Apparently the boss of a cab firm has said some less than complimentary things about cyclists, giving outrage-hungry time-rich media luvvies today’s excuse to whip themselves into a frenzy on Twitter.
My question – what do you all make of this, impartiality-wise?
After reading the views of the chairman of @addisonleecabs towards #cyclists I’ll be taking my custom elsewhere ow.ly/1KR4Qn
— Stuart Hughes (@stuartdhughes) April 19, 2012
Any #cyclists think there’s mileage in getting #boycottaddisonlee trending? #cycling
— Stuart Hughes (@stuartdhughes) April 19, 2012
My story on the #boycottaddisonlee row just filed for @bbcnews ow.ly/apDVE — Stuart Hughes (@stuartdhughes) April 20, 2012
@london_cycling I’ve just filed this story for @BBCNews on the #boycottaddisonlee row… #cycling #londontl.gd/h2j5kk
— Stuart Hughes (@stuartdhughes) April 20, 2012
@johnprescott @bengoldacre I’ve just filed this story for @BBCNews on the #boycottaddisonlee row… #cycling #londontl.gd/h2j5kk
— Stuart Hughes (@stuartdhughes) April 20, 2012
Follow the links and read the copy – it’s pretty clear whose side Stuart Hughes is on. Unsurprising given his personal views, wouldn’t you say?
[*Second tweet added as an update – I missed it to begin with but I hope you agree it adds value – h/t eadwulf]
Great spot, DB.
A BBC reporter actively encouraging a Twitter campaign against a minicab company and then posting a loaded article on the BBC website, with a link to that very Twitter campaign? Doesn’t look very impartial at all.
It looks even worse that he’s tweeting John Prescott about it. Prescott is now in full hue-and-cry against the minicab company because the owner is a “Tory donor” who has apparently given £25K to Boris Johnson.
Time for Helen Boaden to sent out that e-mail to all BBC staff again!
I dont know what he has in his genes but it’s not impartiality!
Well one thing’s for sure, if it’s a BritishBrainwashingCorporation reporter that’s got it in for a minicab firm then, regardless of who owns it, it won’t be one of the thousands of UK minicab firms full of muslim drivers!
If he’s freelance then he can say what he wants, though suggesting a boycott on the BBC shouldn’t be allowed, especially from someone taking license payers money
Cyclists are an untaxed, uninsured menace on the roads. make them pay tax and insurance and pass a test to get on the roads.
what he said
a compelte menace with no regard to the rules of the road
“My story on the #boycottaddisonlee row just filed for @BBCNews ow.ly/apDVE” So this how they do it. Blow some trivia out of all proportion and then sit back and wind people up. This is not journalism. Its campaigning
“..the BBC must remain independent and distanced from government initiatives, campaigners, charities and their agendas, no matter how apparently worthy the cause or how much their message appears to be accepted or uncontroversial.”
http://www.bbc.co.uk/editorialguidelines/page/guidelines-impartiality-consensus-campaigns-scrutiny
So this activist is the “BBC World Affairs Producer , cyclist” Someone else who abuses his position. If this was a politician or local Councillor they would rightly be sacked for a conflict of interest.
The whole story is absolute mindbogglingly trivial. Hughes wants to grow up.
This taxi company appears to be one of the very few not run by an ethnic minority. That’s probably why they consider it to be fair game.
“Any #cyclists think there’s mileage in getting #boycottaddisonlee trending? #cycling”
“@london_cycling @londoncyclist this article deserves a social media campaign to #boycottaddisonlee http://ow.ly/aoBrV”
I’m not into this Twitter rubbish, but is this Hughes organizing a campaign?
Apologies eadwulf – missed this comment pointing out that Hughes was pimping his #boycottaddisonlee hashtag. You got there first – have added hat tip.
Thanks DB
Good to see a BBC hack approaching a story in a level-headed, impartial and disinterested fashion.
Go on, Stuart. You can do it. Yo da man. Why don’t you REALLY go for it and WRITE THAT LETTER TO ARIEL NOW!!!!!
“Only a very foolhardy journalist would broadcast or publish information gleaned from Twitter without making secondary checks or seeking out corroborating evidence.” [Stuart Hughes 2011]
http://www.bbc.co.uk/journalism/blog/2011/11/twitter-out-on-a-wire.shtml
Another good catch, DB. One more for the list. Here’s the little biased Beeboid proving he wrote the article, and here’s the un-bylined piece about it for BBC News Online:
Addison Lee cab firm boss in cyclist comments row
Your license fee hard at work, writing impartial “news” reports then attacking the subject via Twitter.
Plus, Dominic Casciani has joined the fun:
https://twitter.com/#!/BBCDomC/status/193091398537445378
So has Kelvin Brown:
https://twitter.com/#!/kelvinnews/status/193092470144368640
That makes 42 Beeboids tweeting their bias so far, with plenty of collecting still to do.
Just updated my own comment to better reflect and credit DB’s work.
FFS, he actually suggested the #boycottaddisonlee hashtag!
And then he sends in an article to the BBC which casually mentions the very campaign he started:
“Cycling campaigners have begun an internet campaign – using the Twitter hashtag #Boycottaddisonlee – and are urging supporters to put pressure on firms with Addison Lee corporate accounts not to use the company’s cabs.”
The above copy was used as the first draft of the BBC online article, but it’s now been updated to exclude the reference to his own campaign. Someone must’ve read this blog, eh?
And guess who was advising other BBC journalists on the best use of social media today? Yup – Stuart Hughes:
You couldn’t make it up.
‘The above copy was used as the first draft of the BBC online article, but it’s now been updated to exclude the reference to his own campaign.’
‘updated’…. LoL. Brown cords day chez Aunty I’d hazard as this one unravels. They always say it’s not the dodgy story but the cover up that really impacts.
I just sent in a formal complaint about this, including the pile on from Casciani and Brown. Get screenshots of everything!
The tweetlonger page is down, so the fool has put proof he wrote it up on GoogleDocs:
http://t.co/SoJRA0Mt
And another Beeboid joins in. Mike Hirst is covering the Olympics for them:
http://twitter.com/#!/hirstmike/status/193083818540933121
Am I missing something here?
Reading the BBC article as to what the Addison Lee boss said, I fail to find anything inflammatory, despite his own admission that ‘it might have been’.
“[Cyclists] leap onto a vehicle which offers them no protection except a padded plastic hat.”
…cyclists were “throwing themselves onto some of the most congested spaces in the world”.
YUP!
“The influx of beginner cyclists is going to lead to an overall increase in accidents involving cyclists,” he said.
Probably!
Both cyclists and motorists have a responsibility to use the roads safely”
“The rest of us occupying this road space have had to undergo extensive training. We are sitting inside a protected space with impact bars and air bags and paying extortionate amounts of taxes on our vehicle purchase, parking, servicing, insurance and road tax.
“It is time for us to say to cyclists: ‘You want to join our gang, get trained and pay up.'”
“Contrary to what has been reported, at no point did I suggest that motorists are never to blame,” he said.
“Both cyclists and motorists have a responsibility to use the roads safely.”
What he’s stated are simple facts. The only thing I can see that can cause a reaction is that cyclists should be trained, and pay some sort of tax.
In Denmark infractions committed by cyclists involve them having points added on their driving licence.
The story actually suggests that it is the London Cycling Campaign (LCC) that’s acting irresponsibly. Looking at their website, where they seem to want any and all other traffic to cease travel, to give themselves the freedom to move without fear, I can see why they would be favoured by the BBC.
Does it even matter at this point? Defenders of the indefensible will, as always, remain silent.
I think the Danes have it right. If a cyclist runs a red light, travels up a one-way the wrong way, why shouldn’t they collect points?
Interesting, following this beeboid’s hashtag, I notice there’s reference to a debate on journalism vs activism. It’s clear that the BBC is now riddled with activism.
On which subject, this person cannot possibly claim that the hashtag is personal if he references the BBC in it – and continues to refer to his work and work activities in it. My employer would never allow such references on pain of disciplinary action.
Absolutely. The Beeboids love to wring their hands over how difficult this social media lark is, and how they haven’t figured out where to draw the line. In this case, it couldn’t be more obvious.
“Hello, I’m starting an activist campaign, and here’s a BBC article I’ve written to get you started.”
I don’t agree, Teddy. It smacks of a certain attitude of wanting to bully cyclists off the roads. Don’t go along with the clamour for making cyclists pay, either. True, cyclists and heavy vehicles don’t mix that well in the same space and cyclists can be a hazard, mainly to pedestrians walking on pavements or crossing roads.
I have cycled thousands of miles in London over the course of my life. I have also been a mini-cab driver and lorry driver there during periods of my life too, as well as a conventional motorist.
Without a doubt there are good and bad drivers and cyclists. In the case of the latter there are those who flout all semblance of respecting traffic laws and are a menace to all road users.
Since no responsibility is currently demanded from them, it is understandable that professional drivers will be increasingly frustrated by their behaviour, and I think the comments made by Addison Lee boss are not unreasonable.
Although personally I don’t think road tax should be paid by cyclists, it might be an idea to impose the need for a licence following training, and possibly insurance, with penalties imposed for those who are found lacking. Certainly some sort of responsibility and consequences need to be implemented.
Perhaps the Add’Lee boss could have expressed his views more diplomatically, but nothing he’s said makes me think he’s telling drivers to just run cyclists down, just asking for more responsibility to be imposed on cyclists – and I agree with that.
Like the BBC gets behind rioters, benefit claimants, et al and justifies their behaviour, it appears here that Hughes is taking the same tack.
Even he admits that the article was inflammatory – once the nature of his comments had been brought home to him. ‘Mr Griffin later responded by saying: “I accept that the tone of the article was perhaps a little too inflammatory.” ‘ It was. As are comments such as that cyclists are a menace to all road users. He could have made reasonable comments about road users in general, including cyclists, but he chose not to.
i can’t help but think of all those chinks in China that used to ride bikes everywhere, and now drive cars. Maybe the BBC should do a ‘documentary’ about them.
I’ll be taking my custom elsewhere
Sounds like Addison Lee company may be releasing details of BBC journeys…let’s hope 🙂
Love the fact that Hughes tweeted Ben Goldacre about this. Nobody more self-righteously high and mighty about journalistic ethics than him.
P.S. John Griffin is talking perfect sense: everyone who walks near a road or drives has seen cyclists breaking the law repeatedly very day
Bring it on!
Here’s a great piece to see just how hypocritical, and completely useless, is the 2-Jag(off) John Prescott.
The double disaster of John Prescott
No wonder he needs any excuse or bandwagon to try and change his image.
Addison Lee themselves might be interested to hear about this. 😛
http://www.addisonlee.com/support/enquiries
Hope Addison Lee or whoever does Stuart Hughes for restraint of trade or defamation.
Outrageous efforts to smear a white Tory, bring the odious Prescott back from the gravy surfing trough…and , who knows: smear Boris too.
The BBC staff really are the fifth column for New Labour still-and hope the thing falls flat on its face. This idea of making your own news and grievance pressure points to skewer the forces of conservatism is just wrong.
Heh:
There’s somebody who doesn’t think that truth will ever catch up with them – just like Saddam.
So he’s aware of the blog, is he? Funny. Addison Lee is aware of him now, too.
’I’m sure all 21 of yr followers agree’
That renowned BBC reputation for proper research in its education and informational efforts at its customary high levels, given where this was likely to and has ended up. Very proud of his ‘following’ is he? All due to his great insights and personality, and nothing to do with ’BBC World Affairs Producer’ As to ’Views expressed are mine, not the BBC’s’ it is interesting how these views can translate into actions via said medium… ‘’My story on the #boycottaddisonlee row just filed for @bbcnews http://ow.ly/apDVE’. Nice to see it got the now classic ‘row’ headline spin up, when this seems to have been news created by the BBC to then report upon. I guess that was what Helen Boaden meant when she talked about ‘holding the powerful account’, though she did forget to mention it’s mainly holding to account those that rock the BBC bubble’s boat using a mate’s rates & fates £4Bpa personal propaganda machine. Being held to account for abuse of such power… now blogs are closing and complaints are on cookie cutter ‘we’ve had a peek and again feel we got it about right’… not so much.
On the topic of heft, guess the constant deferring to Mehdi Hasan and the News Statesman is somehow ‘different’, uniquely.
Also that now well-documented (by BBC employees, in print) mature response to concerned feedback alive and well, too.
Must be nice to be unaccountable and untouchable.
Though he does seem to like digging to a level where he may strike less certain seams.
Which bit got amputated, or is that the remnants of which the helmet is protecting?
This ’I’m sure all 21 of yr followers agree’ is reminiscent of the twat Owen Jone’s comments to those that fisked him and highlighted the fisking (on the Commentator, someone posted a link here on Open Thread) ; it shows the shallowness of these jerks, how many followers on Twitter (and presumable facebook friends) they have is just soooo important darling, he has more than me… whimper!)
Agree with both comments above.
I too noted this sneer at how “few followers ” the opposing argument is said to have…and therefore, unlike Owen or Stuart; their views are irrelevant or…well “sad”…what else?
I daresay if I were to pint out to these media dribblers, that Jade Goody or Michael Jackson will be getting more followers than they are…then I would be accused of playing the man and not the ball, of “populist grandstanding” and “political opportunism”…which are always the complaints of the left when their milestone policies/reflexes (capital punishment, human rights, EU) are revealed to be elitist, autocratic and minority views.
But-as Ken reveals-as did Johann, Polly and the like…hypocrisy is about the only thing that the left has as a core/key policy anymore…to revel in it, defend it and spread it so no-one personally can be picked off.
The left axis happily won`t survive much longer-when you get the likes of Hughes and Owen as wheels on your Trabant/Volkswagen…you`ll be due a crash anytime soon.
Witness Aaronovitch and Galloway on Question Time…and enjoy the comradely solidarity.
No wonder these people crave for China to take over…once the EU have begun to get us all oven ready…not a chance Beeb!
“I’m sure all 21 of yr followers agree.”
Ooh. It’s rather unseemly for a man to boast about the size of his following, especially in public.
This one sounds a bit of a twat, doesn’t he?
And here Hughes reveals the mind-boggling arrogance that is the BBC mindset. Can you imagine for one moment complaining to a major private organisation e.g. Tesco or British Airways and receiving such an offhand and plainly offensive reply? Any similar behaviour by an employee of such an organisation would find themselves in hot water, and probably be featured as the lead item on Watchdog on the BBC.
BBC employees know that there is no effective complaints procedure, and that the management will be as dismissive of complaints as they are. And all because of the unique way the BBC is funded, i.e. “Don’t like the BBC?, tough. You’ve still got to pay for us. Ha ha!”. A big two fingered salute to the general public.
Even if Tesco received a complaint they thought was baseless, they would have the decency to reply in a courteous manner.
Exactly, Bodo. The arrogance and contempt for the public are breathtaking.
Ermm, that injury he suffered in Iraq, was it brain damage?
No, any brain damage was caused by the BBC CoJ.
Let me get this straight: They discovered that this businessman was a Conservative donor, so they scoured anything they could find just so they could launch a campaign against him for no other reason except that he supports a Conservative. All they could find was a totally mild, fairly uncontroversial comment about cyclists and they used this as an excuse to demonise him.
So Jim Dandy, please explain what there is that is so offensive about his words that can cause such moral outrage amongst your Beboid chums or would you agree that the only reason for this campaign against him is because he dares to support a Conservative? If the latter then don’t you agree the Beboid should be sacked as there is no way he can fulfill the BBC charter to appear unbiased.
Narh He will just pop in shout ‘ yer all wrong ‘
and leave before we can prove we ain’t but then I am still very suspicious of some one who claims they have no connection to the BBC but still feels compelled to defend the multi billion £ corporation with only it’s near 2/3rds control of the media ,20.000 staffers and Labour /lawyers on speed dial to protect them against us and David’s blog hmm protecting the powerful against the powerless how very liberal ?
Hmm maybe if you love dear old auntie for too long you fall victim to Stockholm Syndrome?
Maybe he’s a civil servant in that department that is in charge of government relations with the Beeboid Corporation – the Dept for Culture, Media and Sport (DCMS). That could account for his avid interest in Beeboid doings and also how he might have become an advocate for the Beeboid Corporation against its critics.
I got the impression that Jim Dandy worked in media somewhere.
In this case, David Gregory and Scott would be the ones to explain, not Jim.
And just look at all the privileges he’s received from being a Tory donor: http://www.eureferendum.com/blogview.aspx?blogno=82571 Perhaps he should be funding Red Ken instead…
Frankly I have never understood the concessions for black cabs either. Still a 4-wheel footprint and a bunch of particulate GHGs to ferry one bozo about. They are an expensive, elitist form of travel few can afford… oddly generating a fair whack from one group in particular:
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/culture/tvandradio/bbc/8696016/BBC-executive-Caroline-Thomson-spends-2800-on-taxis.html
Even 30 years ago I never used ’em, as in London’s much less congested streets then the tube was usually quicker and busses often as fast.
Of course, it is only through brain-missing arrogance on Mr. Hughes’ part that this is so clearly documented.
What about the vast number of more covert and subtle means by which a ‘row’ is manufactured in the wine bars of Islington to suit the campaigning and/or social engineering and/or dirty tricks ambitions of the BBC and its fellow ideological travelers? Copying in Lord Creosote of Hypocrisy and @WheretheresmucktheresGoldacre… really?
Like a Dr. Scezandy post here, Mr. Hughes has simply kicked over Pandora’s box to reveal a very rancid worm pile inside.
A small point: if you have a grievance or an issue which you want to highlight in the media, best not to bring it to the attention of a thuggish, bumbling idiot like John Prescott.
There are far more skilled media whores out there who can do a much better job. Stephen Fry, for instance. Or George Monbiot. We really don’t see or hear enough of Stephen or George in the media these days.
Alas, Prescott is something of a Credibility Sponge: his presence alone is enough to absorb any vestiges of credibility in a given situation.
I wonder – when was the last time Prescott’s continent-sized arse made contact with a bike saddle (as opposed to it being squeezed into the driver’s seat of a gas-guzzling Jag)?
John Prescott@johnprescottReply
Hi @mayoroflondon. I see you’re now opposing Addison Lee’s John Griffin. Will you now give back his £25k donation? Ta. #boycottaddisonlee
Way back, in the days when I had hair and my own teeth, I edited a local newspaper.
It was a slow news month and so I decided to publish a letter from a ‘local reader’ who was ‘deeply concerned’ about the behaviour and competence of cyclists. This ‘reader’ suggested in the most unequivocal terms that cyclists should be forced to take tests and pay tax and insurance before they are allowed on the road.
Suffice it to say, this letter (which was certainly not written by an employee of my newspaper) generated a robust response from outraged cycling groups and environmentalists, the fall-out from which lasted for weeks.
Did someone say something about journalists manufacturing news stories? Nah, doesn’t happen.
The guy from the taxi cabs firm was merely expressing an opinion, and in a reasonable and articulate way. How does it justify such an OTT, fascistic reaction? That this is aided and abetted by the BBC speaks volumes.
You will find that the cycling fraternity are a very militant bunch – always have been. I can remember our city centre being brought to a standstill on numerous occasions over the years by a militant left-wing group of cyclists calling themselves “Reclaim The Streets”. Always moaning about there being too much traffic on the roads and demanding that cars and lorries be banned from the city’s streets.
What makes me livid are their demands that taxpayers should foot the bill for cycle lanes and other privileges while they pay nothing towards the cost. Typical of the leftie entitlement culture.
I’ve always found regular cyclists to be the most aggressive and rudest of road users. Your safety is certainly put at risk if you walk any of the lanes or bridle paths in our area, constantly jumping out of the way of speeding cyclists who seem to think they have the right of way over pedestrians. They even put pedestrians at risk by riding on city centre footpaths because “it’s too dangerous to ride on the road.”
Rant over……
What makes me livid are their demands that taxpayers should foot the bill for cycle lanes and other privileges while they pay nothing towards the cost. Typical of the leftie entitlement culture.
I also find that having got funding for their off-road cycle lanes, there is a hard-core group of cyclists who will still insist on using the road even though there’s a perfectly good (and newly built) cycle path just yards away. They should be fined if they persist in using roads and holding up the traffic when there is a perfectly good cycle lane available!
Hughes is either ignorant of the unethical nature of all this, or, and much more likely, this kind of cesspit activism is taught at the BBC College of “Journalism”. Either way he should not be allowed to take money out of my pocket.
Damn, this Beeboid is very rude to you, DB. I don’t follow you on Twitter, but I did email Addison Lee and call them on the phone to tell them about this. Everyone here should do the same.
http://www.addisonlee.com/support/enquiries
0844 800 6677 (UK only)
+44 20 7387 8888 (outside UK)
And forward this post to critics of the BBC in the media.
Well Done Dave 🙂
Looking back through his tweets, there’s another campaign Stuart Hughes seems single-handedly to have got started and then used the BBC News website to publicise.
The story begins back in March:
19/3/12 Delighted to finally be able to announce that I’ll be taking part in the Olympic #torchrelay on Jul 24th
The following day though he gets some unwelcome news…
20/3/12 Ah, the spirit of the Games. I’ve just been told I can buy my Olympic torch – for just £200. Can I claim it on expenses?…
Later that same day on Twitter….
20/3/12 Pls get in touch if you’re part of the #torchrelay & unhappy with the £200 cost for the torch – I’m interested in doing a story on it.
20/3/12 Thanks to all #torchbearer s who sent me quotes on cost of buying torch. I’ve just filed this story… (cont) http://tl.gd/ghdlun
20/3/12 @jackieleonard01 I’m going to sell photos with the torch outside TVC for a fiver a pop.
20/3/12 My story on Olympic #torchbearer s being charged £200 to keep their souvenir from then #torchrelay http://ow.ly/9MCFR
22/3/12 @damiendavis My colleagues at BBC London are following this up with other councils after my story & seeing if others will follow suit.
From this Twitter trail, it looks as if Stuart Hughes was told he was going to be an Olympic torch-bearer and was delighted. The following day he was told he would be charged if he wanted to keep the torch and was far from delighted. So he immediately decides he’ll use the BBC News website to run a story getting other people to protest about it and starts tweeting for help. He gets some replies and publishes a story (with a second BBC journalist) on the BBC website. Then his pals at BBC London start digging after to see if the story goes beyond one council. Or that’s what it looks like.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-17444857
I would describe the BBC Online piece as loaded against the particular company SH is unhappy with. His article also fails to disclose that he, the joint-author of the article, has a personal interest in the story.
The first guy expressing outrage in the report, “Thomas Read”, must be the “Thomas” a certain Emma Gilliam tweets SH about. From her Twitter feed it looks as if she picks up on SH’s request, knows somebody in her class who’s also going to be an Olympics torch-bearer and tells him about the £200 charge, thus making him “outraged!”:
@stuartdhughes i’ve got a student who’s doing the torch relay. where’s the info about the £200?
@stuartdhughes student just seen the email about it all. he’s outraged!
https://twitter.com/#!/EmmaGilliam
SH replies:
@emmagilliam Ask him to email me.
@emmagilliam Thomas has emailed me. Thanks.
(Emma Gilliam, incidentally, is BBC through and through:
http://www.cardiff.ac.uk/jomec/contactsandpeople/profiles/gilliam-emma.html)
This seems to be revealing about how certain news stories make their way onto the BBC New website and some might argue that this is just a reporter finding an interesting story and reporting it – except that Stuart Hughes surely isn’t a disinterested reporter here. He wrote that story, didn’t he, because he is personally involved in it, was “outraged” that he was going to be charged to keep his Olympic torch, fished on Twitter for other people to back him up by saying they were outraged too & then published an article on the BBC News website about the row he seems personally to have stirred up?
Is this what an impartial BBC reporter should be doing?
Well researched Craig 🙂
What what can see from this is how the BBC mindset works. This is an example that was made public, but one can easily imagine that it goes on all the time behind closed doors. We are well used and able to spot a particular BBC agenda, but this gives us an insight as to how insidiously and arrogantly they use their power in a corrupt way.
Your comment deserves its own post.
Unreal. Nice work, Craig. How many Beeboids use their position for activism or advocacy? Justin Webb, Richard Black, Katty Kay, now this Hughes dope….can anyone name others?
Titchmarsh is one that comes to mind
BBC under fire for letting Alan Titchmarsh become the new ‘face’ of B&Q
Then there’s the myriad ‘Arab Spring + Islam is the religion of peace’ mind benders.
I seem to remember they fired Carol Vorderman from Tomorrow’s World for doing ads over on ITV, in case there was the slightest potential for a conflict of interest (supposedly). Not sure how advertising Ariel washing powder could have presented a problem for a technology show.
It would be easier to name those who dont.
Thanks. That’s a good idea, TB!
As always, an eye-watering expose.
Mr. Hughes has rather awoken a sleeping [modestly proportioned, validly-concerned entity], and filled it with a determined resolve. And posting subsequent petulant snarks when exposed really not the smartest play on top. No wonder Dr. Scezandy has decided the bunker buffet offers an easier fruit platter.
‘His article also fails to disclose that he, the joint-author of the article, has a personal interest in the story.’
That is pretty much most-trusted professional SOP for BBC ‘reports’ these days, especially if stirring up an outrage du jour. If the ‘report’ had gone to video they’d have had to use a telephoto lens cropped in the edit suite to make all two (I can mock ‘followings’ too) of them into a ‘critics are saying horde’. Especially one whipped up by a BBC faux issue squad leader.
Looking at the story it seems these things (I thought there was one that came from Greece and got handed about in relay) are not cheap and already subsidised. Like any tickets the BBC gets for the Olympics, I reckon these will be up for bids on eBay before you can say ‘nice scam if you can wangle it’. Not liked by the whippupee teams. All seven of them.
Had to love this comment:
’90. Oliver Barnes
21ST MARCH 2012 – 18:18
£200 for a torch. Step two, charge athletes for the meddles they win.’
Lot of winning meddles by our Stuart! Until Craig rains on his parade with simple factual exposes.
Lord help us if Jeremy Clarkson is ever asked to drive the pace car at F1 and we are required to stump up for a £200k AMG Merc (or similar) to add to his collection as he has access to public media the public does not have..
Stuart… thanks mate, you have dug a hole that makes the Marinas Trench look like a drainage ditch.
I see that the BBC are showing the Bahrain Grand Prix then!
Hope the rebels at the Pearl Roundabout send the quaffing petrolheads at the BBC over to Syria as “traitors to the Revolution”.
It`s what Al Qutb would have wanted (peace be on him and all the martyrs hmm?)
On the Ten O’Clock News on Radio Four last night there was a full report on this ‘scandal’ with, naturally, Addison Lee painted as the villains of the piece.
Another result for Stuart Hughes!
He’s like a junior reporter getting his stories in the paper because his family owns it.
As a leftie I’m sure he’s perfectly happy with that sort of ‘privilege.’
The people at Addison Lee are aware that a BBC producer is organizing this boycott and using the BBC to advance it. More people need to urge them to action, though.
Good work, DP.
Something occurred to me that might account for the ‘ever so public’ arrogance of Simon Hughes.
Say this a few times until it hits you
It’s – ‘I’m on News’
It’s – ‘I’m on News’
It’s – ‘I’m on News’
Did you get it? 😉
Except his name’s Stuart, TB. Heh.
DOH!
It’s Chew Art You’s?
Stuart Hughes has blocked me on Twitter (he joins an ever-increasing list of BBC employees) so somebody else will have to tell him to fire up the Outragemobile over these comments:
“Asking cyclists to be road aware is not itself a bad thing… I’m a cyclist and I really don’t object to people telling us to be more road-aware… London is full of helmet-less hipsters in summer, floating along Old Street totally oblivious to vehicular danger [end rant!]”
That’s BBC Washington correspondent Adam Blenford.
Fight!
‘blocked me on Twitter (he joins an ever-increasing list of BBC employees)’
Given the move to this medium, I am unsure how the service delivery obligation is served by ‘blocking’ without due process and appeal…
http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/newsnight/fromthewebteam/2012/03/this_blog_is_now_closed_-_foll.html
‘You can continue to comment on Newsnight using the social media websites Facebook and Twitter.’
Except of course, where you can’t, which is pretty ‘unique’ on the saying one thing but doing another front.
Such as Lunchtime Loather have similar experiences…
http://lunchtimeloather.blogspot.co.uk/2012/04/left-hand-meet-right-hand.html
I merely note our Adam’s tweet-top bio..
‘Views all mine, not the BBC’s.’
Now, scoping the thread he seems a decent cove, but one not far down did strike me given this ‘nothing to do with the BBC’ claim being made by them all…
Adam Blenford @AdamBlenford
@jtlevy Hi. I work for the BBC. We’re interested in your idea that 99/00 was a cultural high watermark. Could we discuss more off Twitter?
So, BBC… twitter… what the hell is going on? Is it official or is it not. Questions have now been asked. You can’t have it both ways and you can’t close this thread to comments.
Stuey’s baton has been picked up..
http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/culture/harrymount/100062625/bicycles-dont-kill-people-cars-do/
Not, however, working out too well for thew author there, either.
How Harry Mount got a job at The Telegraph I don’t know. With journalists like him the BBC could advertise their job vacancies more there. I notice he used the Holland cyclist example, which suggests he might be a member of the LCC (London Cycling Campaign) the ones that took such umbrage at Griffin’s remarks, and who seem to think that London should be transformed into something akin to Holland. Do they know that London itself has a greater population than the entire country of Holland? In their arrogance never mind how many buildings will have to be demolished and new roads built to accommodate them, so long as they don’t have to pay for it, or be held accountable for their bad cycling habits.
Result. From Hughes’ boss, in response to my complaint:
Having looked into this I do think Stuart got this wrong and have told him so. In our defence, the story on the BBC website was not written by Stuart but by another journalist using Stuart’s copy and other sources, including the Press Association. It was a balanced piece, and the editor who commissioned the report was not aware of the background on Twitter. It is also worth pointing out that Stuart did not start the campaign hashtag #boycottaddisonlee.
However, he was wrong to publicly support one side in an issue of controversy. Further, having done so, he should not have taken part in BBC journalism on that issue.
Stuart has now removed his tweets supporting #boycottaddisonlee. He is active on social media with a few thousand followers and although his profile states that his “views are his own”, he understands that anything he writes should not compromise or appear to compromise the BBCs impartiality on issues of controversy. On this occasion he did just that, he’s apologised and will endeavour not to do so again.
Defenders of the indefensible take note: this blog can affect change.
Just looked back at what went down, and am minded of a miscreant who gets a haircut and wears a suit being let off by the local beak for ‘expressing regret’.
‘@4d2b delighted to be the latest in a long line of BBC journalists you’ve taken umbrage with. I’m sure all 21 of yr followers agree.— Stuart Hughes (@stuartdhughes) April 20, 2012’ does not smack of anyone too concerned about professional probity.
Also, given the extent of listed RTs from Lords to Graun journos (Damien Carrington just got started) to half of the BBC traced back to this guy (excluding those others ‘blocked’ on his ‘private but I work for the BBC’ account, I repeat… pull the other one.
Very well done Dave for at least getting this far.
If nothing else our Stuart will be nursing his ego at what ’21 followers of DB’ can do. I hope he bragged about it just before he had to remove his tweets.
Prick!
An interesting precedent. By the same logic, Tim Weber should avoid editing any articles relating to the economic situation in the States, given that his tweets show he’s a huge Obama fan…
Jeff
‘the story on the BBC website was not written by Stuart but by another journalist using Stuart’s copy‘
Having some fun toying with a complaints weasel in full Murdochowhous? mode trying to claim no one knows anything and hiding behind semantics.
I am, by trade, a copywriter. That is, I write copy.
It occurs to me that saying the writing by one using the copy of another really doesn’t quite introduce the degree of separation hoped for there.
They are still trying to avoid answering my question as to who was the lead author:)
‘Result’
Indeed. However….
‘It was a balanced piece’
I wonder what possibly could have inspired that oddly confident opinion being included?,
‘the editor who commissioned the report was not aware of the background on Twitter.’
Nudge, nudge, wink, wink to a blind Lord a-tweeting. Or, frankly, bollocks.
‘He is active on social media with a few thousand followers and although his profile states that his “views are his own”, he understands that anything he writes should not compromise or appear to compromise the BBCs impartiality on issues of controversy.
And he understands this, seemingly alone in the BBC, only now?
‘On this occasion he did just that,’
Did not someone look back a bit and locate his last ‘campaign’ in self interest, which would make the occasion(s) plural?
‘…he’s apologised and will endeavour not to do so again.’
Endeavour? What is he, six? Or is it Alzheimers?
Meanwhile, one presumes the BBC and its employees will not be gleefully calling for Ministerial resignations today, so long as they pretend to be suitably penitent and get a minion to say Sowwy very much.
It will just go undercover, and get worse.
But yes, a result.
I assume he meant that the piece wasn’t an attack on the taxi company, and didn’t come across as biased against it. We’ve all obviously looked at the article first in the context of Hughes’ biased tweets, and without being pre-informed like that the piece probably does seem okay. Whether or not it was actually worthy of even reporting at all over other stories is another matter.
I’ll grant you that it does seem hard to be believe that the editor who took Hughes’ copy had no idea about the Twitter campaign. Maybe Hughes filed it in a sober manner, without tipping his hand? I guess it’s possible.
I didn’t say anything in my complaint about that torch business, so I guess nobody would bother looking back to see if he has form. I did, though, reply to this reply and suggest that they might consider the inherent danger of having Beeboids use their no-holds-barred personal “views my own” accounts to promote their BBC work, and how it blurs the line.
I’m just going to take the man at his word this time. It was an obvious case of bias, and they accepted it without hesitation, so credit where due. Hopefully this will be an actually learned lesson, rather than the usual “we’ve taken it into advisement, etc.” and nothing changes.
But we will keep an eye out, of course. DB is ever vigilant.
Sorry, we crossed.
But we will keep an eye out, of course. DB is ever vigilant.
Sadly he does get blocked on BBC employees’ private/public twitter accounts a fair bit, especially those prone to ‘straying’, so where one falls, or is pushed, it is to be hoped others may fill the breach.