Easter Monday and time for a new Open Thread! Enjoy.
OPEN THREAD…
Bookmark the permalink.
Search Biased BBC
Recent Comments
- tomo Dec 22, 13:30
Weekend 21st December 2024
[img]https://i.ibb.co/0FRhgWz/Gf-Zf-J-l-W4-AEya-LK.jpg[/img] - Emmanuel Goldstein Dec 22, 13:29
Weekend 21st December 2024
On GB News they have a couple of people on doing wine tasting. Maybe I’m just ‘scum’ as Labour might… - atlas_shrugged Dec 22, 13:08
Weekend 21st December 2024
… and the solar panels get smashed up by storm WosIsName - atlas_shrugged Dec 22, 13:01
Weekend 21st December 2024
A bit more on Captagon in this article: https://www.psychiatrictimes.com/view/the-captagon-controversy-and-why-it-captivates The question being was it used to turn hamas into monsters… - Guest Who Dec 22, 12:59
Weekend 21st December 2024
Germans are also, historically, more prone to get with the gummint program. With the U.K. seemingly catching up fast, bar… - Mrs Kitty Dec 22, 12:51
Weekend 21st December 2024
@Pug at 11.04 Depending on who you speak to all three of those names have carried the terrorist badge. - Jeff Dec 22, 12:04
Weekend 21st December 2024
So, the German authorities received “multiple warnings” from the Saudi government, telling politicians that this man was a danger to… - MarkyMark Dec 22, 11:41
Weekend 21st December 2024
If we change “Christmas Markets” to “Festival Events” we can end the attack by upset Islamists and save lives. -… - MarkyMark Dec 22, 11:23
Weekend 21st December 2024
Cosy, green & cost effective heat pumps Installation from £500 including a £7,500 government grant with Britain’s favourite heat pump… - MarkyMark Dec 22, 11:22
Weekend 21st December 2024
“Rishi has proved to be a diligent constituency MP and it was no surprise to see him re-elected in 2017,…
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
If only all BBC lefties were like Bill Maher:-
Please note, there’s two links in the above post.
Maher jumped the shark a while back. Even if one agrees with him occasionally, he’s far too venal, and gave $1 million to the President’s re-election PAC. Let’s not hope the Beeboids imitate him, please.
Wasn’t it Maher who called Sarah Palin a “C**t” on his TV show?
You think Mark Mardell is going to give a fair shake to Israel or the Muslim threat?
Give me Bill Maher over BBC lefties any day.
Ask him to comment on your religious beliefs and views of homosexuality sometime.
You seem to have a short circuit here DP. He’s a leftie. Of course we’re not on the same page on a lot of things.
He’s on the same page that any democrat should be on over Islam and the threat to Israel.
That’s quite unusual for a leftie, and it’s quite a ‘biggie’.
Not at all. There are plenty on the left who are fearless critics of islam. Like Hitchens and Maher they tend to be of an atheistic bent (although Hitchens and Maher had some spectacular rows). Like me, they see the folly in all religion and the danger particularly prevalent in some.
No JD, they recognise the unique evil and threat of Islam (or recognised in Hitchen’s case).
From Maher we get the output we get, from the BBC we get ‘The Power of Nightmares’.
Its amazing to me how open the US media are with criticism of the ROP. Could you ever imagine an interview like that one occuring anywhere on the BBCs vast broadcasting estate.
Its funny they can have Stephen Fry attacking catholicism blaming them for inventing paedophilia and being the collaborators with the gas chambers. This can be followed by Tatchell and rent a mob saying much the same thing, as auntie blames the left footers for everything bad including climate change. And yet if you criticise the ROP you are given short shrift.
This young woman tells the truth and yet I was shocked to here it. Not that i didnt know but it was like hearing something forbidden. It felt slightly ilicit but also slightly freeing.
Good on her and good on the US broadcasters who have the guts to say uncomfortable difficult truths
BBC Radio 4 news bulletins today seem keen on a story that someone has calculated that bank holidays are very expensive for the British economy. Up the workers eh?
I find this a dubious assertion since we spend an awful lot of cash on shopping and other leisure activities that are available year round.
But the Beeb passes on the theory – without comment – that, apparently, it might be better for business if they evened out holidays over the year. A shift in the terms of the argument but I begin to see where this might be leading. Now to fetch my diary and check where bank holidays are bunched up in the calendar. Well looky here: Christmas and Easter. Someone dreaming of that French Revolutionary calendar I wonder? Decimalisation and the removal of religious festivals?
to quote war of the worlds
slowly but surely they drew their plans against us
That reminds me of another Radio 4-related thing I heard this morning: they were trailing a programme about French identity. Since when have Beeboids cared a fig about the French? I wonder about the cause of this new-found interest. Hm…what could be the agenda here?
I await the version and interest for the English.
What’s Islam Not BBC (INBBC) giving its political priority to this
Easter Monday?
-To politically campaigning for ISLAMIC INTERESTS.
INBBC’s top items on BBC TV Islamic ‘News’ at lunchtime:
1.) INBBC unstated campaign on behalf of mainly Muslim refugees’ mass migration en route from Islamic Syria to Islamic Turkey, who want to get into E.U. and Britain via the porous borders of Greece (unmentioned by INBBC).
2.) INBBC’s second lead story, on how maybe an Islamic jihadist activist was subject to ‘rendition’ to Libya, dates back to about 2005 (when we only later are reminded that there was then a Labour Government).
It’s still INBBC ‘BINYAM MOHAMED’ time!
On news item 2.) above, the way INBBC politically angles its pro-Libyan Islamic jihad ‘report’ (presented with political bias by INBBC’s Mr TAYLOR), is to criticise British security for taking action against the Libyan Islamic jihad threat to Britain!
The INBBC line seems to be: ‘we know British security say they were acting in the interests of the British people, but we at INBBC like this Libyan Islamic jihad type almost as much as Islamic jihad trainee Binyam Mohamed; and it doesn’t matter that Labour’s Foreign Secretary of the time won’t talk to us, we’ll stick this one on to the present Tory Foreign Secretary who had nothing to do with it! It’s what we do daily, at the British people’s expense.’
E.g.:-
(Labour) “UK government ‘approved Abdel Hakim Belhaj’s rendition'”
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-17651797
And, of course, INBBC, like Ms S CHAkRABARTI of LSE governors’ infamy, supported the Gaddafi regime of the time.
It would be interesting if the BBC were to do a piece on why there isn’t a single predominantly Muslim country which does not practice torture. I suppose it would be fun to watch pigs fly, as well.
The World At One leads with Syrians firing across the border into Turkish refugee camps,
No background at all-were the Syrians fired at first…does Syria fear the Free Army gathering over the border…is Assad aware of the fate of Mubarrak or Gadhaffi?…for Gods sake, give us the background before you want me to emote and tell Hague that “something must be done”.
2. Libyan was rendered for torture to Gadhaffis goons back in 2004…apparently “successive governments” did this… so please don`t bother with whatever Jack Straw or David Milibands complicity in it all might have been.
The ongoing airbrushing of history seems to be a Forth Bridge” kind of task these days…Bank Holiday or not!
The World at One also had a long piece about the plight of Christians in Syria (Homs specifically) and Iraq.
Did it mention how those Christians support Assad because they fear what may follow his deposing?
I was in the bath, so can’t be sure.
You mean you were too busy playing with your ducks or you can’t listen to your radio in the bath?
Head under water is what I’m arguing
That’s a very dangerous way to take a bath. If you’re going to do that please hire a lifeguard.
its my willy and I’ll wash it as many times as i want.
🙂
mind you I wouldnt choose the world at one for daytime erotica.
You’re kind of kinky if you ask me
And how long has that taken them? I didn’t catch it all, so did they actually put a figure on how many Christians have fled Iraq due to the persecution? I don’t think the full horror of what they have been subjected to actually came across. The delivery of the BBC reporter was very flat, none of the emoting or undisguised tone of outrage you get when they cover Israeli ‘atrocities’ in Palestine.
The BBC are keen to give us something Titanic-related to think about this Easter. What could it be about the hundred year old tale of maritime mishap that attracts latter day liberal class warriors?
Radio 4 favourite poster girl Jeanette Winterson launches their Titanic : Ship of Dreams.
Alarm bells start to ring and maroon distress rockets go up as I read the BBC web page for the show – ‘The Titanic is a snapshot of a generation, driven by a quest for PROFIT and a desire to open up the world – a world dominated by CLASS DIVISION.’
Good old Jeantte, her gritty north western accent, not too polished by that English degree from Oxford, still keen to work for the Beeb – no apparent acrimony then for the employer of her lover of a dozen years Australian Peggy (Adventures in Poetry) Reynolds.
Although wary of the dangers lurking below I tentatively venture aboard Radio 4’s Titanic for the maiden voyage of this series of 5.
Ironic is a greatly over used word (as you will know, Jeanette) so why does the BBC insist on playing Rule Britannia as part of the soundtrack?
Sure enough I am soon made privy to the plots and schemes of the evil trans-Atlantic capitalists that lie behind this disaster. However, it was planned that Third Class passengers would be relatively comfortable on board – served soup and roast beef. Modest single girls en route for an independent career were made to feel more relaxed in dormitaries separated from the unwanted attentions of the male steerage passengers. (Steady, Jeanette).
So much care for the comforts of the lower orders? Doesn’t seem to fit the narrative. Perhaps Ismay and J P Morgan were drunk? Or so Jeanette speculates.
Oddly enough Channel 5 recently screened a documentary on the forgotten Joseph Goebbels propaganda movie Titanic. And you know what evil was supposed to lie behind the disaster in this wartime anti-British drama? You guessed it: Capitalism.
No the 3rd class were used as ballast! And kicked by the toffs and forced to eat driftwood… lucky though that they all have northern or Irish accents and dance ditties to their hearts content and have much bigger dicks than those toffs with their public school accents.
To be sure, all those below decks could dance like flatley. Its a well known fact , don’tya know. To be sure. All the women were flame haired Colleens who just happened on board with their ‘hard shoe” dance shoes.
And of course its a well known fact that the toffs locked them all below decks in the hope of giving them servants in the afterlife.
The wealthiest men willingly went down with the ship, sending women and children to safety first. It was a different world.
Survival rates were interesting. Something like 60% first class, 40% second and 25% third.
…but that wasn’t due to “class”, there were 324 First Class passengers, 284 in Second Class and 709 in Third so nearly as many 1st class died as 3rd class. Also the greater ‘distance’ and numbers of stairs to the deck would be the main reason: women and children first was honoured;
Sorry, ignore that, sums in reverse (!!!), a lot more 3rd class died but the reason was presumably what I wrote.
Okay, then, the wealthiest men sent their own women and children first, anyway. And why wouldn’t they?
Hmm, my maths isn’t much good, but doesn’t that add up to 105%?
Do you have the gender breakdown Jim? Or the 1st, 2nd & 3rd class passenger breakdown?
To my mind, its a bit of a sad thing to try to diminish the heroism and selflessness displayed that tragic day.
As ever, noone tells it better than Mark Steyn:-
http://www.nationalreview.com/articles/288778/sinking-west-mark-steyn
I only recently discovered that Henry Wilde (Chief Officer of the Titanic) is a first cousin. I came across some family photos (of his mother and several of him as a child and young man) and almost threw them out thinking we don’t have any relatives from Liverpool – the address of the studio on the back !
That’s a great anecdote but did it give you a sinking feeling? And no more iceberg lettuce in your house from now on!
(I’ll get my coat)
Iceberg, Goldberg. The old one’s are the best.
Wilde?
I suspect he was absolutely livid.
IGMC
I’m intrigued….are you 150 years old or thereabouts?
Yes
And with that statistic, Mr Dandy, I would suggest that you show your hand. 105% Marxist and with a point to prove. Just like the jolly old BBC. Care to share with us the source of those particular tractor stats? I promise that if you can show me just how mean those capitalists were 100 years ago I will withdraw from my support of George Osborn’s deficit reduction plans and became more sympathetic to Ed Ball’s spending binge ploys. Just like you and the Beeb want me to. Mind you, when our new Chancellor Ed lets the BBC increase the licence – like I reckon he will – you have to buy me a big bottle of your socialist champers with your BBC pay rise. Deal?
No, he is correct. You and hippie have misunderstood his post (and I misread it!) If you check the link that Teddy Bear posted below (here it is again: http://www.ithaca.edu/staff/jhenderson/titanic.html ) Jim Dandy is accurate (actual was 63%, 43% and 25%)
My poor drafting to blame. Missing an ‘of’; so 60% of first class…
Doesn’t proove anything necessarily, but interesting.
And ‘As I See It’
Just buy me a beer sometime.
Mr Dandy, fair play to you, you do seem to have those statistics nailed on. As you say ‘interesting’ (up to a point, although the survival stats were not part of the Radio 4 show or of my original post). I wouldn’t say that it ‘doesn’t prove anything’ – I guess as statistics they stand for themselves. But, may I ask, what are they supposed to prove? Suppose we establish Pharaoh used slave labour to build the pyramids and his health and safety regime was not all it should have been? Should the BBC provide endless platforms for left leaning writers to trumpet such ‘facts’ as tenous corroboration of their world views and by extention of Ed Miliband’s claim ‘we are not in this together’. This is my point – the BBC are looking to make the Titanic an allegory of what they dislike about modern Britain. As did Mr Goebbels with his 1940s film. Interestingly – although it doesn’t prove anything – certain scenes were recycled in A Night to Remember.
I suggest for anybody who watched this programme to visit this site and get an accurate picture of just who survived and who perished – and the different reasons for it. It might just show how the BBC distort things to pursue their agenda.
Demographics of the TITANIC Passengers:
Deaths, Survivals, and Lifeboat Occupancy
good info, thanks.
A total of 3 Irish passengers?
Not quite the story James Cameron told in his rancidly anti-British trope.
hippie, we’re all having a bad numbers day: there were 120 Irish, the 3 figure is 1st class (must have lied or something, or been evil Tory landowners)
Uuf! My silly! and 120 Irish in 3rd class. All the same, his movie was still a rancid anti-British trope.
Strewth, ‘aving a ‘mare with the figures! 120 is the total Irish!
Interesting % survival: Irish 35%; British 32%
Meanwhile, on Beeboid TV they have a programme or programmes about the Titanic, presented by a dancing teacher and judge from Strictly Come Dancing – God knows why.
to be fair to him Millie,he did work at Harland and Wolff in Belfast and lived in NI for a while
Ah! I didn’t know he had any connection with Belfast. I thought he was a Cockney dance teacher!
perhaps because he was a welder for Harland and Wolf for 10 years? 🙂
Heh. Leha, I didn’t know we could use emoticons on here. I’ve missed not having them. How does one get hold of them?
you just do the colon dash bracket
🙂
Not sure in others work: here’s a wink
😉
I like it – the wink! Thanks, Span.
I was wondering about that myself. Thanks Span. :_)
(Let’s see if that works!)
Ah, flipping heck! I’ll have to follow instructions better. 🙂
🙂
The ‘Today’ website’s gets ever more frustrating.
If you go to the page for this morning’s show, you find they’ve selected only a few examples for immediate, accessible ‘listening again’ and for posterity.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/today/hi/today/newsid_9711000/9711939.stm
I wanted to listen to the segment with the Taxpayers’ Alliance at 7.09, but there’s no audio for that. I also wanted to listen to Lord Howard, Sheila Gunn and Kelvin MacKenzie on John Major’s premiership at 8.33, but again there’s no audio. I’ll have to trawl instead through the whole programme sometime during the next seven days to find them.
So what is being kept for the ‘Today’ Archive and not lost after seven days?
The interview with a chap from the left-leaning think tank Demos, an interview with Labour MP Willie Bain, some piece alleging British wrongdoing over extraordinary rendition, Nicholas Hytner attacking the government over arts funding, a report from Burma (fair enough), somebody from the anti-Assad movement, Michael Bond of Paddington Bear fame (huh?), Labour’s Baroness Glenys Kinnock and Billy Bloody Bragg.
What’s with this partially arbitrary-seeming, partly biased-seeming selection process?
Forensic as ever Craig!
Interesting. I never even thought to notice. Will this be a weekly trend?
Interesting they had so many perspectives from the right.
They had a few, Jim. Not so many as from the left, of course. And not accessible via an immediate ‘Listen again’. 🙂
Viz my previous comment Jim, it seems your maths is even worse than mine.
Let’s see, what is archived and what is not….wonder if the guy charged with doing this is called Winston Smith by any chance?
Two men have been arrested, the BBC reports, for killing three black men and shooting to more in Tulsa, OK. It’s all supposed to be a hate crime, white racists killing black people, just another day in the racist white US.
The BBC quotes the suspects’ neighbor from the same AP report everyone else is. Except, since this is the BBC and there’s a Narrative to be upheld, they censor something rather important. The BBC version:
Susan Sevenstar, a family friend of Mr England, told the Associated Press that he was “a good kid” who “was not in his right mind” after his father’s death and the suicide of his fiancee in January.
The full quote:
A family friend told the Associated Press that England was “a good kid” and “a good, hard worker,” who “was not in his right mind” after losing his father and the January suicide of his fiancee, with whom he’d recently had a baby.
“If anybody is trying to say this is a racial situation, they’ve got things confused,” said the friend, who described England as Cherokee Indian. “He didn’t care what your color was. It wasn’t a racist thing.”
The BBC censored the most important point. Why?
Of course this was racially motivated, despite what the woman says. But if the guy is not white, that’s massively important considering the national conversation about white racism and white supremacy following the Travyon Martin killing (by a Latino).
The BBC did a whole WHYS segment on how racist the US is, with somebody even calling in at one point saying that white supremacy is alive and well all over the place. This latest killing of black people was and is being used by the BBC to push that same Narrative. So it’s extremely dishonest for them to censor news that the alleged killer – who was clearly motivated by racial revenge – is not white.
Aside from the fact that you just can’t trust the BBC when it comes to important US issues, the most important reason for the BBC to be absolutely honest here is that this is a year when the country is deciding on whether or not to re-elect the first black President. We all know that the BBC suggested in 2008 that the US was probably too racist to elect one in the first place, and the number one motivation mooted for opposing the President ever since is racism. Even Mark Mardell, despite his own admission that he sees no open evidence of it, is convinced that the Tea Party movement, and opposition to the President in general, is driven by crypto-racism.
How can one have an honest discussion about the US when the BBC keeps doing this? You’re not informed: you’re misled. Unwitting bias, or deliberate? I say it’s both.
The claim by Susan Sevenstar (a surname with strong Cherokee associations) that England is Cherokee Indian is a detail you’d think any decent reporter would think newsworthy enough to put into a report.
That whoever wrote this BBC report clearly thought otherwise (or didn’t think at all) is, to say the least, weird. Whether unwitting or deliberate, it’s certainly evidence of bias.
‘Whether unwitting or deliberate”
Don’t know whether it exists or not, but have seen and am liking the contraction ‘witting’, for ‘knew darn well what was being editted in and censored out’.
It’s a propaganda thing.
Before any defender of the indefensible suggests it, let me just say that the neighbor’s statement that England is Cherokee is just as much speculation and opinion as everything else the BBC did quote. There is no valid journalistic reason to have censored it. But there is a Narrative reason.
Well Zimmerman was ‘white Latino’ ( a new one on me) so England is surely a white American Indian (not a redskin but a red, white and blue-skin?)
At no point does the BBC refer to White racists. In fact it quotes the police as saying a racist motive is too early to assert. The valid reason to not quote the cherokee point is because it’s irrelevant. You don’t have to be White to be racist! On the face if it the Facebook quotes suggest there could be a racial element, so the nonsensical quote from the neighbour is best left out.
The investigation one hopes will expose the real motivation. The BBC is right to not spectulate.
I’m not saying they did Jim, I am referring to the Zimmerman witch hunt which was a mostly US affair.
Wasn’t the ‘race’ element in this case largely about the Police’s risible investigation rather than the ethnicity of the perp?
The racism complaint was only partially about what you define as the “risible” police investigation, Jim. The bulk of the outcry was against Zimmerman for killing Martin out of a racist suspicion of an innocent black boy in a hoodie. Young black men are in danger, etc.
Having said that, the fact that the OK police swiftly went after and caught their suspects shows that the authorities are not as racist as the BBC wants you to think (yes, I know it’s different states, but the BBC generalizes about the US all the damn time). Yet they instead keep pushing that Narrative.
Jim, they don’t have to say “white” this time. As I’ve shown, the Narrative has already been established. The update of the Travyon Martin context pushes it yet again.
The Cherokee ethnicity is absolutely not nonsensical: it’s vital, considering the big picture of BBC reporting on this issue.
I agree that racism isn’t something restricted to whites, but that’s the whole problem with the BBC’s Narrative, isn’t it?
Jim, other news sources (which you have been known to refer to) don’t regard the speculative Cherokee background of the killer as irrelevant. They regard it as newsworthy.
If he is Cherokee (as is being reported elsewhere) and if there is a racist motive for these killings, that is surely an unusual news angle well worth reporting – and exploring?
‘You don’t have to be white to be racist’. You obviously don’t live in the UK.
Of course one doesn’t have to be white to be racist. But we’re not talking about common sense: we’re talking about BBC reporting!
I think you meant to say, “You obviously don’t live in the hideously white (sic) UK”
close your eyes.
Picture a racist thug.
Shaven head
Tattoos
Chelsea shirt.
Doc Martins
Rockport shoes
stone island jacket.
Imagine him shouting abuse from a pub beer garden at some passing women in Hijabs.
Now imagine him as black.
See how all pervasive the BBCs characterisation of Racism is.
Witting: yes, the dictionaries have it, though you’ll seldom see it in use.
I just grabbed a screenshot in case of stealth edit. And I’m keeping a tab of News Sniffer open on this. But what News Sniffer hasn’t caught yet is that the BBC just added a whole extra bit about how these murders “come at a fraught time for African-Americans, amid continued protests over the death of Trayvon Martin, an unarmed black teenager who was killed by a neighbourhood watch volunteer in Florida in February.”
Narrative? What Narrative?
The BBC has now updated their report to describe Sevenstar as a “family friend”. So she would know if he was Cherokee or not, which makes it even more worthy of mention.
If England does turn out to be Cherokee, how soon before the BBC drops a reference to white crimes against the Indian into the story?
Can’t they find a slavery angle? I am sure they will try!
No wonder Obama hates England – we killing his peple!
Yes, and did you hear the one about England being Cherokee? That was news to me!
Shortly, after Romney becomes the Republican presidential candidate, the BBC will report (probably Mardell) about the disaffected members of the party in open revolt against a non-conservative being chosen over Santorum. This will be played BIG. It will not have any traction in reality as the dislike of Obama trumps EVERYTHING else.
However the BBC turns a blind eye to a current story which shows the disquiet over Obama within the Democrats. The story? Hilary Clinton will not be attending the DMC convention in Charlotte. (http://www.charlotteobserver.com/2012/04/06/3156959/hillary-clinton-citing-her-above.html)
Exactly what is happening behind the scenes with the Dems is a big story. They are preparing for an election defeat with knives drawn – the target is the Chicago political machine. Remember it was Bill C himself who called Obama “a Chicago thug”; Hilary who first raised the question of Obama’s birth certificate; if the polls are right, there will be a number of political careers in ruins, men and women who helped Obama only be told this time round he is not going to campaign for them.
But the media has no interest in speculation for this kind. Their job is to get Obama re-elected. But keep watching behind the scenes for the cracks which are already appearing…meanwhile the BBC will center its output on the “rampant racism” among Republicans – that’s the White House strategy.
ps: just saw this on line concerning graphic language by CNN
http://dailycaller.com/2012/04/09/for-second-time-in-three-weeks-a-cnn-reporter-says-ngger-on-live-tv-video/
The use of this language TWICE by CNN is no mistake. It is part of the ramping up of “the racist narrative”. Watch put. There’s a bumpy year ahead.
Good point about the disaffected Republicans angle. Although that might depend on whether or not Romney chooses someone the Tea Party movement likes (not that there’s a monolithic opinion there, but you know what I mean) for his running mate.
As for Hillary, she’s already said that she doesn’t want to be part of a second Obamessiah Administration. So I’m not surprised she’s going to skip the convention.
Of course, her statement and her criticisms of the President’s dithering has also been censored by the BBC, so those who rely on the BBC for their news will be very surprised.
Hasn’t Hillary Clinton already said some time ago that she wont be Secretary of State for a second term?
Maybe just positioning as a justification for not supporing Obama for a second term?
Yes, that was in the link.
Never count the Clintons out. If Obama does not win she will surely be a contender.
She’ll be too old in 2016. Not saying it’s fair, just that’s how it is.
Obama will win.
I dont see Romney inspiring anyone. It’s one machine politician against a machine subversive.
At an election you need a reason for change, and in my view Romney isn’t it. Aside from anything, a lot of the core Republican vote wont bring themselves to vote for him because he’s a Mormon.
Guiliani may be the greatest President America never had.
I’ve high hopes for Allen West in 2012. I think he’s done the right thing in not entering the ring this time round. He needs experience under his belt in Washington.
Let’s hope they’ll be a world left or that democracy has survived after a further 4 years of a crypto commie in the White House.
Oh, Allen West as VP could be inspirational! That will bring out the base.
If you want to be inspired, then you really need to look up Ron Paul on youtube.
He speaks TOTAL sense, and suffering a media blackout as a result (check the Jon Stewart videos), he still has won hundreds of delegates, and is refusing to give up the race. People are hoping he will stand as an independent as the republican party is trying to ensure he does not win the nomination, yet he is the one who will get the most Democrat, youth, military and all the libertarian votes.
Erm, I’d rather have Obama than a patently anti-Semitic kook like Ron Paul.
Anti-war, pro-trade with dictators and our geopolitical enemies, and anti-Israel: It’s a winning combination!
How does the BBC ensure quality to its viewers? Well in the case of this years Masters Golf championship in Georgia this weekend, they paid, probably a LOT of money for a cricketer to be one of the commentators there.
To judge by his poor performance it certainly had nothing to do with his knowledge of golf, so why pick him? They could easily have found a genuine golf expert, with a personality for less money than they must have paid Vaughan.
Vaughan admits having Masters stinker as BBC face backlash for bumbling Woods interview
The BBC ‘ensuring quality’ and ‘value for money’ as they would have us believe.
I hate to say it, and there’s probably a better explanation, but this does seem typical of BBC broadcast genius. It’s like moving Mark Mardell from Europe to the US. Knowledge of the beat isn’t so important. The “broadcaster” is trained, experienced enough, so it doesn’t matter what the subject is. He’ll have been prepped by producers, job done.
I did say a couple years ago regarding Mardell that it was a joke to bring somebody in who had no idea what was going on and expect that it’s just fine since he’s a trained, experienced broadcaster, and that they’d never do this with sports. I guess I was wrong.
Along the same lines, I thought there would be an outcry over Claire Baldwin’s performance on the boatrace?? It was cringe-inducing, appalling, no redeeming features.
Do you mean Claire Balding on the boatrace or Claire Balding’s boatrace because if it’s the latter then appalling is an accurate description.
NIGERIA.
Islam Not BBC (INBBC) has apparently decided to deflect attention away from murderous Muslims by not even describing Boko Haram correctly, as the Islamic jihadists they are, but instead to censor the Islamic essentials and to euphemistically and deceitfully describe Boko Haram as “a militant group”.
And the Islamic jihad of targeting mass murders of Christians continues, with no special treatment by INBBC for the Christian victims of Islam jihad. Any empathy which the BBC has, seems to be given to Muslims in such matters be it in Egypt, Israel, Lebanon, France, Britain, etc.
‘Jihadwatch’
“Nigeria: Death toll now 50 in Easter Sunday jihad bombings at church”
http://www.jihadwatch.org/2012/04/nigeria-death-toll-now-50-in-easter-sunday-jihad-bombings-at-church.html
INBBC:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-17650542
The bBC, the propaganda arm of radical Islam.
So how many people have read the latest instalment of how the UK rendered a Al Q member back to his home country. Many I suppose seeing how the bBC has had the story on top of the front page for almost a day now.
UK government ‘approved Abdel Hakim Belhaj’s rendition’
Why the bBC feels that this is such an important story they have even given it, its own HYS spot. Strange how the bBC can opine about facts and figures which I ahve know now for a good few months and yet try and refer to it as ’Breaking news’ really.
Hands up anybody here who is in the least bothered about a self proclaimed Jihadist didn’t even get what he dishes out. I mean Gaddiffis government wasn’t seen as one which subscribed to human right conventions but Abdul seems all right, he doesn’t even complain about getting his penis cut. And of course he was released a free man. Yet anybody kidnapped by his like are soon sporting the marks of a truly peaceful religion.
Then there’s the part he was captured by the CIA while Abdul was on route to claim asylum in the UK. Hell I for one am really happy this twat didn’t make it to the Uk in which to claim benefits, you know just like that Israeli Muslim who walked through customs on a 10 day trip and for some strange reason is still here fighting deportation. (Why hasn’t the bBC opened a HYS on this freeloader)
But that’s just it, the bBC only fights tooth and nail for those who wish to murder us. Yes folks you cannot trust a Muslim, yet to the screaming queens over at the bBc, there’s something dangerous about shagging a Muslim up the arse and then defending his human rights to murder anybody and everybody because his honour has been defiled.
The bBC , the traitors in our Midst.
Yes, here’s one INBBC did earlier.
Clearly, along with Chakrabarti of LSE-Gaddafi infamy, INBBC has decided to spend our licence fees on employing themselves as defence counsel for Islamic jihad suspects.
As a reminder, because there are so many, here’s an expensive Islamic jihad type case which INBBC took on at great expense (to the British people) a couple of days ago:
“Terrorism suspect says he’s innocent, shock horror. So tell us, BBC: just how much of our money did you spend securing this exclusive? ”
by Danian Thompson
http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/news/damianthompson/100149529/terrorism-suspect-says-hes-innocent-shock-horror-so-tell-us-bbc-just-how-much-of-our-money-did-you-spend-securing-this-exclusive/
INBBC = Al Jazeera.
Just been listening to R4 discussion about Formula 1 going to Bahrain in consideration of the government’s use of force there. During run up to interview with Bahraini human rights person it was mentioned that should F1 go the teams might be in danger from attacks by protestors.
When that interview came the HR man was asked if there would be protests and violence……but here’s the thing that always annoys me….its an obvious question and almost central to the issue but not asked….if you’re protesting about violence how can you then justify using violence against completely innocent F1 team members and how can a professional journalist not have the nous to ask such a question?
I think I shall protest about people not paying taxes by not paying my taxes.
At least I know I won’t be asked any taxing questions by R4 journos.
INBBC’s political line on SAUDI ARABIA.
Of course, the political line which INBBC adopts on SAUDI ARABIA is one of subservience to the suggestions of a Saudi Muslim princess.
INBBC is not critical of Saudi Arabia as a political breeding ground of global Islamic jihad and of Islamic imperialism.
For a non-BBC analysis of Saudi Arabia:
“A Second Look at the Saudis”
Parts 1, 2, 3 and 4
http://www.asecondlookatthesaudis.com/
INBBC has:
“Saudi princess: What I’d change about my country.”
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/magazine-17446831
Talking about Saudi princesses, note how INBBC avoids reference to the earlier censorship by British media/Government re the TV documentary, ‘Death of Princess’ (1980s) which we are all supposed to erase from our memories:
“Death of a Princess”
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Death_of_a_Princess
The Obamessiah 2012 campaign HQ is as hideously white as the BBC. Yet you won’t see Mardell or any other Beeboid demonizing this group based simply on the the collective color of their skin.
They’re all young and white, I’d guess 80% students and not yet wise to the ways of the world (i.e. ignorant ideological twats)
That is really intriguing given that the 90%+ of the Black vote that Obama won pushed him into the Presidency.
The black vote isn’t enough to win anything national, unless the tie-breaker was Detroit or some other majority black precinct. The Obamessiah won because of the white youth vote, the relentless media support, and white adult independents with Bush fatigue (and possibly voter fraud in New Mexico and the midwest, but don’t tell Newsnight).
Can somebody please explain?
How while the Syrians can murder over 9000 of its own, why the Libyans (past and present) can do likewise when it comes to murder, how the Sudanese can wage war on Christians and how Muslims in Nigeria kills non Muslims willy nilly why nobody is protesting on the streets of London at these outrages.
However when Israel fights back against terrorists (be it Hamas/Hezballah) hoards of Muslims and their bBC inspired sycophantic activists not only have no problem protesting on the streets of the UK, they are given guidance by the bBC of where to protest.
The bBC, the traitors in our Midst.
No pounce, nobody can explain that! Oh yes hang on, it’s because they’re a bunch of slime-ball, hypocritical anti Israel jerk-offs.
I’m reminded of this quote from Stanley Kubrick’s film Ship of Fools. For Reiber insert BBC.
Rieber: You must admit that the Jews are a great part of the German problem.
Lowenthal: True, but not only the Jews, also men who smoke the pipe are a great part of the German problem.
Rieber: Why men who smoke the pipe?
Lowenthal: Why the Jews?
Sorry – that should be Stanley Kramer not Kubrick.
A reprise:
“Where are the Demonstrations, Flotillas, and Calls for Boycotts by Artists and Intellectuals?”
http://www.newenglishreview.org/blog_display.cfm/blog_id/41455
‘Can somebody please explain?’
Not really. But I believe much, at least on a professional or integrity basis in the media world, is meant to fall under, and be excused by the word ‘unique’.
Yesterday I watched an Al Jazeera report on the plight of the South Sudanese currently being ousted from Khartoum. Amazingly the British journos employed by AJ managed to get through this lengthy report without a single mention of entire crux of the issue. The respective religions of the refugees and of the Khartoum Government. This is the sort of thing that we already have a taste of with the current BBC. And, I suspect, we are slipping further down this slope. To think: the generation of journalists that trained to ‘speak truth to power’.
Black armbands at the ready at BBC HQ – warmly worded coverage being prepared…
“Venezuelan President Hugo Chavez wiped tears from his face as he pleaded for life in his fight against an undisclosed cancer at a Catholic mass in his home state of Barinas.”
http://www.jammiewf.com/2012/dying-chavez-pleads-for-life-heads-to-brazil-after-botched-radiation-in-cuba/
Chavez and Mugabe; maybe life is fair?
Someone posted the Robert Redford article on the previous open thread in which he sings the praises of documentaries…
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/entertainment-arts-17534932
Here’s a very short one he’ll be less fond of…
There’s one for Mr. Titanic too…
Another problem for those who wish to boycott all things Israeli…
“The new vaccine, developed by drug company Vaxil Biotheraputics along with researchers at Tel Aviv University, uses a small section of the molecule to prime the immune system so that it can identify and destroy cancer cells. ”
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/science/science-news/9191848/Universal-cancer-vaccine-developed.html
Hat-tip – http://vladtepesblog.com/?p=46835
BBC Three likes to get down with the kids. I’m a fool to myself but I did watch a few minutes of Our Crime : Riot.
The premise seemed to be to air a lot of amateur footage with testimony from some of those involved. Those who did not lose their own property or were not prosecuted appeared to either believe this was a grand cause or to find the whole experience amusing. A parent of an imprisoned young man thought it unfair that her boy was being punished. By far the most annoying individual was a well spoken white male who seemed to have done a fair bit of the filming. He was greatly entertained by the experience and reckoned he had little sympathy for the police because ‘it was their job’. So this is where we are folks! I fully expect the Beeb to sign him up to make his own documentary.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/iplayer/episode/p00pj0m7/Our_Crime_Riot/
I’m 25 mins in, its really good!
Although the latter half has more of a scrote element to it.
BBC Breakfast coming from their new Salford location. Same old sneering and talking down of any good news that comes Britain’s way (during non Labour Governments of course)
Nissan announce a new car to be built in Sunderland. It will generate 200 new jobs at the plant and a thousand or so in the supply chain industry.
Bill Beeboid Turnbull sneeringly interviewing a worker at the plant – “200 jobs, so not that many then?”.
I do hope the next time a small factory or small business unfortunately closes down with the loss of 200 jobs, the BBC state on air that “it’s only 200 jobs being lost, not that many”.
BBC: new studios, same bias.
Luvvie reviewer on SKY says people shouldn’t be nasty about the BBC… but then shows the mindset at play by saying he is about to offer a passionate critique of how spendthrift they are with public money.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/culture/tvandradio/bbc/9194099/The-BBCs-2m-London-to-Salford-travel-bill.html
Still, that whole Strasbourg/Brussels shuttle never troubled them either.
‘A BBC spokesman added: “…some element of travel is inevitable.’
Remember that the next time the assembled ‘talent’ read out what they have been told to say about nasty GHG’s from ‘other’ folk engaging in some elements of travel hypocritically NOT approved of.
Not their money.
I guess we all knew Salford was a pointless waste but here are some facts –
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/culture/tvandradio/bbc/9031837/Media-City-Can-the-BBC-save-Salford.html
I hold most media in pretty low regard, but I have to say SKY’s Tim Marshall can be a refreshing change of pace, perhaps because he too seems to hold most media in low regard.
I wish his analysis of the Russian response to the Syrian situation could be captured and replayed.
Basically he was saying that because some media were saying things were afoot, other media keen to make it seem that way were simply quoting each other, when in reality nothing had changed.
As neat a filleting of the delusional wish-fulfillment that passes as ‘news’ these days as I have heard in a while.
Looking at the ‘news’ about England for today (BBC website)there are 9 items relating to violence -riot/policing hooligans/body/stabbed man/trespassers/lewd students/dead/arrest/ and 4 unrelated such as Titanic/Strike etc. Is this unremitting obsession with violence and crime symptomatic of life in England? Yesterday was even worse. Editors at the BBC seem to have no appetite for changing the ‘news’ agenda. Is there no news in science, medicine, finance,industry that reflects a clean , wholesome inmage? No- violent collision of Higgs-Boson particles rule!
No raaaacism today, then? Goodness! The Beeboid Corporation must be slipping.
Looking at the ‘news’ about England for today (BBC website)there are 9 items relating to violence -riot/policing hooligans/body/stabbed man/trespassers/lewd students/dead/arrest/ and 4 unrelated such as Titanic/Strike etc. Is this unremitting obsession with violence and crime symptomatic of life in England? Yesterday was even worse. Editors at the BBC seem to have no appetite for changing the ‘news’ agenda. Is there no news in science, medicine, finance,industry that reflects a clean , wholesome image? No- violent collision of Higgs-Boson particles rule!
This made me chuckle, on a variety of levels…
Benjamin Cohen @benjamincohen
When will US publications realise that @channel4news is not made by the BBC? Article about @amazon security expose http://p.ink.cx/ImrZSj
Perhaps if BBC America didn’t run so much C4 content and promote it as BBC, our tiny little parochial brains wouldn’t be so confused. I guess they’re getting enough bang for that $20 million+ advertising budget.
Did anyone else catch renowned lefty Peter Hook of New Order/Joy Division and his highly incongruous presence on Toady in a peak-time slot? It was billed as an item on 30 years since the drug-infested Manc nitespot Hacienda opened, despite the fact that this aspect turned out to not be the main theme of the actual piece.
(What do you mean you’ve never heard of Peter Hook or the Hacienda? Philistines!)
Anyway, if you missed it, and if it is one of the clips to have made the cut and get a place on Iplayer, please do listen to the most contrived and tediously-linked political bias you ever did hear. It is a true gem; straight from The Day Today or Brass Eye.
I quite enjoyed the package as it took me back to if not my youth, to my early middle age. I was one of those who went to the Oasis, Twisted Wheel and Jigsaw clubs in the late 60s and 70s, and though I knew quite a lot about the Madchester scene, I wasn’t able to dive in because I was too busy raising my children. What was missing from the package was any reference to Tony Wilson who was the force behind the Factory Records and the Hacienda. But then this is true to the half of the story all of the time approach to BBC reporting. Though I can’t quite figure what the agenda for this might be. As for the young guy who felt youth today were depressed because they were under the yoke of yet another Conservative government, I think he overlooks the fact that the Madchester scene flourished at pretty much the same time that the Thatcher Government were in power.
Just to clarify that last comment, the Manc scene included lots of great dance music, and not just the ‘I’m going to slit my wrists’ stuff.
Why doesn’t Islam Not BBC (INBBC) move in with AL JAZEERA, officially?
In its propaganda reporting on behalf of the five Islamic jihad suspects who may be deported from the UK, local INBBC radio gave us a one-sided propaganda blast this morning from the Muslim father of one of the Muslim suspects whom INBBC has been lionising in recent days.
In contrast, ‘Daily Mail’ has:-
“Hate preacher Abu Hamza facing up to 50 years behind bars in the U.S. after losing extradition appeal .
“Hook-handed one-eyed hardliner Hamza wanted on 11 terrorism charges.
“Four other Muslim fanatics to be deported to face possible jail terms.
“Human rights will NOT be breached by conditions in U.S. prisons.
“Prime Minister ‘very pleased’ by ruling as Home Secretary says suspects will be handed to U.S. as ‘quickly as possible’ .
“Terror suspects have three months to make last-ditch appeal.”
By James Slack
Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2127434/Abu-Hamza-extradition-Hate-preacher-facing-50-years-US-jail-losing-appeal.html#ixzz1rdH9YYVF
Beeboids on the whole did not want to move to Salford and we licencepayers were not consulted about the huge costs to us in that move. Most Beeboids would have been happier to stay in London, and most would have been happier if INBBC had officially merged politically with AL JAZEERA at the South Bank , London HQ .
As for INBBC’s political media chums at AL JAZEERA, where scores of ex-Beeboids are happy to put out the Islamic broadcaster’s propaganda from its South Bank HQ-address-
Al-Jazeera Satellite Channel
Westminster Tower, 3 Albert Embankment
London
SE1 7SL
http://www.aljazeera.com/aboutus/2006/11/2008525185234921586.html
“Al-Jazeera Gets Rap as Qatar Mouthpiece”
http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2012-04-09/al-jazeera-gets-rap-as-qatar-mouthpiece.html
Oh dear, BBC favourite Alan ‘I urinated on the Tory club’ Davies has upset the good people of Liverpool.
Alan, love, check BBC notes and conditions appendix 5 who not to offend, you will find the Scoucers listed below human rights lawyers and social workers and just above the Belgians.
Here’s one of the latest “bespoke” magazine pieces being produced by the BBC with aims at a US audience and ad revenue. I don’t know whether this speaks more to how pathetic BBC journalism is becoming, or just the BBC’s general contempt for their US audience.
On the trail with Bigfoot-hunters
An award-winning website, moving from strength to strength. XD
Christine Blower of the NUT just interviewed (well, fed lines) by a SKY peroxide sink.
Every claim as a statement she made was prefaced with ‘the fact is..’.
And she made a bunch.
Some of which I doubt were, in fact, factually sound. All let pass.
I am sure the BBC would be much more forensic of anyone I would not let within a bargepole’s length of my kids’ futures and certainly education.
Oddly, the same ear-wig prompted robot next had on a couple of guests to ‘discuss’ Mr. Osborne’s tax-dodging measures, that went a very different way.
For balance, the were a rich bird from some charity and a grinning idiot from an activist group called 38 degrees.
Blondie rather put the cat amongst the pigeons by suggesting that some charities and NGOs get shed loads of money but don’t actually do much that is charitable other than pay the salaries of ‘spokespersons’ such as the ‘yourwealthtotheirpockets’ income redistributing advocates sitting in the comfy chairs as others work at actual real jobs.
As it seems a milk round across London’s studios, I’d be interested if they, and their ‘unique’ tax ideas lobbed up at the BBC any time. And, if they did, the matter of which folk dodging tax came up… and who was not mentioned at all.
Maybe the media is harder on those who don’t like big media salaries pushed through shell companies, so they can afford to be chilled on harpies screwing up kids’ educations as none of theirs are in the state system?
Peroxide sink 🙂
GW – are you one of the ‘My Sites’ from the old site?
We still seem to be missing some regulars though 🙁
We have badly misjudged the BBC…at least as far as tax dodging millionaires go…they are intensely relaxed about people getting filthy rich.
Osborne announces he is going to close tax dodging loopholes…and the BBC, after a few select words in a tone indicating their disdain for Osborne….wheel in the defence….apparently it’s OK….all that dodging was for the benefit of disadvantaged children and struggling start up companies….the less you tax them the more we get economic growth.
Hmmm…whose policy is that? Oh…Osborne’s.
You couldn’t make it up…but the BBC do as they go along.
Top tax rate cut to 40p anyone?
I fear I have awakened a sleeping giant toddler, grumpy at working over the school hols, and filled it with a childish resolve…
—
I note your reply. I also noted that it, as so often happens, seems to be in one of the more casual of the varied forms the BBC uses back, whilst requiring of licence fee payers to conform to a very rigid set of parameters, often highly labyrinthine, in the other direction.
Not to mention tonality. This one smacks of the quickie dashed off in the pub to entertain the mates. Again.
On 10 Apr 2012, at 12:51, NewsOnline Complaints wrote:
Thank you for your email. We are satisfied the headline sums up the
story perfectly well.
I note your satisfaction. I am a licence fee payer and am not. I also happen to disagree with your perfect opinion of yourselves. Now that is out of the way…
May we refer you to how other media reported it?
http://www.channel4.com/news/osborne-happy-to-publish-tax-returns
http://www.itv.com/news/2012-04-07/osborne-very-happy-to-publish-politic
ians-tax-returns/
http://www.metro.co.uk/news/895479-george-osborne-very-happy-to-publish-
politicians-tax-returns
http://www.itn.co.uk/home/42770/Osborne+supports+publication+of+MPs27+ta
x
http://www.scotsman.com/scotland-on-sunday/scotland/george-osborne-happy
-to-reveal-ministers-tax-returns-1-2222812
Refer away, and noted.
But how, might I ask, the behaviour by some other media, which in this country I hold in about as high regard as the BBC on matters of accuracy or professionalism, of any relevance to the standards of the UK public broadcaster?
All media have a slant, these days usually agenda-based or ratings, or both.
This was a slow news moment to spin up something, and making anything more exciting than it was/is and cannot by some be resisted as the rewards are too great. Ratings equates to traffic. Traffic to bonusses. Including with your colleagues in editorial. Get a twisted view in, and knife taboot… extra points.
So if it turns out that Operation Motorman, The Balen Report or some such finds BBC employees showing the same ethical standards as others, the precedent of ‘but Sir, they did it too’ is going to look pretty lame if that is how you wish to advance matters.
Sometimes I feel like I am dealing in these complaints with pre-schoolers.
Trading other media with Telegraph coverage is facile. Especially media who like to stir things up. And I don’t have to, and hence don’t… pay for.
That the Telegraph is in this case faithful and accurate, means kudos to them.
What you try to defend was not. No matter how many shared the gutter you seek to dredge, that is not going to get avoided.
Now, again, good try on the attempted dismissal; now tell me how to get this on to a pay grade who may talk more sense and adopt a less casual tone. And see a hole already dug for them that may inspire some feedback internally.
This lack of good faith on the part of the BBC complaints process is too much, too often to be a mistake any more, and needs curbing.
{Complaint category:} Factual error or inaccuracy
{Complaint title:} Further descent into accuracy won’t fit mobiles
{Complaint:} I am already engaged in a few other complaints, rather
bizarrely involving ever more senior folk in the complaint chain
essentially trying to explain away ‘truth won’t fit’ headlines either
with silly reasons that are not excuses, or by airily making the
incredible claim for a professional news entity that if what is in
headline is not accurate, if it is clarified elsewhere, later, all is
well.
This is the headline on BBC ‘news: ‘George Osborne ‘happy’ to reveal
politicians’ tax data’
This is the headline in other media: ‘Osborne ‘very happy’ for
government to consider publishing MPs personal tax returns –
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/politics/georgeosborne/9191222/Osborne-v
ery-happy-for-government-to-consider-publishing-MPs-personal-tax-returns
.html
Now, please, consider this: if you can’t see how that one word in
particular is very key, yet got dropped from the BBC headline, you are
in worse shape than I already thought possible.
Especially given the semantic hoop-jumping already being engaged upon up
through ECU to Trust on this issue already.
{URL:} http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-17642736
Please note that the BBC monitors e-mails sent or received.
Further communication will signify your consent to all sorts of silly, sneaky stuff – No, it does not
The BBC sensitivity (and attempt at narrowing parameters so much they can censor anything) on this rather epitomised here:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/bbcinternet/2012/03/bbc_news_mobile_site_refresh.html?postId=112223613#comment_112223613
I get the impression this BBC editor is pleading for someone outside the BBC to get the hint and refer a comment or two…
http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/bbcinternet/2012/03/news_mobile_responsive_design.html?postId=112223347#comment_112223347
Reactive moderation is a ladydog, ain’t it:-)
Anti-conservative campaigner Richard Bacon plays host today to book salesman Paul ‘It’s kicking off everywhere’ Mason. Mr Mason is Newsnight’s economics editor. No, don’t laugh. As such he has personally taken it upon himself to pronounce the demise capitalism. (Shhhhsh, don’t tell the Indians, the Chinese, etc etc…). Having got this great economic insight out of the way Mr Mason can get on with what really interests him – riots, uprisings and revolutions. Young lefty campaigners and the social media. Right on! Here comes my economic insight. This BBC feature is so incestuous it would make a Hillbilly blush. The main beneficiary, however, will not be the global revolution. It will be Mr Mason’s book royalties account. Oh, the demise of capitalism.
‘what really interests him – riots, uprisings and revolutions.’
Any flame-haired lovely assistants lurking in support? Though New York seems to have lured her away from these shores. Shame, as this was rather engaging..
Laurie Penny @PennyRed
Just got called on my own bullshit rather astutely IRL. Hate it when that happens. Solemn omphaloskepsis shall now occur. #newfavouriteword
Hell of a word in context of the above, too.
Speaking of soured boat races (Bow Bells pealing in earshot as I write) I also notice the lass has, by sheer coincidence, an article in the Indy about.. yay… the latest protest! With Jonnie still counting his marbles, how long until the Wolfie Smiff of Newsnight has another ‘special aquatic correspondent’ on the beat?
A rare moment of (pretend?) humility from PennyRed there…it will last about as long as Owen Shouty’s embarrassment from his ‘This Week Car Crash’ – ie…until the next rent-a-gob appointment comes in. She still managed to be both verbose and pretentious in the same sentence, though. No change there.
Did someone overintone the Candyman’s name too many times?
Talk about great uses of BBC employee time:
—-
Dear BBC Visitor,
Thank you for contributing to the BBC web site. Unfortunately we’ve had to remove the content below because it contravened one of our House Rules.
Your comment was considered to have broken the following House Rule:
“We reserve the right to fail comments which…
Are considered to be off-topic for the discussion.”
URL of content (now removed):
http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/newsnight/fromthewebteam/2011/11/tuesday_22_november_2011.html
Subject:
Tuesday 22 November 2011
Posting:
’17. At 22:01 22nd Nov 2011, nautonier wrote:
Our Economics editor Paul Mason reports?
Well not on his blog, apparently!
Indeed.
The question of what does not get mentioned (across a few key areas of ‘news’) these days is as concerning as how what does gets ‘shaped’.
That Mr. Mason’s only outlet for interactivity was last ‘open’ back on the 7th, and even then closed at 38 is something about which, to coin a BBC anchor’s phrase ‘questions are being asked’.
There are others too, in what is shaping up to be an interesting media climate.
Oddly, the answers are less forthcoming.
However, Science editor Susan Watts will bring us up to speed… one is sure.
Meantime, how is another ‘expert’ in ‘reporting’ doing…
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-15846886
Not much yawning so far. Though on past evidence, it will get spun as opinions being ‘split’, as I recall the 100:1 even on Graun CiF on the 0:10 special being so described.
—
Let me get this straight.. they have gone back.. 5 months… to decide a topic is ‘off’?
When replying to one that is, still, currently, ‘on’?
And on a now closed blog?
A smidge… petulant… maybe?
Mr Mason going broadcast only while meanwhile extolling the revolution in new social media and interactivity?
A tangled weave indeed above…Blower/NUT/ Beeb nervousness re tax details being published/Israel and Syria/Hookie and Manchester….so much to answer for eh?
Saw bits of the 1992 Election Coverage as was repeated on the Beeb yesterday…turns out that they`ve ALWAYS wanted a libleft alliance and let the likes of Jenkins and Ashdown drone on in pursuit of the same.
Thatcher cut through the moaning minnies on her dooorstep like a hot knife through butter-and Dennis Skinner blasted the chattering classes as personified by Dimblebys and Kelners pretty well, to be fair to him.
In short-no change at all, but more obvious and desperate for the same now…only Dimbleby has wasted years of his life in hoping he`ll be some kind of catalyst, poor sod!
True he`s been well padded with our money-but when he goes to his wicca coffin, it was a life well-wasted.
So given the Beebs Bollinger goggles…no change at all. They only heard about the Hacienda long after it closed, but the likes of Vine were always there in spirit, so that`s their connection to rebellion…and we`ll not hear the end of these prep school fakes until we shut the BBC up-and let it all be a Channel 4 collage of crap as the US sees it.
The likes of Blowhard won`t have taught in recent history, being public sector Pilgrims seeking to avoid the kids as long as the unions get free reps as jacuzzi turds left after Brown left the pool in 2010…they won`t want to do phonics testing, because that would then mean they`d be shown as illiterate themselves.
BBC Audiobooks of Das Kapital apart, these NUT/NAS/UWT/ATL/ASCL are functional flops who crave a hammock in the staffroom, having long given up on teaching…creating a revolution from their beds as Gallagher or Lennon told them to do…so they did!
There’s an article by the BBC’s Sean Clare which has just appeared underneath the main story on the BBC website (‘Judges back Abu Hamza extradition’) about American ‘supermax’ prisons, with the splendidly loaded title ‘Just how bad are American ‘supermax’ prisons?’
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-17663629
In the wake of the ECHR’s rejection of the complaints of Babar Ahmad, Abu Hamza & Co., this BBC reporter weighs in and, I think, blatantly disputes the court’s findings (and backs up Ahmad, Hamza & Co.) by lining up a whole host of critics of what he calls the “infamous” ‘supermax’ prisons. He then gives them the run of his article (with small concessions to the other side of the argument).
I think this piece is remarkably biased but I’d be interested to hear other people’s views on this (Jim?)
As a side issue and probably playing the man rather than the ball, this reporter – “Sean Clare, BBC News” – used to be a GLA press officer, according to his Twitter feed.
https://twitter.com/#!/Sean__Clare
He’s a bit coy there, but Googling reveals that he used to be the press officer specifically for the Labour Group on the GLA.
http://www.london.gov.uk/who-runs-london/the-london-assembly/members/labour-group
Anyhow, back to the ‘supermax’ prison story…this morning’s ‘Today’ also seemed to me to back up the defendents’ (ie. Hamza and friends). James Naughtie interviewed two people on what Naughtie described as this “fairly controversial” issue. This item was given the popular 8.30 am spot. One of them criticised such prisons as “degrading the soul”. The other, a bomber, also criticised them. Quite how this wasn’t extremely biased is beyond me, but somebody might be able to explain it to me.
Then, for extra bias (and as if this wasn’t bad enough), Dr. Amna Ahmad, sister of Babar Ahmad, was given the opportunity to add a third voice for the pro-Hamza/Ahmad side.
You can here this double interview & the interview with Anna Ahmad, here:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/today/hi/today/newsid_9712000/9712065.stm
Ah (someone might say), but earlier in the programme (at the less-listened-to 7.15. spot) ‘Today’ interviewed Conservative MP Dominic Raab, who put the other side of the argument. That’s very true..and you can listen again to this interview…er… actually, no you can’t because ‘Today’ has chosen not to make it accessible to you via an easy-to-click-on permanent link, for some strange reason.
Am I missing something, or is the BBC just very, very biased?
There’s also what seems to me to be a questionable sets of priorities in another of the BBC Online pieces:
‘Reaction to European court’s terror extraditions ruling’
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-17662762
If you were writing such a piece, whose reaction would you consider to be the most important, and the one to report first – the prime minister, Babar Ahmad’s father, the home secretary, the shadow home secretary, Babar Ahmad’s sister?
I think I’d have gone for the order:
1. The prime minister.
2. The home secretary.
3. The shadow home secretary.
4. Babar Ahmad’s father.
5. Babar Ahmad’s sister.
The BBC article, however, chooses:
1. Babar Ahmad’s father.
2. Babar Ahmad’s sister.
3. The prime minister.
4. The home secretary.
5. The shadow home secretary.
Exactly, Craig.
INBBC is the ‘Trojan Horse’ for Islamic ideology and propaganda inside Britain.
On local INBBC radio at lunchtime the only vox pop was with the Muslim father of a Muslim Islamic jihad suspect up for deportation.
Beeboids want the cases of Islamic jihad suspects in Britain NOT to be decided by British courts, but to be decided by non-British leftist political elite in E.U., which happens to have political views very similar to those of the Islamic subservient INBBC.
Your preferred order is pretty much the order in the main item, except the us justice department goes third and there’s nothing from any family member.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-17657814
Not INBBC:-
“Abu Hamza extradition: The UK must assert its sovereignty on human rights.”
By Chris Moncrieff
Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/debate/article-2127682/Abu-Hamza-extradition-The-UK-assert-sovereignty-human-rights.html#ixzz1rfo5K3iG
Didn’t (want to) watch their normal drivel but the Court actually said that; “facilities (listed) in American prisons offer inmates more than many European prisons therefore they did not see any reason to interpret that the applicants would be treated inhumanely.”
Bet they DIDN’T mention this.
Yep, the BBC reported that. See link above.
The Tulsa police are, according to the NY Times, describing both suspects in the shooting spree as “white”. One of them obviously is, but the other has been described by a family friend as Cherokee.
The LA Times, on the other hand, mentions that last relevant factoid, as does the AP (at least via those news outlets who don’t censor that part of the wire service report).
The MSM described George Zimmerman as “white Hispanic”, and now we have a “white Cherokee”.
We’re all of us white, here.
Now for a viewpoint about this you will never hear from the BBC:
Color Me White, Even If I’m Indian?
Written by the great-grandson of the famous Comanche leader, Bad Eagle.
The exception to the rule…you don’t ever hear the same people referring to the President as ‘white African’. Funny that.
This isn’t really important, but something I’ve been mulling over the last few days and thought I’d share. A little phrase was used by David Loyn on the World Today on the BBC World Service referring to the government of Burma’s pronouncements on greater democracy in the country. This time, quoth Loyn, the statement bore “BORE ALL THE HALLMARKS OF THE TRUTH”.
(NB: “Bore all the hallmarks” was first used in the context of Northern Ireland as in: “bore all the hallmarks of the IRA”. Isn’t language, as used by the unwary, a wonderful thing?)
This http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-17658019 was the latest entry I could find. What I have not been able to find is all the news about the NBC producer being fired for falsely editing the Zimmerman radio chat, that had the operator question of ‘what race’ being edited out. Also the ‘no wounds’ debunked with testimony that Zimmerman was patched up in the field and had deep wounds. Also the picture of a 12 year old Trayvon did not match the real persona of the actual 17 year old.
Well the bBC would never like to correct the picture it had painted so far.
My sentiments exactly. They did their initial round of reporting on it, then moved on, damage….er…job done. No need to correct is as they’re bored now and aren’t interested in diminishing the Narrative construct.
Fred Bloggs, a good point. The real danger from the omission of corrective reporting is that only the reported information is stored by careless newsrooms and regurgitated when subsequent material is published. In follow-up stories about the Zimmerman case the edited audio of the 911 call will therefore become the “truthful” version. The “true truth” will die.
I cite a couple of examples: the BBC’s continued claim – always corrected by the author – that Jeffery Archer was declared bankrupt. in every interview I have heard with Archer the presenter makes that assertion. Thank goodness the victim is still around to correct it. He was never declared bankrupt but paid back his debts. However, when he shuffles off this mortal coil the BBC database will still say he was once bankrupt.
The second example is the BBC’s continued use of the “Diana Gould” interview with Mrs Thatcher as THE moment of truth in the Belgrano affair. Mrs Gould’s passion disguises the fact she was wrong. Thatcher was right. This is never pointed out in BBC reports waxing lyrical about the power of the media.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-gloucestershire-16119332
A subsequent interview with the Captain of the Belgrano admitting his actions is all but forgotten by the BBC.
http://iaindale.blogspot.com/2007/06/belgrano-captain-we-did-pose-threat-to.htm
But history is littered by falsehoods. Sadly, Mr Zimmeran’s 911 call is just the latest evidence that news is the not first draft of history, it is the first draft of myth.
Furthermore, Mrs Gould is always portrayed as “an ordinary housewife/voter”. She was a Labour councillor and activist.
I didn’t know that, htb. I guess nobody else does either, except those that have looked into it in a bit more depth than the superficial mainstream reporting of the day provided.
“Mrs Gould’s passion disguises the fact she was wrong”
Gould asked why the Belgrano was sunk when it was sailing away from the Falklands. Thatcher said; “it was not sailing away from the Falklands”. Mrs Gould was right, Mrs Thatcher was wrong. Stupidly, rather than admit her error, Thatcher clumsily tried to brush it aside with various condescending remarks. It was one of the few occasions when she revealed her true character rather than the carefully cultivated public image; and one that would eventually lead to her downfall.
Semantics. Mrs. Gould’s objection was that the Belgrano should never have been sunk, as it was heading away from the Falklands. Mrs. Thatcher’s defense was that the ship was within an area that posed a danger to our forces, and that the Argentinians were given fair warning of this condition before orders were given for it’s sinking. Listening to the audio, I think Mrs. Thatcher very much holds her own, and history has proven the decision to be justified.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-gloucestershire-16119332
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/southamerica/falklandislands/9181091/Falklands-commander-sinking-the-Belgrano-was-right-thing-to-do.html
‘Semantics’
Without which the BBC, its complaints dept. and oddly loyal cherry vulture kapo squads would be rather struggling in defence of much they attempt.
BBC and milking it !
As your unelected, and probably unwanted, ARCHERS monitor, I have let the story line concerning “Mega Daries” go as it has been even handed, well up until tonight.
Before you conclude I am becomimg increasingly obsessed with trivia, I have posted on our new site because we know that the traffic is well up and that is bound to include the BBC being curious as to how much they can get away with.
Well R4, I’m listening and telling it like it is on a blog which really does promote HAVE YOUR SAY.
So BBC, be very careful with the one and only radio programme to enjoy anything like approaching an audience.
Or do you want to destroy that as well ?
Santorum has quit the race. So Romney is it. Mark Mardell will be back from his two week vacation shortly to gloat about how it was always going to be Romney, which he and all his media friends have been saying from the very beginning.
Once they trashed Herman Cain’s chances, there was nobody else really salable, but don’t expect Mardell to put it that way. Romney was always the establishment candidate, so plenty of people will be unhappy. Next comes the “analysis” about how conservatives might just take their ball and go home, and not vote in November. We’ll now see just how much Mardell thinks there’s a mood to vote for an overripe cabbage rather than live through another four years of his beloved Obamessiah.
paxman on Viewsnight dismissed Santorum as “the enemy of gay marriage,abortion and climate change”
pity I couldn’t get to vote for him
The Arab Spring – I don’t suppose the BBC will relay the TRUE ambitions of this likely Muslim Brotherhood candidate for President of Egypt :
http://www.jpost.com/MiddleEast/Article.aspx?id=265583&R=R3
John, the cozy relationship between the MB and the WH seems to include turning a blind eye. It appears one member of recent Brotherhood delegation to Washington last week, Abdul Mawgoud Dardery, a US green card holder, is under investigation in the state of Pennsylvania for child porn. However, as you’ll see from the report I’ve linked to, the normal vetting procedures were circumvented to make his visit trouble free.
http://www.investigativeproject.org/3525/ipt-exclusive-state-department-barred-inspection
You know, I was going to blame this one on the usual problem of fiefdoms not communicating with each other, but not after reading the bit about the State Dept. making a conscious effort to override common sense.
Giving someone a free pass for appeasement never pays off.
Paul Mason does amuse me. He is such an old-style clown. Perhaps it is something about his lugubrious northern tones? Hotfoot from shooting the breeze with Ricky Bacon and the Salford posse (ie selling the book what he wrote to the kids) he pops up again for the grown ups at the end of Newsnight. For an economics editor (no don’t laugh) it seems it is always politics that really floats his boat. Except this time it’s not a boat it’s junk – because Daddy Mason has lurched into the China story. Funny that while he was telling us so confidently how it was all kicking off everywhere from the bottom up suddenly he has to get tuned into a very top down Chinese power struggle. Confucius him say, Oh wise one, you might have warned us! Paxo seems to think that when it comes to unpicking the complex Kremlinology of the Commies Mason ought to be the go to guy. Put away your own Bookywook and that unthumbed supply and demand primer Mr Mason (or did you share Alan Johnson’s Economics for Dummies?) and fetch out that two decades overdue Sheffield Uni library book on Mao that you once liberated. Trouble is Mason just doesn’t seem to have a vocabulary to deal with this story. One Chinese faction are more social democrat and are using the rhetoric of the cultural revolution he says. Quick, call Shirley Williams! Oh Mr Mason, I’m sure you will understand but I feel obliged to use a bit of the current parlance of social media – Epic Fail. LOL.
So the 5 Muslims of the bBCcalypse have been refused the hand of the EU in which to prevent them getting kicked out of the country in which to pay the price for their jihad activities . The bBC naturally upset cannot go against the EU, as that is against their mantra. So instead they bitch about the size of the prison cell these Islamic zeros will have to live in if they are sent to a super-max prison. (For the past few years the bBC has been opining about their heros getting sent to Guantanamo , but now that they know they won’t be going there, they have picked the next best thing in which to attack the US.
What makes me laugh is how the bBC is bitching (real good) about the size of the prison cell their Islamic heroes would live in. Have a Look
Most army single bunks are a lot smaller, myself I lived in smaller spaces for years at a time. Why submariners and sailors live in smaller pits (Slang for bedspace) In the falklands I lived in an iso container with 5 other fellows.
Yet when a rabid Muslim who hates everything about our way of life who having moved from the turd world from a house a lot worse than that the Americans offer their supermax inmates and the bBC is up in arms.
The bBC, the traitors in our Midst.
And just how concerned are the bBC about how their Islamic heroes may get sent down. Well judge for yourself by reading how the bBC end their sop for Islamic terrorists
Have you been affected by the issues raised in this story? Send us your comments using the form below.
The bBC, the traitors in our Midst.
I wonder if this will make a few Beeboids rethink their position on the sanctity of the EU Human Rights courts. Probably a little cognitive dissonance going on in editorial meetings right about now.
Oh dear…this tax spotlight might move to the BBC…
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/personalfinance/9193069/BBC-stars-should-join-ministers-in-publishing-tax-returns.html
http://www.dailystar.co.uk/posts/view/245140
–TOP BBC hosts such as Jeremy Clarkson, Chris Moyles, Susanna Reid and Gary Lineker could be forced to reveal their tax returns.
–Government minister Grant Shapps said any move to publish MPs’ tax returns could be extended to others paid by the taxpayer.
Wonder if they’ll rack up another legal bill to ‘protect their privacy’. I bet they’ll now be very wary about how they cover any push to make the publishing of politicians’ tax affairs a regular occurrence. Is Mr. Shapps making a promise…or a threat?
…and , in another installment of ‘do as I say, not as I do’ Socialist hypocrisy…
–The Sunday Telegraph has established Mr Galloway has channelled his substantial media earnings through one service company and set up another such structure just seven weeks ago.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/politics/9192330/George-Galloway-faces-questions-over-tax-affairs.html
Didn’t Clarkson live on the Isle of something for a year for tax purposes? Still, the BBC makes more cash off him than on the rest of them combined, so that won’t change.
John Simpson “lived” in Eire for tax purposes, I believe – until Eire changed its tax shelter law. I believe Eire then lost its green charm !