesses are keen to sacrifice their professional reputations in order to score cheap, adolescent political points. Of course, those horrible conservative think-tanks might be proposing smaller government, so that ‘Our Public’ might be less ‘enclosed’ in the future. I’m sure the lefty ones aren’t interested in the very control you claim to be opposing.
-If you are a builder repairing the house of an elitist can you also bug it and share the footage and audio online?
Like News of The World! Go Rupert!
-If you clean the bathroom of someone that considers themselves elite or is an elite sympathiser, like a right wing professor, can you never put loo paper in their bathroom?
Right-wing professor? Good luck with that. All rather petty and childish, though, isn’t it. Toilet paper – this is hardcore revolution, folks. This guy might be dangerous.
There’s so much material here. It’s such comedy gold that it reads like a parody. I’m almost of a mind that this is the kind of thing that is written to demonstrate Poe’s Law.
http://elitismleadstotyranny.squarespace.com/
Enjoy fisking this shite! Over to the rest of you 🙂
For those of you who tweet…
http://twitter.com/#!/search/%23twatinthethames
What the hell has gone wrong out there in Oz?
Why are they sending us their metrosexual fops like Shane Warne, and allowing saps called Trenton to leave their shores…do`nt they need a few weeks in the quarries before rehab on Bondi beach?
Rudd?…Gillard…ye gods!…Is Tony Abbott the last ocker standing?
I`d put Trenton back into the Thames and let us count how many blows to the head would knock some sense back into this prawn of privilege!
Got to be a research grant into it!…and there must be a clever bod or two on those boats who could do it for us!
Ah yes !
Shouty– Trenton !He seems to be terribly upset about something doesn’t he ?
Sports and Entitled Elitism -eh !
Well may I suggest that he goes and pulls a stunt like that at a Meeting of the Sport of Kings.
I think we all know what the Bookie’s Odds on the outcome would be.
I’m sick of these upper-class tits, who’ve never done a real day’s work in their lives and who are emotionally still children, stop other people from doing things they are entitled to. These lads (and lass) have worked like stink, gone through many pain barriers and devoted all their spare time to try to achieve something good then for this posh scumbag to ruin it for them just so he could get publicity for himself. He claims to be anti-elitist but is probably more of the rich elite than the majority of the two crews whose day he ruined.
There are no words that sum up what a vile piece of garbage this git is. A shame he didn’t get seriously injured – he wouldn’t have tried it again. Now he’s set it up for the Olympics to be ruined by fellow upper-class grown-up children.
I should have finished “whose year he ruined, or even in some cases whose life-times ambitions have been trashed by his vanity.”
Oh, Gawd, not another Australian rent a gob. Please! Australia, send us no more. We have enough to be going on with, with Peter Tatchell.
I meant to add that other one – the attention seeker, of Leaks notoriety.
If one man’s terrorist is another man’s freedom fighter (yawn)….
Is one Man’s protester another man’s idiot?
Garry Richardson is doing the graveyard shift on BBC 5 Live early this morning where it has just dawned on the Beeb that their precious Olympics might be at risk from lone protesters.
Perhaps Paul ‘Why it’s kicking off everywhere’ Mason could do a Newsnight on it?
Maybe BBC can get The Rev Giles Fraser, late supporter of the Occupy Movement, to contribute to a sympathetic documentary?
Where on earth do these idiot protesters get their idea of how to go about making a point?
Has my worry about the hosepipe ban putting the swimming and diving events at the Olympics in jeopardy cropped up yet?
If not, I`ve decided that this is my worry and will lead my bulletins…running up a flag and seeing who will salute it!
Gaia and the water tables will not tolerate anything but a brief paddle in a temporary paddling pool-and I do hope that the BBC will take this as seriously as I do…for there is a movement behind me…honest!
Garry ‘Oi’ll Ask The Same Question Three Toimes If Oi May’ Richardson is doing the graveyard shift on BBC 5 Live early this morning.
———————————————————–
Newsflash – *every* shift on 5 Live is a graveyard shift.
INBBC news 24 just announced a huge explosion at a church in Nigeria. The reader observed that previously churches have been targeted by islamists. Do they believe that their term of islamist absolves the religion of Islam from any blame? Or does anyone else?
Is the teaching union rep I am seeing on SKY getting as easy a ride on BBC for her quaint strike logic?
Her classes must be fun: ‘Miss, it’s Smither’s fault I trashed his homework as he was not giving me what I want’… ‘Oh, of course. Smithers! Detention!’
With the BBC either shutting down blogs, or their authors making them broadcast-only (ie: simply another story), or swathes of closings, it is hard now to find a BBC blog that’s open for comment, much less worth commenting upon.
But some do maintain the pretence, well, sort of.
Perhaps on one of those BBC school holidays, or maybe a Harrabinandgone ‘sabbatical’, or perhaps boning up on his pre-Olympic boat U-Boat training with Penny, Trenton, Jonnie and the rest of the #OccupyPondBottom crew, but today marks the month’s anniversary of Paul Mason’s sharing his wisdom..
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/correspondents/paulmason/
Just when you think our MSM couldn’t get any more dire, they simply excavate further.
Yes, it’s overdue. Yes it’s going to involve shenanigans. Yes, it may even be a punt and forget rushed out to dig out from bad press, but this human right to family ‘story’ is being totally spun on a ‘questions are being asked’ negative basis by so-called spokespersons for the country, fed by their pet grievance-hustlers on Sunday speed-dial.
I loved the SKY political reporter stuttering around how this was a bad thing… despite having to mutter it would garner near 100% public approval. Sounds like the AV vote and Camer’NON2EU’, with the chatterati in a tizzy ‘cos they don’t get to dominate the policy directions.
I dread to think what the BBC is up to..
Nothing I can see on the website despite SKY being all over it. Watertight oversight? Concocting a ‘view’? Kevin Maguire not ready to chip in yet?
What I did see was this: ‘Miliband: PM has ‘something to hide’ That is, in fact, an unsubstantiated accusation by a political rival being made that someone on the graveyard shift seems to consider worthy of prominence with that ‘special’ BBC subbing.
Unique.
At least I get more time in the garden:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/bbcthree/2012/03/be-your-own-boss.shtml
I do actually, have a killer idea, a patented one (currently lauded internationally and even by the Business & Innovation Minister this week), but my being a bit more ‘creative’ than business-oriented it does need a boost.
Hence this looked worth a punt.
Being today is the deadline, that would be a big chunk of my time.
However, I am also a smidge over the 18 lower cut off.
And stuff like this all over the promo doesn’t look promising:
‘…looking to nurture and invest in the next wave of young entrepreneurs.
In his early 20s, Richard and two friends had a business idea that no one believed in… wants to do the same for a new generation of start-up superstars.’
I know how this all works, and a man of my years should not even be reading a BBC 3 yoof blog, but while nothing is explicit, a lot is inferred, and I don’t think it’s worth my time. Especially reading the application and t&cs..
* Recent photo
* DoB
..oh.. and..
‘The Producers reserve the right to refuse any Application for any reason at their absolute discretion and shall not be obliged to explain the reason to the Applicant’
Blimey, that’s a ‘do what we want’ charter to rival even a FoI-excluding complaint blow off.
Thing is, this being the BBC ‘n all, is all this not a little bit, I don’t know, ‘ageist’ and exclusive?
I think I may drop a line to complaints to ask what’s going on.
I would have asked on the blog if it’s worth a man of my years trying anyway but, before the end of the application deadline, with all of one post (modded out) up there, the thread has been closed.
Unique.
The initial surf looks promising:
http://www.yourlegalrights.co.uk/employment/age-discrimination-in-recruitment-and-selection
‘In Ireland, Ryanair was successfully sued for age discrimination when it used the words “young and dynamic” in a job advert.’
It might be unfair if an application form asks you to fill in your date of birth or attach a photograph.
Don’t tell me, the BBC can get out of it because it is… ‘unique’?
Now I know reality TV needs a special kind of person to ‘work’, and this is showbiz, but I think I may make ’em work hard on this one.
Especially given:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/business/5298164.stm
‘Such words and phrases could be considered ageist – leaving the employer open to legal action’
I know it’s not a ‘job’ per se, and the weasels will be out in force already, but simply on an ethical basis alone, I’d say they are, well, not practising what they preach.
Especially when everyone knows my application would have been canned… and I was denied a chance to check the age criteria implied by the blog’s early closing before submission deadline.
And it’s not like the BBC doesn’t have form, a lot of it, on rigging competitions entered into in good faith, already.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/entertainment/7011715.stm
‘Mr Marson was at the helm when Blue Peter staff asked a child visiting the studio to pose as a phone-in competition winner.
The BBC was fined an unprecedented £50,000 by media watchdog Ofcom over the incident. ‘
Now, who did that money come from, and go to?
I’ll bet whoever it was, it was ‘unique’ then too.
I`m surprised that the fine Tony O Reilly has let his firm be fined.
One of the last titans in the way of the business PC rot that permeates the windsocks of “business”…his idea of making his staff lose weight needs taking up at the BBC in Salford.
I love Ryanair…let`s hope they tell the EU to “F*** off”…in Gaelic of course!
Have you noticed that Israel has largely dropped of the BBC radar? Unless, naturally, it can be slipped in to the last paragraph?
Hamas hangs Gaza prisoners, including one ‘collaborator’
The BBC is opposed to capital punishment, isn’t it?
The BBC demands natural justice, doesn’t it?
After 11 paragraphs, the article and/or Kevin Connolly conclude “It is not even possible to know what specific charges the executed men faced, he adds.
Israel’s intelligence services recruit informers to gather information about possible targets for militants and help block attacks”. Which rather suggests that despite admitted zero, known evidence, the charges are accurate.
The map graphic is new. On one hand it finally names all bordering countries. On the other since when has the 1967 Green Line, actually the 1948 cease-fire lines become the unresolved border?
The BBC thinks the Palestinian State was created in 1948. They pretend the 1967 war was an Israeli invasion of sovereign Palestinian territory. This map merely reflects established BBC editorial policy.
It’s not an unwitting bias, either. It’s instituitional.
David Preiser has posted elsewhere the namby-pamby way the BBC has treated the Supreme Court hearings on ObamaCare. And how the BBC has shown continued hostility to any budget plan by the Republicans – because such plans at least try to deal with the debt mountains. No BBC criticism – or even mention – of the fact that Obama’s silly attempts at framing budgets were both defeated XXX to Zero when votes were taken, while the Democrat Senate has failed for the entire Obama period to do its legal duty and produce a budget.
Obama is clearly trying to play the blame game on every issue – to divert attention from his appallling record in office. He looks and sounds incompetent and pathetic, whining away at every opportunity, never doing any proper GOVERNING.
Here’s a couple of links to seasoned US journalists stating the blindingly obvious about Obama’s failures – which the BBC mostly refuses to see or mention :
http://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/charles-krauthammer-obama-v-scotus/2012/04/05/gIQAZ41txS_print.html
http://www.weeklystandard.com/blogs/morning-jay-our-pathetic-president_635461.html
These are from what the BBC would describe as “Right-wing critics”, those who would “want to tear Him down”. So they don’t bother with that point of view.
Of course, if this is Right-wing opinion, and the BBC reports from the opposite perspective, by definition they’re of the Left.
Since the Tulsa, OK, police have swiftly arrested two white men for killing several black people around town, which has been mooted as a racist crime, does this mean that the BBC World Service hour from two weeks ago discussing how the US is run by white supremacists because George Zimmerman wasn’t jailed immediately was total BS? Shouldn’t the BBC now have another show discussing how this latest quick action by the police means the US isn’t quite the white supremacist police state they let everyone say it was?
I won’t hold my breath.
If they are indeed racist murders there will be champagne corks popping at Broadcasting House.
They’ve been after one of these for such a long time now.
The police suspect a racial motive, but they used a significant amount of manpower and resources to quickly find and arrest the alleged killers. This seems like the exact opposite behavior from what the BBC World Service spent an hour promoting two weeks ago.
The Narrative was that Zimmerman was not arrested because US law and power is basically white supremacist. If that were true, nothing much would have been done in Tulsa. The BBC owes my country an apology, but it will never happen. In fact, I’m quite sure this will only serve to reinforce their prejudices.
Sentenced to death for being old: The NHS denies life-saving treatment to the elderly, as one man’s chilling story reveals
When Kenneth Warden was diagnosed with terminal bladder cancer, his hospital consultant sent him home to die, ruling that at 78 he was too old to treat.
Even the palliative surgery or chemotherapy that could have eased his distressing symptoms were declared off-limits because of his age.
BBC: ZZzzzzzz
I know that, in the US, prostate cancer is generally left untreated for octogenarians, because it takes so long to do anything the patient usually dies of something else – even old age – long before the cancer becomes a problem. But that’s not the case here.
‘zzzzzzz’
Hardly:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-17492944
Not about the specific case, but they ran with MacMillan’s general story.
Are you saying the BBC avoids stories criticaheir the NHS? I don’t think that’s right.
PS interesting how this has gone viral in the US and played into the whole Obamacare/ death panel debate.
‘criticaheir’ should re
Deep breaths. Take it slow… you can make it.
…ad ‘critical of’. It was a late night.
‘..…that are ‘critical of’. It was a late night.’?
But it is other wise a lovely Easter Monday morn! Bar the rain.
‘Hardly:
…
Not about the specific case…’
Hardly ‘hardly’ then?
Or when someone uses a specific in future, any old generic can be wheeled out?
That will make future BBC apologies even easier.. ‘OK, we didn’t cover the child murders as they made our guys look bad, but we once ran a story on the Lindburgh case so the general story is on the website somewhere.’
Unique.
I thnk the point is the BBC has a rather unhealthy rose-tinted view of many unaccountable practitioners within that august public sector national treasure, whereby individual responsibility too often gets ‘explained away’ with a ‘it wuz the cuts wot made me do it’ by the perp, and a ‘lessons learned’ patronising guff from the £200kpa numpties in management.
Like Gordo’s CQC harpie… rather less spotlighted for rewards for failure than less lethal professional strayers.
But thanks for raising it.
You’ll notice two things. First the BBC piece is written by MacMillan. So this is part of a campaign. Second it was written before the Mail piece. So my guess is the Mail has worked with MacMillan to work a human interest angle on the story and interviewed him and his daughter. So the two stories are two sides of the same issue, BBC ran with it first and the idea the BBC have ignored the issue is wrong.
‘.. the idea the BBC have ignored the issue is wrong.
I have noticed two things.
First, you have picked enough cherries to feed the five thousand, if they wish to be let eat cake.
Second, the ‘it is.. because I say it is’ thing… still not working for me. Didn’t with some teachers. Didn’t with some bosses. Doesn’t with most politicians. Almost certainly not with most the BBC now issues and… sadly, their default defenders.
David P raised a notable case. You tried to lose that in some waffle, now based on ‘guesses’. And still seem to be.
Of course the BBC is having to cover the issue of elder care, as they can’t ignore it and indeed it is a means to bash a truly inept Government response, albeit ignoring inept with no funds thanks to the BBC’s favoured option in power.
The problem with two sides of the same coin, if the thing is loaded you only get the other end to heads.
‘..his hospital consultant sent him home to die, ruling that at 78 he was too old to treat.’
When you get old, do you want this guy looking after you? And the BBC covering the consequences by handing over to the DM as ‘human interest’?
I was not aware that the complete story was now a matter of piecing together complementing threads between the BBC and.. the Daily Mail.
I also notice that the thread you share got closed at the ton after just one day. Now, why the early pull? Hardly seems the issue ceased to be topical overnight. Looking at the Highest Rated, and who they are dealing with at Lowest, I think I have my answer. Now, I wonder which posters you would be onside with?
And are you going to say that the BBC doesn’t get very specific on ‘topics’… when it suits?
I note this one is still up..
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-17620641
An issue that outside the BBC seems to have been seen as a necessary, timely response to a highlighted failure, but here seems to have acquired a rather ‘unique’ slant in the reporting.
At risk of incurring the wrath of your picket line, you seem to be rather missing the point… for some reason… a lot.
I am saying the BBC covered this issue a week before the Mail did. I am saying it is not true to say the lack of follow up on the Mail’s exclusive interview represents the BBC being asleep on the issue as DP implies. The general issue is the story; the specific case is not. It merely illustrates the wider story, which the BBC covered.
Pretty simple really.
‘Pretty simple really’
As always.
The first thing you did was try to counter DavidP’s specific (which he, the Telegraph, I, and possibly others felt were a pertinent story, even if you, and the BBC did/do not, on the basis of… you just don’t), with a generic dredged up from the archive pool.
Now, while I would caution any to avoid the ‘BBC never/hasn’t… ‘ route in face of such resource, it is worthy raising when specifics do motivate our national treasure, and where they seem more prone to an overview of ‘the big picture’.
Hence a grunt uses a page from the wrong book in an inappropriate manner, and you’ll have a BBC reporter knocking on their relative’s door for a ‘how does it make you feel?’ before you can say ‘frequent flyer miles’.
Doorstepping the nearest and dearest of other Western citizens not being nice to their fellow man, and if there is any up close and personal relative input, it will be more likely to empathise and offer any help possible.
That’s the difference. A unique one.
I happen to think that is a skewed priority; you happen not to. Uncomplicated if, in your case, hard to see as rational in the face of the facts.
You don’t speak for me, much as you appear to think you are elected to do, any more than the BBC is.
David P posted on an issue. Nothing about the ‘wider story’. The one about a GP/consultant telling an elder they were too old to help with care. You default countered on other NHS ‘stuff’, which you have tried to shoehorn into your issue, and tried to make your new version his. I agree with David and, still, after several rounds, not with you.
It’s rainy outside so I am popping back at tea breaks. Backatcha. But simply saying the same thing over and over whilst not answering questions does rather make the wheel spin in one place.
It may be interesting in a few decades to see if karma does a nice line in geriatric consultants for those keener on the ‘wider story’ than their own.
Careful what you wish for; if the BBC gets its way, you might just get it too.
‘You don’t speak for me, much as you appear to think you are elected to do, any more than the BBC is.’
I speak only for myself. I’d be interested in David p’s view of whether the link I posted weakens his (pretty minor) point. I don’t think it undermines any more general points you wish to make about the bbc’s coverage of the NHs. But i do think it belies the argument the BBC have been asleep on this issue.
‘I speak only for myself.’
Super. So the raft of unequivocal statements made, often with colourful extra imagery, can actually be treated the same way as a BBC tweeter’s ‘The views of me as a BBC employee, http://www.bbc.co.uk/myshow, are personal and nothing at all to be presumed anything to do with ingratiating with peers and superiors within the BBC, who, did I mention, employs me’.?
Glad that’s sorted.
As to the plethora of thinking going on subsequently, despite the (pretty petty) taunt, I’d suspect David P has wisely decided to move on to more productive fields of discourse. Dally here and risk missing out!
Me, like I say, it’s raining. I’ve got all day.
@theJeremyVine “To say this is a missile test is really nonsense.” (Jang Myong-Jin, North Korean space centre). So that’s okay then: http://soc.li/eJ7Kwsb
Hey, this not taking North Korean style statements at face value.. indeed cranking an eyebrow, could catch on at the BBC! Possibly.
Who turned on the water minister’s hosepipe? [i](Headline on the main page of the BBC news website, not the article itself)[/i] – http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-17650230
[i]’Tory MP Richard Benyon said there is “no way” a 15ft hose was left running at the family estate in his constituency of Newbury in Berkshire.'[/i]
The BBC’s headline implies that Mr Benyon’s hosepipe had indeed been left on, and that therefore he’s lying…
Jeff
Trenton Oldfield – The ‘twat in the Thames’ – has clearly started his ‘civil disobedience’ campaign.
First target – entitled elitist Tory MP Richard Benyon.
The revolution begins!…Where will this end, people!
(better start stock-piling the food supplies)
Five Minutes With…a gay guy
The appalling left wing bias of David Dimbleby (irony!):
…another thick, hectoring female Labourite. They have quite a collection.
This is glorious, fractious Paxo being ripped a new one (the fun really kicks in about 2:20):-
Here’s something interesting that upperclass leftwing prick who jumped into the Thames yesterday has as his business the following address:
24 Myrdle Court, Myrdle Street, London.
Go to street view on Google maps and have a look around.
Makes you wonder about his so called leftwing view point and how the some lord it over others.
Oops. The guy who killed (with an accomplice, I guess) those three black men in Tulsa and wounded two more has been described by his neighbor as Cherokee, not white.
Sure, he was apparently killing random black people out of revenge for his father being killed by a different black person, so that makes it a “hate crime” according to common parlance. But if he’s really Cherokee, he ain’t white, and the BBC will have to put that White Racist USA Narrative champagne back on ice for another time.