Big Brother? I never knew the half of it. Monday morning, George here, and inviting you to start the week by detailing the BBC bias that is annoying you here…
OPEN THREAD…
Bookmark the permalink.
Search Biased BBC
Recent Comments
- tomo Dec 19, 06:21
Midweek 18th December 2024
Dimwit MP https://x.com/josephpowell/status/1869051927734194241 and… Labour’s new Corruption Minister - JohnC Dec 19, 05:51
Midweek 18th December 2024
Syria not a threat to world, rebel leader Ahmed al-Sharaa tells BBC https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/c05p9g2nqmeo Jesus H Christ, this is another absolutely… - atlas_shrugged Dec 19, 05:18
Midweek 18th December 2024
So they found him a razor to chop his beard off then. - Zephir Dec 19, 03:04
Midweek 18th December 2024
The liars caught out over and over: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NZX3XFzmTww - BRISSLES Dec 19, 00:58
Midweek 18th December 2024
Perhaps they’re looking to give Chopper (Ive done this, Ive done that ..) Hopeless his own show – he infiltrates… - StewGreen Dec 19, 00:25
Midweek 18th December 2024
GBnews new lineup statement doesn’t mention Dolan https://www.gbnews.com/shows/gb-news-makes-2025-programming-announcement - StewGreen Dec 19, 00:24
Midweek 18th December 2024
Foreign funded Client Earth have been using lawfare trickery to usurp democracy on UK enviro policy, for years They are… - wwfc Dec 18, 23:08
Midweek 18th December 2024
I wonder why this is happening more and more now let me think !! His 61-year-old father collapsed and died… - wwfc Dec 18, 22:50
Midweek 18th December 2024
Well looks like this site will not be around much longer happy heart attack and you paid for it yourself… - atlas_shrugged Dec 18, 22:39
Midweek 18th December 2024
A Turkish crime boss said to be one of Britain’s biggest drug dealers has won his human rights battle against…
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
racism – blacks and asians – dont go to the Euros
el beeb, has wet its pants totally this morning, in case there is racism at the Euro s. going absurdly over the top …
A tad discriminatory in and of itself against non black/non asians, who are going 😀
So now waiting on indepth exposes from Panorama on Qatar and the World Cup? , hey! … while their at it, why no women from Saud in the Olympics?
More lengthy one sided pap! about Syria too, (mind you not helped by W. Vague).
The roving reporters must be too busy ambushing old Engelbert eh!
The saudis could involve women: they could take part in the “how far the head flies when executed ” game.
another example of “hate speech” for el beeb to tut tut over :-D.
Obviously, as it doesn t mention the ahem …
“rich tapestry of multicultural diversity” very much
mind you its the truth, good enough for me
http://youtu.be/IwJTjY1rbug
The more I hear from him, the more I like this bloke. He speaks for me – something I can’t say for almost all of our current politicians.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/middleeast/syria/9293620/BBC-News-uses-Iraq-photo-to-illustrate-Syrian-massacre.html
If they accept fake pictures maybe they accept fake stories?
For me this is a very serious story in that IT SHOWS JUST HOW SLOPPY AND HARMFUL THE bBC is. If they had just counted the bodies they would have seen that there are too many, so what burke dug up( no pun intended) this old photo. Also the very low esteen that bBC news is held in , just gets lower.
Ah, but you see, Fred, the BBC already showed their get-out-of-sloppiness-free card when they said the picture was already circulating around the social media….er….”internet”. Their excuse is the same one they use to avoid reporting stories they don’t like or making a big fuss about a non-story if it suits them.
The very, very young person earning very, very low wages charged with digging up photos for the website isn’t required to count the bodies or make any other effort to determine whether or not the photo is valid. Other news outlets are doing it, so it’s perfectly fine for the BBC to do it (or not do it, as the case may be) as well. We’ve heard that one over and over again from Beeboids and from their defenders.
‘Other news outlets are doing it, so it’s perfectly fine for the BBC to do it (or not do it, as the case may be) as well’
You don’t earn that ‘most professional, most trusted’ accolade (well, it was mainly from Helen Boaden, but still..) just any old how, y’know, trust me… well.. them.
I just realized another problem with the BBC’s behavior here. They said they got the photo from an “activist”. Seeing as how we know for a fact that they source (and sometimes even create) more and more “stories” via their connections in social media, it’s highly likely that one of their producers is Twitter or Facebook buddies with the human rights activist who sent this to them.
BBC “journalists” are entirely too close to “activists”, and this social media lark just makes it worse. Because they hold the same approved thoughts as the Beeboid and are in regular contact via social media, the “activist” is considered trustworthy enough to run with it before checking further.
‘BBC “journalists” are entirely too close to “activists”
From his tweets alone, the supposedly impartial Economics Editor that is Paul Mason doesn’t half seem to get ‘in on the action’ early with many topping his iPhone favourites list.
For a person on such a beat, he has been advised of or rallied others to many a kick-off one might suggest was not really his beat, or indeed any impartial BBC ‘reporter’.
That the £145.50pa compelled BBC is reusing material from the free twitter is simply fraud, and the addition of zero oversight or, worse, selective filtering is something infinitely worse.
So we go from ‘twitter posts’ not being anything to do with the BBC via its employees, to ‘twitter sourced ‘news'” not being anything to do with its.. oh… employees again.
What, then, are the UK licence fee extorted public paying for?
We know how easily they can swat away subjective stuff, like ‘views’, so it is interesting to see the focus move on to more on substantive fare, say… world-renowned levels of accuracy.. http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/middleeast/syria/9293620/BBC-News-uses-Iraq-photo-to-illustrate-Syrian-massacre.html
As one already having interesting semantic debates with BBC Complaints>ECU/ The[cough]Trust on ‘Accuracy won’t Fit mobile screens’ headlines, is this the next incarnation, namely ‘The Truth Wouldn’t Crop As Well’? Unique… but not in a good way.
Fran… Helen… questions being asked.
You seem powerful & are being held to account.
Views?
http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/theeditors/2012/03/why_bbc_journalists_are_in_bes.html
‘The purpose of reporting is to provide evidence and to interpret on behalf of viewers, listeners and readers.’
http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/theeditors/2007/12/rebuilding_trust.html
‘In News, that means accuracy, impartiality, independence, fairness and open mindedness remain at an absolute premium.
Now, why does one suspect that any asking questions about this will a) get the runaround, b) end up being told that a note has been made but no record kept (plus don’t let’s mention it, OK) and c) if one doesn’t accept that you’ll get banned.
And this is the ‘genetically impartial BBC’, run by such silly girls, plus some females.
FAUXTOGRAPHY Getting it just about right.
Just back from a morning cuppa, where I almost knocked the TV off the wall as the dead echo suggested Levenson was running on loop as the production team topped up their tans on the studio roof.
However, it was our Tone, and in two minutes it was actually pure gold.
First up, following Murdoch, he made the point that pols were held in check by ballot every few years, as were media by reader support… every day.
Of course, in our ‘unique’ politico-media infirmament he failed to mention one, unique, exception to that.
Be interesting to see how our most trusted national media monopoly ‘reports’ that… or not (at all).
Then, for good measure, he moved on the The Independent and its original news over views mantra vs. the exact reversal it exhibits now.
Another interesting critique of our tribal media in a state one doubts Aunty will be too keen to explore, as rather down in that unprofessional, totally partial gutter already on all counts.
Teacher, Teacher The boy I was bullying hit me on the nose. It’s so unfair.
http://www.guardian.co.uk/media/2012/may/27/guto-harri-press-campaign-against-bbc
‘”Of course they are: the whole lot of them are funded by the taxpayer.” A BBC spokeswoman said: “It is not unusual to receive complaints before and after broadcast from people trying to influence our reporting and they are considered with our commitment to impartiality in mind. However all news output is judged on editorial merit, produced in an balanced way, in accordance with BBC editorial guidelines.”
Ah, the old ‘we’ve checked our own guidelines and we are comfortable in our belief that they say we have got it about right’.
As Roland D recently said ‘Haha..’ + repeat a lot.
Oh, and looking at both of the above, talking of repeating… a lot…
http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_PNESGwoU4lk/TF9GdEPhZYI/AAAAAAAAD3A/T55NnS702V4/s1600/politics.jpg
When did the BBC move from impartial medium to full-blown, highly partial political PR.
I’d hazard… 1997?
‘Harri’s suggestion that Downing Street was also ready to put pressure on the public service broadcaster raises questions about the Tories’ tactics against the BBC and the extent of the pressure City Hall has exerted in its attempts to influence coverage.’
Pure, unadulterated, leftie, reality-inverting gold.
40 minutes in at the Blair examination at Leveson and he is being given an easy ride, delivering a lecture rather than being cross examined.
To sum up the first 45 minutes: Every thing said that is good about Bliar is true. Everything Bliar said is true, everything contradicting Bliar is false.
Except the bit about Sadaam’s WMDs. Even though the BBC fired someone for saying Blair lied about that, they eventually came round because they couldn’t stay on the same side of an issue as George Bush forever.
Oh I was mistaken…Blair is not there to be interrogated, he is there to advise !
Blair opened at Leveson with a masterful gambit – he appealed to the liberal elite with the plea – yes, I cosied up to Murdoch – but how else would I have got through gay marriage and the minimum wage?
Rapidly followed by – come on chaps, be nice, we all love the EU, right?
tom bradby @tombradby
Like him or loathe him, Blair is a brilliant performer. There is just no one anywhere near as good on the scene these days.
There is, of course, a nifty way around the powerful being held to account… get seen as ‘good on the scene’ in performance terms, it would seem.
As a metaphor for the new media age, apt if damning.
I can and never could understand people saying he is a brilliant performer. He stutters and stammers all the time and comes over as insincere and indecisive.
He fails to eye contact the interviewer or the camera unless he is delivering a prepared speech.
Ah… but, he is, you know… ‘just a regular guy’.
And to some, co-inhabiting that echoing bubble, he probably seems that way.
http://www.infiniteunknown.net/2012/01/09/tony-blair-and-the-8-million-tax-mystery-telegraph-blair-incs-baffling-increase-in-earnings-guardian/
Not, one presumes, anything those ‘holding the powerful to accounters’ in some media feel it necessary to trouble him over, being they are not far off the same rac.. bracket.
So, professional courtesy ‘n all.
That is very interesting, I am sure that the BBC did a full investigation and analysis of Blair’s myriad of companies and the disappearance of the £8 million together with the minimal amount of tax he paid, but I must have missed that particular report !!!!!!!!
And the destruction of all his expenses data when he left office.
I don’t remember Blair’s bonfire of his expenses claims getting even a passing mention on the BBC. Compare and contrast with the lengthy, forensic examination of Warsi’s expenses misdemeanours on this morning’s ‘Today’ (accompanied by trademark snortings and sniggerings).
Nice earnings there, Tony….for a regular guy and all. Nice place you’ve got there too, for a regular guy.
http://i.telegraph.co.uk/multimedia/archive/00667/050508-gielgud-home_667976c.jpg
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/1927686/Tony-Blair-to-buy-John-Gielguds-former-home.html
I see you’re living in an actor’s house…fitting, as you’re such a great performer. I do hope that ‘regular guy’ thing wasn’t an act, I’d feel so exploited – like you’d cheapened the high office you once held…or something.
Tony, you’re a real man of the people. that’s why we all miss you so much, c*nt.
I can’t agree more. Blair comes across as insincere and untrustworthy I just can’t see why the media keep saying he is such a good performer. Its obvious his act is carefully rehearsed and he just can’t hide it when something happens that is beyond the script.
Yes, look at his face when asked if he ‘had blood on his hands’ at a conference, in the States i recall, over the ‘suicide’ of Dr Kelly.
“Like him or loathe him, Blair is a brilliant performer.”
So was Tommy Cooper, but I wouldn’t vote for him.
…although he’d appear less of a clown than the current bunch, and probably make more sense than the previous lot.
I think he’d make a better job of running the place, and he’s been dead nearly 30 years.
Would he do it ‘just like that?’
IGMC.
‘Daily Express’ reasonably has this as its frontpage, but apparently,
BBC-EU- high cost greenies, regard it was a politically desirable
fait accompli-
“EU FORCE NEW RISE IN PRICE OF PETROL ”
http://www.express.co.uk/posts/view/322930/EU-force-new-rise-in-price-of-petrol
‘Express’ Comment:
“WHY EU HAS NO BUSINESS PUTTING UP PRICE OF PETROL”
http://www.express.co.uk/ourcomments/view/322907/Why-EU-has-no-business-putting-up-price-of-petrol
Blair at Leveson…
12.55 Mr Blair said the “strongest lobbying” he received from the media was the BBC over the licence fee. He added that there was a “severe falling out” with the corporation over Iraq.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/leveson-inquiry/9294317/Leveson-Inquiry-Tony-Blair-gives-evidence-live.html
I trust the BBC will give this story…of a powerful, influential media organisation lobbying the Labour government in it’s own corporate self interest…as much coverage as it did the story of the Murdoch corporation lobbying the Conservatives.
It’s that ‘trust’ word again, as in ‘The Trust’ or ‘..our audiences trust us..’ (c) Boaden, H.
‘I trust the BBC will give this story…of a powerful, influential media organisation lobbying the Labour government in its own corporate self interest…as much coverage as it did the story of the Murdoch corporation lobbying the Conservatives.’
If I may engage in some ‘cut ‘n paste’ commentary: As Roland D recently said ‘Haha..’ + repeat a lot.
Is that what Dr Kelly’s death has been reduced to; a ‘severe falling out’?
Lovely people.
He added that there was a “severe falling out” with the corporation over Iraq.
Gosh, Mr Blair, I hope you’re not suggesting that our favourite impartial broadcaster had a stance on the Iraq War? I think that if you would like to submit a complaint to the BBC, you will find that they were completely impartial on the matter. And the times they did sail a bit close to the wind, well I think you’ll
find they got it about right.
Your complaint will be logged, which is important.
Excellent, Beeboidal!
BBC-NUJ: wants LEVESON inquisition to be unending.
As Beeboids hope to get off ‘scott free’ for their own political bias, and for their monopositic broadcasting and taxing power, they want Leveson inquisition of News International/Murdoch to be forever.
‘Spiked’:
“Rupert Murdoch’s shadow state’ and other bullshit.”
by Brendan O’Neill
http://www.spiked-online.com/site/reviewofbooks_article/12483/
‘Monopolistic’ above, as in BBC’s monopolistic power.
At times, you wonder about Watson’s mental health. Don’t worry, this isn’t libellous – his friends worry about it, too.
Best I can tell, one uniquely loyal, sycophantic and enduring collection of BFF’s seem as unconcerned by the hypocrisies and psychoses shown by Mr. Watson as they do their other green room regulars, from Ms. Abbott to Mr. Livingstone.
Maybe they feel such folk are more ‘their’ kind of people and ‘speak for them’?
As to whether such folk are representative the UK licence fee-paying public, well, who gives a !@£&, as what could anyone do about it anyway?
Ah, right on queue here comes someone to remind us of the Iraq War – the one issue where Tony Blair really parted company with the British left. Coincidentally (I’m sure) the one issue where the BBC really fell out with Blair.
INBBC CAIRO Bureau’s Ms KNELL:
-promoting, not criticising Muslim Brotherhood again.
“Regional rise of the Muslim Brotherhood”
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-middle-east-18205786
Ms Knell does not seem to read this site:
‘Global Muslim Brotherhood Daily report’, preferring press hand-outs from the Brothers.
http://globalmbreport.org/
If I may expand on the Big Brother theme. Here’s an extract from ‘1984’, on the rise of ‘The Party’:
‘The new aristocracy was made up for the most part of bureaucrats, scientists, technicians, trade-union organizers, publicity experts, sociologists, teachers, journalists and professional politicians. These people, whose origins lay in the salaried middle class and the upper grades of the working class, had been shaped and brought together by the barren world of monopoly industry and centralised government. As compared with their opposite numbers in past ages, they were less avaricious, less tempted by luxury, hungrier for pure power and, above all, more conscious of what they were doing and more intent on crushing the opposition. The last difference was cardinal. By comparison with that existing today, all the tyrannies of the past were half-hearted and inefficient. The ruling groups were always infected to some extent by liberal ideas and were content to leave loose ends everywhere, to regard only the overt act and to be uninterested in what their subjects were thinking. Even the Catholic Church of the Middle Ages was tolerant by modern standards. Part of the reason for this was that no government had the power to keep its citizens under constant surveillance. The invention of print, however, made it easier to manipulate public opinion, and the film and radio carried the process further’….(and so it continues expanding the theme).
Spookily prescient. Feel free to apply to a political party/broadcaster/newspaper of your choice!
A story not likely to be seen on the BBC….
More of the success of multiculturalism – integration is soooo Imperialist, you racists… 👿
They were born in the UK, but many second and third generation immigrants speak or understand hardly any English, it was revealed today.
Families deliberately discouraged children from learning English to protect their culture and ensure they could talk to their grandparents.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2150667/Second-generation-migrants-struggle-understand-basic-instructions-English.html#ixzz1w5hoDMx0
—————————————-
…and one that probably will…
As someone who is broadly supportive of gay rights, do they not realise that this kind of nonsense is entirely counter-productive. I wonder if the majority of gay people feel the same way, but it’s only the militants whose opinions are sought. I notice the article says that they received ‘a’ complaint – I guess Harriet has nothing better to do.
Officials decided to use the term ‘partner’ throughout the 200-page guide, titled Ready Steady Baby, after receiving a complaint that ‘dad’ was discriminating against same-sex couples.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/health/article-2150672/NHS-remove-word-Dad-pregnancy-handbook-case-offends-sex-couples.html#ixzz1w5eDPgiQ
Craig Oliver calls out Norman Smith over BBC’s biased reporting of Jeremy Hunt episode.
Guido Fawkes @GuidoFawkes
Warning to BBC lawyers: You’re wasting public’s money trying to suppress video of two public servants discussing matter of public interest.
Like that has EVER stopped them before… or ever will.
[Grabs popcorn anyway]
The BBC… suppression when it suits? I’m shocked I tell you..shocked…:)
http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/theeditors/helen_boaden/
‘It’s not an approach that makes us popular with everyone of course, but it may explain why audiences have remained so loyal to BBC News output over many decades.’
Don’t confuse loyalty with lack of alternatives, backed by compulsion, luv.
And in the spirit of propaganda backed by censorship for which our national broadcaster is fast becoming the poster aunt.. ‘This video has been removed..’
Cue the utter joy of the twitter-based viral going much further than anything else could or would and, better… off narrative for once.
Video removed by user. Down the memory hole.
Still up a Guido’s, thankfully…
http://order-order.com/2012/05/28/the-video-they-dont-want-you-to-see/
Great video – it has been moved to here –
Speaking of ‘Big Brother’… in business news: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2150606/Google-deliberately-stole-information-executives-covered-years.html
That can’t be good. One presumes the BBC, and Newsnight especially, has quick access to senior officials for comment? Yoo-hoo… calling Mr. Barron!
Though, it may be interesting to find out what Newsnight suddenly gets all interested in given what’s dominating the news today.
Maybe time for a quick retrospective of Tracey Emin’s early work? The Kleenex Years?
Given their skill at wiping away messes closer to home, it may even be ‘appropriate’.
They’ll soon find an interest when they remember this story…
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2146552/Tories-held-cosy-meetings-Google-month-election.html
…perhaps another of their ‘spiders web’ graphics is in order.
“Prime Minister linked to sinister ‘information harvesting’ scandal outrage abuse”.
‘it may be interesting to find out what Newsnight suddenly gets all interested in given what’s dominating the news today.’
Wonder no more…
BBC Newsnight @BBCNewsnight
On Newsnight later, Shakespeare & British leadership, with actors Mark Rylance + Tom Hiddlestone. By coincidence, Tony Blair is at #Leveson
They couldn’t really avoid Tone, and that can be edited to fit. As to rest in the world, yes, nailed it.. they suddenly have gone all thespian to start the week.
Ex-Newsnight Editor Peter Barron, now of Google, can breathe easy again.
Wonder what a Levensoning of BBC emails might conjure up, or would they be FOI/inquiry excluded for some ‘unique’ journalistic reasons?
The GUIDO site has the interview: at 4.30 mins, Smith states repeating the Labour allegations about Hunt lobbying. Proof positive that the bBC are Labour political poodles. i.e Labour make an accusation and we the bBC will repeat it regardless of substance.
Some rather keenly observed comments already.
—
“Mars Attacks says:
May 28, 2012 at 2:53 pm
Having watched it through several times, I’m struck by two things. Firstly, Craig Oliver asked the valid and unanswered question that Hunt was lobbying to whom? Because the PM had recused himself and therefore had no power to decide on BSkyB. I was also struck by how calm and persistent he was when faced by someone who had already decided how far to the left he was going to slant his report, and didn’t take kindly to being brought to task.
.. intellectually Nobby Norman had no defence other than “Well I see it that way, despite the facts. Now pay your licence fee, you plebs.”
—
49
Labour Poodle (aka BBC) says:
May 28, 2012 at 2:58 pm
Proof that the BBC repeat Labour attacks that do not have a real foundation.
—
43.BBC says:
May 28, 2012 at 2:54 pm
We’re the largest public broadcaster in the world.
That’s why we’re so worried about Murdoch creeping up on our turf.
He’s got about 14% of UK media to our 82% now.
We must crush him.
—
5. Can you. says:
May 28, 2012 at 2:33 pm
FOI the BBC and see how much taxpayers money spent on getting videos taken down?
—
37
DLDD aka Dalai Llama Ding Dong says:
May 28, 2012 at 2:53 pm
I was thinking exactly the same thing…
But could you trust them to tell the truth?
I think not.
—
26. Boudicca says:
May 28, 2012 at 2:48 pm
R4 Toady report on the forthcoming week at Leveson declared that Blair was appearing today but Thursday was ” much more important” because Jeremy Hunt was appearing.
Certainly not ” much more important” in my humble opinion considering the hacking occurred while Labour were in power and cosying up to Murdoch.
—
29. **** the bbc says:
May 28, 2012 at 2:49 pm
Blair berating Watson et al – that will be swept under the BBC carpet
—
So far… plus any here… making today a little more fun:)
At least I can now put a face to the kind of person who answers every complaint with the template ‘I’ve looked in the mirror and still like what I see’ default.
It’s Norman ‘I have seen the future and it works’ Smith. Lincoln Steffens, your heirs are apparent.
Harry Cole@MrHarryCole
RT @andymcsmith: @GuidoFawkes Downing Street say that no one there asked for the YouTube video to be removed. – well someone’s lying!
Ah, accusations and claims of lying.
Now, what happened when that last happened, between Mr. Murdoch and Mr. Brown, and the former’s account was supported over that of the latter, by BBC senior talent, Mr. Neil?
As I recall… Much moving on in the Mire.
There is another aspect to this: who leked the footage and why. It was an off the record session filmed by the bBC. So was it leaked by some subversive inside the BBC. Or my preferred explanation, some rabid bBC oick who thought it showed No10 trying to spin the truth (as they see it); oblivious that it showed the opposite.
Cannot believe too many people had access to that footage.
Hi All
I have been involved in a long running dispute with the BBC World Service and its Business Daily Programme from October 31st last year. Yes that long-running!
I did however contact the BBC the day after but got ignored and had my case judged after a long delay and persistence from me on a complicated economics/finance matter by someone who’s only qualification was in complaints handling!
If you think of the themes of delay and people who are not qualified in the area you may enjoy this from the BBCTrust. As you can imagine I wanted to know who was looking into my case.
“The Trust does not provide information about the personal qualifications of individual members of staff nor identify its independent editorial advisers. It is important that the editorial adviser is free to conduct an investigation without any external influence or pressure. However, independent editorial advisers instructed by the Trust have a wide range of relevant experience and generally have experience in one of the following areas: (a) broadcasting; (b) journalism; (c) working in a regulatory role; or (d) practicing as a lawyer with relevant experience in a media environment.”
Yes it took them a month to tell me they wouldn’t tell me!
The evidence that I know what I am talking about is put on here every day http://www.mindfulmoney.co.uk/wp/author/shaun-richards/
Paul…
‘Yes it took them a month to tell me they wouldn’t tell me!’
Welcome to the wonderful world of the BBC “Beware of the Leopard” logic.
Is there any other entity, anywhere, that enjoys such ‘we’ve found you guilty of not believing us, but won’t tell you how or why’ failures in credibility?
Their excuses as reasons are simply jokes.
A while ago it was suggested that complaints, and responses, be collated separately.
If BBBC has enough on its plate I am minded to do so myself, if anyone IT-savvy (plus a smidge of legal) is game to advise/chip in.
I would see it as needing to be ruthlessly factual, and above board in terms of names, etc, plus disclaimers in case some trojan posters try and seed a few deliberate errors to discredit things. Names/emails of posters would be needed to verify, but could be left unpublished.
I think simply publishing the utter BS the BBC ‘system’ gets away with daily would soon build up to be an almighty embarrassment to them (beyond that their ‘professional’ editorial is already costing them).
The fervour with which they react, and poorly, to such shares suggest the ‘united we stand, divided they rule’ model is one they are not keen on seeing broken from the current latter.
What was your complaint about? I tried searching your blog but found only a post reminding readers that you had made a complaint.
Hi David
Here is a copy of the email I sent to the programme the very next day. At this point I was simply asking for a right of reply to correct its inaccuracies.
“Hi
I am afraid that your Business Daily programme of the 31st of October was ridden with assumptions and assertions. It is only the 1st of November as I type this and your section on hedge funds has already been way outpaced by events.I am playing it as I type this now and with the moves we have seen phrases like “profiting unfairly” were never very accurate and are now a joke.
An example of this is that Greek one year bond yields have risen from around 150% to over 200% today so where are your profits now?
I would be happy to have the opportunity to correct this and put the other side of the situation and I have no great reason to support hedge funds.
My thoughts of today on Greece can be found in the link below.
http://www.mindfulmoney.co.uk/wp/shaun-richards/the-greek-referendum-means-that-the-latest-euro-zone-summit-deal-has-unwound-already/
Regards”
In essence the BBC reporters presented assertions as facts. These assertions were wrong within 24 hours..
BBC-NUJ and partial Leveson reports.
‘Guardian’ has:-
“Cameron’s media chief rebukes BBC reporter over Leveson coverage.
“Downing Street tensions with BBC revealed after leaked video shows argument between Craig Oliver and Norman Smith.”
http://www.guardian.co.uk/media/2012/may/28/cameron-media-chief-rebukes-bbc-reporter
‘Oliver was himself a senior BBC executive’
Flee the dark side, Craig!
BBC-NUJ’s Norman SMITH is being pro-Labour Party and politically devious.
Beeboid SMITH should be sacked, not Beeboids’ political target, Hunt.
http://playpolitical.typepad.com/all_sorts/2012/05/craig-oliver-downing-streets-director-of-communications-clashes-with-the-bbcs-norman-smith-over-cove.html
Enjoy the protester’s pricking of Blair’s bubble of self-importance and pomposity.
…but his response is so lack in self-awareness, it deserves repeating…
——————————————
Part of the difficulty, actually, with modern politics, and I say this not as a criticism of the media, is that my experience of the reporting of these events is that you can have a thousand people in a room and someone gets up and shouts or throws something…that’s the news. The other 999 might as well not have bothered turning up.
——————————————–
so…rather like his storm-trooped, Mr. Campbell, who used the same kind of aggressive, attention-seeking tactics, as he barged his way into TV studios to demand interviews that would dominate the evening’s news bulletins…or the sensational, headline-grabbing briefings to the media against even Blair’s own colleagues as a means to secure his position within the party. If there is a problem with modern politics and the media’s coverage, you’re at the top of the list of those responsible, Mr. Blair. Just when you think you can’t possibly loathe someone any more…
…lacking! I iz talk stoopid sumtimes.
Will BBC-NUJ politically warm to its critic, and 10 Downing St officer, Craig OLIVER, as BBC politically warmed, and provided open propaganda house to Blair’s Alastair CAMPBELL?
He’ll have to cross the floor to the other party first. Then they can talk.
Great site. I don’t think the RSS tab is working on the right-hand side.
Welcome…RSS is working fine for me…anyone else?
Ok with me too
BBC London and the mayoral campaign
Another from the “We’ve looked at it and decided we got it about right” stable.
Comments will be disabled/deleted in 5..4..3..2..1
Blimey, give ’em chance.
First Mike has to see if he has garnered any support for such rehashed gems as..‘..the job of the BBC to analyse as impartially as possible what is going on – and that can ruffle feathers.’ ((c)Boaden. H (various, inc: http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/theeditors/2011/12/the_challenge_of_reporting.html ‘ It’s not an approach that makes us popular with everyone of course, but it may explain why audiences have remained so loyal to BBC News output over many decades.’)and when no one seems quite convinced on the basis of them simply saying so… then the plug can be pulled.
Especially when treating trotted out tripe like this.. ‘We asked tough questions of Ken Livingstone during his term in office, many of which he didn’t like either.’ or this ‘Our audience research suggests that the BBC is the most trusted of all sources news and that trust – which we value above all else – is born from being independent, impartial and accurate.’ self-referential and reverential BS as holy writ. Still.
If you are clearly outed as a false prophet, there comes a time to slink away to a cave and desist from standing on the mountaintop declaiming to an audience of none (bar two, so far, less than convinced bystanders) that you are the second coming.
Speaking of shouting loudly that is, and with a £4Bpa megaphone to do it with.
Berk.
Screw it… this is what I was going to post, but they have imposed some new ‘we can write War & peace’, but you get 400 chars to debate back’ BS that is not worth the effort…
—
The commitment at senior, market rate talent level within the BBC to recycling is again to be commended…
‘ it is the job of the BBC to analyse as impartially as possible what is going on – and that can ruffle feathers… This means that BBC London sometimes finds that it is asking uncomfortable questions that go into a level of detail that the mayor and his advisers, like many other politicians, may find inconvenient.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/theeditors/2011/12/the_challenge_of_reporting.html
“Almost inevitably, this process leads to politicians having to field some uncomfortable questions from BBC interviewers. ”
‘We asked tough questions of Ken Livingstone during his term in office, many of which he didn’t like either.
And many of which, much to our Ken’s relief, remain unasked or unanswered or unchased. To now. As he moves seamlessly to the green room nirvana of ‘expert guest’ commentary with such as Mehdi Hasan, etc.
Our audience research suggests that the BBC is the most trusted of all sources news and that trust – which we value above all else – is born from being independent, impartial and accurate.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/theeditors/2011/12/the_challenge_of_reporting.html
“It’s not an approach that makes us popular with everyone of course, but it may explain why audiences have remained so loyal to BBC News output over many decades.”
Thing is, saying it doesn’t make it true. And saying it over and over, doesn’t make it any more true, despite the early successes of the last guy who tried to claim that.
‘The BBC is owned by all its viewers, listeners and online readers.
A fact that could be shared with BBC Complaints>ECU>Trust, who simply tot up the number of times they decide the BBC has got it about right and then ban anyone from asking more questions in bringing a vastly powerful media organisation to account.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/theeditors/2011/03/coverage_of_the_tuc_rally.html
“Licence fee payers represent the views of the whole country and they have a right to expect that the BBC reflects the diversity of their views.”
‘But those who … have, almost by definition, the most committed point of view … tend to shout loudest when confronted with the reality of impartiality.’
Especially when in sole control of the megaphone and no realistic external oversight or accountability.
Read the output from here… and hang your heads…
http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/theeditors/helen_boaden/
‘I always think that impartiality is in our DNA – it’s part of the BBC’s genetic make-up. Anyone who thinks differently doesn’t really understand how the organisation works and how seriously we take issues around balance and impartiality.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/theeditors/steve_herrmann/
‘If you’d like to leave comments and feedback about it, or have questions, please post them here.’ – Where they’ll get mostly ignored, or the thread will get pulled PDQ when things get ‘challenging’.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/theeditors/fran_unsworth/
‘The purpose of reporting is to provide evidence and to interpret on behalf of viewers, listeners and readers.’ – No, it isn’t, it is to report, not ‘interpret’. That’s where you start going very, very off the rails.
Read each post in each blog, going back, and ponder this, latest effort.
Especially in light of the invitations to comment, met with referrals, House Rulings and early closures, often with no response.
‘Our presenters take professional pride in holding the powerful to account through fair but tough questioning’
http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/theeditors/2010/09/impartiality_is_in_our_genes.html
What the BBC and its senior management seem to forget, yet enshrines in the one-way broadcast and interactive systems (especially complaints), is that can, and should be a two-way street.
The BBC is powerful, and needs to be held to account. Simply intoning the ‘we think we get it about right’ mantra over and over may be reassuring internally, but out in the real world it sounds more than a little delusional now.
The Beeboids think and talk in handy cliches so they don’t really have to think very much or very deeply at all. This lazy habit is why they don’t see anything questionable about proclaiming themselves as “holding the powerful to account” and do not have an inkling that the Beeboid Corporation is both powerful (more so than the government in many ways) and not held to account.
An announcement from BBC-NUJ?:
‘In view of our political priority to the castigation of Murdoch at Leveson, and our further commitment to propagandising for the Muslim Brotherhood in the Middle East, we are not in a position to report on the following:
“Furore over EU’s new ‘green’ fuel drive that will force 4p a litre rise in petrol.”
Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2150968/Furore-EUs-new-green-fuel-drive-force-4p-litre-rise-petrol.html#ixzz1wBNVpVAT
Bliar explains in less than two minutes the crucial value of the Biased BBC’s total, unquestioning support to Liebour –
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/leveson-inquiry/9294635/Leveson-Inquiry-Tony-Blairs-gesticulations-explained.html
London PUS Seminar – 30th May – Felicity Mellor – The BBC’s impartiality review of their science coverage
Details of the seminar are below.
All welcome. If you’d like to join the email list then please contact Simon Lock.
We look forward to seeing you there.
Professor Martin Bauer, Dr Simon Lock, Dr Jane Gregory
Date, Time and Location:
Wednesday 30th May 2012
16.15-18:00
Venue: St Clement’s, S314, LSE
Speaker: Felicity Mellor (Imperial College London)
Title: Off balance? The impartiality review of the BBC’s science coverage.
Abstract:
In 2010, the BBC Trust commissioned a review of the accuracy and impartiality of the BBC’s science coverage. This seminar will examine how the notion impartiality applies to science journalism by drawing on the results of a content analysis conducted as part of the BBC’s impartiality review. I will argue that commentators often adopt a narrow interpretation of impartiality as balance which has over-simplified debates about the media coverage of topics such as climate change. The findings of the content analysis raise questions about the sourcing strategies and transparency of the BBC’s science reporting which, I suggest, are important to ensuring impartiality.
Dr Simon J Lock
Department of Science and Technology Studies
UCL
Gower Street
London WC1E 6BT
simon.lock@ucl.ac.uk
020 7679 3763 (internal: x33763)
http://www.ucl.ac.uk/sts/staff/lock
twitter: @simonjlock
What they really need to examine are Richard Black’s and Roger Harrabin’s email and Twitter exchanges with climate scientists and activists.
Of course, if they find this survey does not result in anything favourable to the BBC the results will be surpressed. And hundreds of thousands of pounds will be spent keeping it from reaching the public as with Balen.
In fact this could become a verb, to “do a Balen”. As in, “the BBC decided to Balen the scientific impartiality review as it was decided the truth was not in the public interest. “
BBC apologises for crazy Halo / United Nations logo mix-up.
http://www.techradar.com/news/gaming/bbc-apologises-for-crazy-halo-united-nations-logo-mix-up-1082400
That has to be a late April 1? Mind you, both outfits are a bunch of space cadets, so one can sort of appreciate the mix up.
Maybe it’s the mantra for the BBC of the future?
“To educate, inform, and boldly go where no medium has ever gone before… to infantility… and beyond!”
Could have been worse I guess….
‘Want to know more? We will carefully rehash your views’
TUNISIA today: where INBBC’s ‘Arab Spring’/ Islamic Winter began-
1.)
‘Jihadwatch’ –
“Tunisia: Thousands of misunderstanders of Islam chant ‘Obama, Obama, we are all Osama’; ‘Every Muslim is a jihadist'”
http://www.jihadwatch.org/2012/05/tunisia-thousands-of-misunderstanders-of-islam-chant-obama-obama-we-are-all-osama-every-muslim-is-a.html
2.)
INBBC –
“Tunisia Salafists clash with police in Jendouba”
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-africa-18222810
“BBC News uses ‘Iraq photo to illustrate Syrian massacre.’
The BBC is facing criticism after it accidentally used a picture taken in Iraq in 2003 to illustrate the senseless massacre of children in Syria. ”
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/middleeast/syria/9293620/BBC-News-uses-Iraq-photo-to-illustrate-Syrian-massacre.html
Channel 4:
‘The real Mr and Mrs ASSAD.’
http://www.channel4.com/programmes/dispatches/articles/the-real-mr-mrs-assad
Also Channel 4:
“Assad circle ‘could be charged with crimes against humanity.'”
(by Jonathan Miller).
http://www.channel4.com/news/assad-circle-could-be-charged-with-crimes-against-humanity
This post is dedicated to those of you who have ever been told by the BBC that there just isn’t enough space for an article to provide the kind of balance you’re looking for.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/entertainment-arts-18242422
On the plus side, if truncated, it would read on twitter for mobile: ‘Globe Theatre: Israeli play goes on’
Had a check back at some ECU weasels on the subject in response to my complaints on ‘truth wouldn’t fit’ headlines..
Our short headlines which appear on an index have to be between 31 and 33 characters long
Really? Why? Where is this specified? And no matter what the need for accuracy or communication value, the headlines have to be within 2 characters? Talk about box-ticking. Pure process over content. No wonder if headlines end up obeying mandates other than simple accuracy.
·
– hence the headline ‘Thatcher told abandon Liverpool’. Once you click on the story you get a longer headline – “ Toxteth riots: Howe proposed ‘managed decline’ for city“.
So it doesn’t matter any more if it makes sense, or accurately reflects the story? Just so long as it ‘fits’? (including, evidently, a certian tribal narrative). I will view all BBC index, and main story headlines in future with renewed interest, especially those littered, as now seems the trend, with ‘quotes’ for no good reason than, possibly, simply to make up the required character number.
This headline being 45 characters, it would appear that a variation of BBC ‘truth’ can fit, up to 30% longer, when it suits.
Lucky it wasn’t a ‘conservative’ version, but on current standards of subbing, they’d probably have just used ‘Tory’ anyway as shorthand and defend it on their quaint ‘most people would know what we meant really’ basis.
Uniquely.
There’s a thing… just checked the home page and guess what, it has been editted ‘to fit’ in another way entirely…
‘Israeli play goes on amid protests’
Go figger.
Maybe, in future, it should be only referred to within the BBC’s circles as ‘The Merchant of Venice Play’, as using the ‘Israeli’ word may be deemed unlucky enough to get half a dozen along in ‘protest’, which means a direct email to Paul Mason’s iPhone, so they then have to send a crew followed by a properly spun ‘report’ on it all…
How the bbC promotes anti-Semitism in the UK
Globe Theatre: Israeli play goes on despite protests
A performance of The Merchant of Venice by Israel’s Habima theatre company has taken place at Shakespeare’s Globe in London amid protests by pro-Palestinian activists. Around 15 protesters were led or carried out during the performance after unfurling banners and Palestinian flags.
So reading the above 15 people were kicked out for protesting against Israel during a show. Yet for some strange reason the bBC reports on each and every protester and how they protested. In fact the bBC even reports how the audience were forbidden to take pictures by the theatre.
15 protesters , nothing at all, yet according to the bBC, it is a newsworthy event that everybody should know about so they can spread their hatred towards the jew just that little bit further.
The bBC, the traitors in our Midst.
“Zionism and bigotry”
by Melanie Phillips.
http://phillipsblog.dailymail.co.uk/2012/05/zionism-and-bigotry.html
TALIBAN.
For INBBC’s Lyse DOUCET:-
“Afghan women leave the country in fear of Taliban return.”
http://www.jihadwatch.org/2012/05/afghan-women-leave-the-country-in-fear-of-taliban-return.html
This INBBC Lyse Doucet (2008):
“BBC presenter Lyse Doucet: Media fail to convey ‘humanity of the Taliban'”
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/2613717/BBC-presenter-Lyse-Doucet-Media-fail-to-convey-humanity-of-the-Taliban.html
The humanity of the Taliban – ah, yes, we all understand that now after listening to their Al-Beeb sponsored poetry circle (what was it again that rhymed with ‘public beheadings’?).
Child weddings!
BBC mistake computer game logo for United Nations Security Council symbol – http://www.telegraph.co.uk/culture/tvandradio/bbc/9296664/BBC-mistake-computer-game-logo-for-United-Nations-Security-Council-symbol.html
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/media/press/help-me-decide-future-of-press-leveson-asks-blair-7794142.html
An interesting presumption by one shaping up, like Prescott, to be more another ‘Oh, good Lord’.
Guessing certain broadcasters get a pass under this semantic definition? Norman Smith must be breathing a sigh of relief.
Leveson has made himself unfit to run this enquiry by asking Blair’s help in writing the report. And to think what they are making of a personal remark made by Osborn to Cameron when neither were in a position to influence the BSkyB decision, this is unacceptable. Cameron should force Leveson to appear before a Parliamentary enquiry before continuing with this witch-hunt.
The steady drip, drip, drip of the anti Israel mindset at the BBC
Although it’s disappeared from the front of the Middle East page but still on the site:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-middle-east-18210133
This story for me is a perfect illustration of the of a deliberate policy or midnset to mine for anti Israel stories. Because contrary to what you might infer from reading this story this isn’t a US State department release on the poor treatment of refugees in Israel. The report to which the story refers is a global assessment of the human rights across the world.
The BBC could have picked any country from the drop down list, but went for Israel. Think of all the nations we cold have had a good look at but the report demonstrates they wanted Israel.
In fact we start with criticisms. But what the BBC really hope you’ll do is not go and look at the report itself because whilst it’s an aspect it misses out some key details on this heartless regime from the report such as:
Sudanese and Eritrean asylum seekers, who constituted approximately 85 percent of all asylum seekers in the country, were not allowed access to asylum procedures but were given renewable “conditional release” documents that deferred deportation and had to be renewed every few months.
Suddenly not so bad eh?
Then we have this little line from the BBC:
The US state department notes that Israel has ended the practice of immediately returning asylum seekers who had arrived through Egypt.
We don’t really get a comment on this bit but it does prove take is in an interesting direction, namely that Sudan and Eritrea don’t border with Israel so what is the determination to make it to Israel amongst these migrants? Maybe the State Department report has an expanation why Israel doesn’t send people back to Israel and lo it does!
Nonrefoulement: The government provided some protection against the expulsion or return of refugees to countries where their lives or freedom could be threatened. In March the government declared the suspension of the “hot returns” procedure of immediately returning African asylum seekers across the border to Egypt.
Which led me to look at the State Department report for Egypt, where in the the equivalent section that the BBC had focussed on for Israel, I found this:
Access to Asylum: The 1971 constitution and the provisional constitution provide for the protection of political refugees, but the country’s laws do not provide for the granting of asylum or refugee status, and the government has not established a system for providing protection to refugees. The UNHCR has the authority to make refugee status determinations based on a 1954 memorandum of understanding with the government. However, the government frequently denied UNHCR representatives access to detention facilities. Detained refugees, asylum seekers, and migrants were subject to criminal penalties and administrative detention for unauthorized entry or residence. They were often held in jails, military camps, and regular prisons with convicted criminals
and this:
Nonrefoulement: In October authorities forcibly returned at least 10 Eritreans to Eritrea; 62 others returned voluntarily, although human rights advocates reported that many voluntary returns of Eritreans were in fact coerced since detained Eritreans were given only two options: volunteer to return to Eritrea or remain indefinitely in detention. The government provided few with access to the UNHCR and the option of seeking refugee status. The circumstances surrounding another return in October of approximately 115-120 Eritreans were not known, because they were denied access to appeal mechanisms and to the UNHCR for asylum protection.
oh and then we had this very very telling paragraph:
Refugee Abuse: Police shot and killed at least 13 migrants during the year to prevent them from entering Israel through the Sinai Peninsula. NGOs alleged that authorities held as many as 500 Africans in detention centers in Sinai at year’s end. NGOs and victims reaching Israel alleged that Bedouin smugglers subjected migrants to extortion, long-term detention, rape, and torture, sometimes resulting in death. Smugglers demanded ransoms of up to LE 239,000 ($40,000) per person. Prison guards subjected African detainees to race-related beatings, and African refugees faced societal discrimination based on race.
So the real story of human rights abuses lies in the treatment of “refugees” in Egypt and not in Israel. But of course if you want to spend time deliberately criticising Israel you wouldn’t let Joe Public see this bit of the report would you?
might not catch this on el beeb news anytime soon.
so glad his shamefully prostrating himself, and prostituting all our values in Cairo is working so well
“MC Calls US President ‘The Ape Obama,'”
1000s chant we are all Osama now
MEMRI
feel the love
link
http://www.memri.org/clip/en/0/0/0/0/0/0/3445.htm
Loved the Kung Fu Display team.
If that’s the best they’ve got …
yep! … trembling in my shoes NOTi think their kung fu attire is a binja,(cross between a burkha/ninja).
😀
Made me immediately think of this…
Yes coming to a town or city near you soon:
let’s celebrate this wonderful diversity, now being imposed upon us slowly, but ceaselessly by our main political parties: the three treacherous parties. If you keep voting these traitors in dont be surprised when it bites you on the arse and they use those swords to come after YOU !
Whilst the tribal agenda aspect at the BBC is vast, all in the MSM are into stirring stupidly just to fill the 24/7 dead air maw.
Just watched SKY with the peroxide sink ‘interviewing’ what I presumed to be some slaphead chav singlemuvva whinging ‘bartdecuts, but it turned out to be some Labour harridan ShadMin allowed to rant for minutes about every sound bite from ‘the cuts’ to ‘out of touch’.
When some of her stuff proved even more incredible that the sink felt obliged to attempt a bit of context, it was mainly that the government might have another view…. but had not fielded a counter.
Now our cretinous coalition may well have collectively ducked for cover, but is it also just possible that, unlike Labour and over-staffed media entities, they may on occasion have their hands full running the country as opposed to dancing to the latest politico-media spun ‘row’/U-turn, etc?
No wonder this country is screwed. Policy is driven by folk only geared to tell folk what they want to hear, facilitated by media who don’t care what they say so long as it fills a slot and drives audience numbers.
A scathing review of Obama by a senior US journalist that would NEVER be reflected in any BBC coverage- is he actually a dumbass ? All mouth, no brain or ability or experience ?
http://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2012/05/25/obama_is_not_that_bright_114271.html
BBC once again proving itself more concerned with environmental politicking than taking an unbiased, rational view…
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-18236535
“…The International Energy Agency (IEA) has infuriated environmentalists with a report on what it calls the “golden age” of gas.
The summary says gas use could grow more than 50% by 2035 if local problems with shale extraction can be overcome.
Only in the last paragraph does it say this would be inconsistent with a global temperature rise of 2C…”
Roger Harrabin once again underscoring his credentials as an energy Luddite of the first order and fully-signed up member of the AGW congregation. Nice to know the BBC placed such importance on employing open-minded, genuinely unbiased science reporters.
A total disgrace.
“The International Energy Agency (IEA) has infuriated environmentalists with a report on what it calls the “golden age” of gas.”
Must be nice to have instant access to the BBC propaganda machine as soon as one has been infuriated.
Maybe there’s an infuryline like the US/USSR hotline, only between activists and BBC tame PRtonews transcribers?
Better yet, it may even be automated…
‘ Press 1 for ‘Critics are saying… Press 2 for ‘Questions are being asked…’, 3 for ‘A huge row has blown up……’
Shome mishtake shurely? It’s this kind of thing that allows the Beeb to claim it gets coverage of Israel “just about right”:
http://palestinecampaign.org/index7b.asp?m_id=1&l1_id=4&l2_id=24&Content_ID=2594
Well, at least these people agree with me that the BBC’s standard line of defense – “we’re just following what other media outlets do” – is a load of crap.
‘the BBC’s standard line of defense – “we’re just following what other media outlets do” – is a load of crap.’
Worth repeating, mind.
Every time they do.
Not the only ones who can play that game.
Wish I could get the BBC they watch, one that wasn’t geared to always supporting Palestinians and demonising Israel at every opportunity.
It would be fairer than the BBC we’ve got.
The BBC keeps up its tradition of extending its political agenda into its drama offerings with tonghts episode of “Silk”. This even requires our usual defence briefs to become prosecutors, when in the dock are those evil Bullingdon boys. I wonder how many of the Tory posh boys we will be able to recognise.
EGYPT.
1.) Here’s INBBC’s Ms KNELL, touting for Muslim Brotherhood (MB) as usual.
“Egypt Islamist candidate Mursi promises broad coalition”
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-middle-east-18252938
Her political subservience belies the political reality.
In contrast:
2.)’New English Review’-
“Salafists in Egypt Blame Copts for Vote Results”
[Concluding excerpt] –
“We can expect more of this anti-Copt blame game from Morsy’s Muslim Brotherhood and Salafists like El-Zomor during the campaign for the run-off Presidential elections in Egypt scheduled to occur on June 16th and 17th.”
And we can expect more this INBBC/Knell/Leyne political subservience to Salafists and to MB before then.
http://www.newenglishreview.org/blog_display.cfm/blog_id/42220
“David Cameron is a rapist” -Silk
Some internal conflict about to commence at BBC News…
Occupy aligned anarchist group to target Olympics…
Anarchist group vows to wage ‘low level warfare’ on Olympics
An anarchist group has vowed to wage “low level warfare” against Britain, sabotaging financial institutions, transport, and the military in the lead up to the London Olympics.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/9293298/Anarchist-group-vows-to-wage-low-level-warfare-on-Olympics.html
Here’s the umbrella ‘organisation’ that links all these groups…
http://325.nostate.net/?tag=occupy
Here’s my guess…disruption, vandalism, violence, public disorder, permanent protest and general anarchy will be a lot less ‘cool’, and ‘radical chic’ will suddenly fall out of fashion if it affects their much vaunted Olympics coverage. They’re quite content when this kind of thing afflicts and inconveniences other people and institutions, just not us at the BBC, m’kay.
As long as it doesn’t disrupt BBC coverage or inconvenience the Beeboids’ partying, it shouldn’t be too much of a concern for them.
Has anyone seen this yet?
Panorama – Euro 2012: Stadiums of Hate
The BBC takes a very, very, rare look into anti-Semitism in Europe. Okay, it’s really about soccer fans in Poland and the Ukraine, but still a refreshing change from the BBC’s censorship or at best casual dismissal of the problem. I guess it’s safe to examine anti-Semitism in those places because – unlike the European cities about which the BBC refuses to report – there is no significant Mohammedan population.
How typical that da beeb should focus on ‘stadiums of hate’ rather than the ‘cities of hate’ that they helped to create and which most of us have to negotiate everyday unlike the beeboids who immune from the mess they create are safely ensconced in their ivory towers. There’s a gobshite on BBC local radio called Alan Beswick who loves the multiculti horrorshow this country has become but who on retirement wants to live in France. Surely he should be proud of the mess he and other beeboids have created, you’d think he’d want to stick around for the riots and sharia law. Another Andy Crane, exhibits the same views but lives in leafy Derbyshire, a million miles away from the crime ridden cess-pits they love so much. BBC local radio is a just a drip, drip, drip, about how great the multiculti religion is to the country ignoring the downsides, a religion incompatible with the western world, peoples barely literate from peasant societies, the steadfast refusal of these people to integrate, but they’re supported every step of the way by the traitorous BBC. Until these beeboid fuckers have lived in Moss Side or Rusholme, Oldham or Bradford, Blackburn or Burnley, Luton or London, or even Malmo, Amsterdam, Antwerp, Brussels, then they should spare us the lectures about stadiums of hate because they don’t know what true hatred is like – ask a Jew in Malmo if you can find one.
Exactly, Doyle. Ask anyone who gets their news from the BBC about what’s been happening to the Jews in Malmö, and they’ll have no idea what you’re talking about. But they will know about the anti-Muslim sentiment some Mohammedans are experiencing, because the BBC has done two reports on it while censoring all news about the Jews.
Defenders of the indefensible continue to remain silent about that one.
They know, if they started to report on the multitude of problems created in a great number of European cities by mass immigration and the almost complete lack of integration that seems to be the norm with the newest wave of incomers, that they would immediately be accused of ‘stirring up hatred’ by the forces of the pro-multicultural left. For these types, suppression of dissent is the only viable tactic. It’s becoming much more difficult to persist with the assertion that there are only positives to the ‘enrichment’ of our society with incompatible cultures, as the evidence of the negative impacts of unsolicited mass immigration contines to be increasingly apparent.
Not that they have any appetite to report these kinds of stories, but they know how it works. It’s the very reason that sites like GOV and many others are labelled ‘hate sites’ – they reveal the truth for all to see, and our morally superior guardians of enforced diversity don’t like it one bit.
Could that possibly be THE Andy Crane?…he of “Edd the Duck” Fame.
If so, that`s another childrens presenter who is staying forever young, like “Biffer” Bacon..he of drugs on Blue Peter fame.
Maybe he softpedals on immigration because Edd himself was a successful migrating bird who always seemed to end up with Cranes fist up his bottom.
Hope Crane still pays him the minimum wage!
Yes that Andy Crane and Edd the Duck talks more sense than him.
The BBC is about three weeks late on this story of Dewey & LeBoeuf going bust, but at least they’ve gotten around to whipping up a new brief about it:
Major US law firm files for bankruptcy protection
Key bit:
It has now reduced that to 150 employees, who will wind down the business.
The firm’s management promised millions of dollars in guaranteed packages to about 100 of its partners, which left it unable to cope with the downturn in revenues during the recession.
“The full extent of the partner compensation arrangements is subject of continuing investigation,” said Joff Mitchell, its chief restructuring officer.
Anybody think the genius BBC business and economics experts will examine this for lessons to be learned about possible causes of unsustainable government debt and the public sector? Yeah, me neither.
I am not sure why I got this e-mail – or indeed how Shanene Thorpe got my e-mail address. But when I read the tactics that Newsnight used accoring to Shanene I wonder about everything they do. Although I will not be signing Shanene’s petition (I don’t like unsolicited e-mails) I thought I would bring it here to Biased BBC.
“Last week, I got a call from my manager at work asking if I’d be happy to be interviewed by Newsnight about working as a young single parent.
Of course I’d be happy to do that, being a working mum is something I’m proud of but I didn’t expect to be personally scrutinised.
So I was devastated to see the interview that went to air on BBC2 on Wednesday that had been edited to make it look like I was an unemployed scrounger, questioned why I didn’t live with my parents and made no mention of my job with Tower Hamlets Council.
I’ve worked since I was 16 and I only get help towards my rent because it is so high. The way that the programme has portrayed me is totally unfair so I’ve started a campaign on Change.org asking Newsnight to tell me why they felt it was OK to humiliate me in this way and publicly apologise for it.
Please click here to watch the interview and add your support.
In the full interview, the reporter even asked me if I thought it was right to have had my daughter. I couldn’t believe the question. I am proud of being a working mum. I do my very best, and these questions were really offensive.
Please join me in calling for a public apology from Newsnight and ensuring that others aren’t inaccurately represented.”
Don’t know if there was meant to be a link?
This young lady’s unhappiness was also raised on the Newsnight FaceBook page.
Whoever she is, she seems annoyed and coordinated. Kind of ironic as she’ll be pitted against Paul Mason & the Penny for your thoughts brigade to shut her protest down pronto.
Not sure the BBC should get a bad rep. for messing wiv’ da singlemuvvahood, as that could blow their entire voxpop on-call crew away.
sorry Guest Who I should have provided a link – but have now deleted the e-mail.
I think the programme you’re referring to is this one, but might only be available to watch again for the next day or so.
Of the many, varied, and mostly impossible to prove (bar a huge effort, and hence BBC ECU/Trust proof) ways to impose a slant in the way a story is portrayed, is how an image of a protagonist is portrayed.
Which is why I thought this a hoot…
http://www.bishop-hill.net/blog/2012/5/28/youtube-stills.html
Mainly for the hole-digging berk in question taking… a blog… to task, but then getting shown up as being totally incorrect in his paranoid accusation on top.
Now, imagine if you will by contrast any person of interest to the BBC, and not in a good way, seeking redress in a similar way.
I would suggest the shrift would be as short as the actual proactive motivations deliberate.
Unlikely –
http://www.granitegrok.com/pix/Obama_1.jpg
Jury’s Out –
http://keeptonyblairforpm.files.wordpress.com/2011/08/tony-blair_telegraph_jasonkemp_getty_images.jpg
Dead Cert –
http://www.babble.com/CS/blogs/strollerderby/2008/10/23-End/palin_wideweb__470x315,0.jpg
YouTube gives the uploader a choice of three random frames for the image placeholder, and that’s it. Anyone third party taking it from there has no choice.
The BBC, though, hand-picks images from Getty or AP or any number of services, or can select the frame from their own video player….or posts images sent to them by activists via Twitter or Facebook.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/theeditors/2012/05/bbc_london_and_the_mayors.html
Going well for ’em so far.
Not.
Still, no closing, yet if a few referrals.
The there’s this..
http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/theeditors/2012/05/houla_massacre_picture_mistake.html
…which probably deserves a wider audience, too.
Strange how the BBC doesn’t think this is newsworthy:
Secret ‘Kill List’ Proves a Test of Obama’s Principles and Will
“How old are these people?” he asked, according to two officials present. “If they are starting to use children,” he said of Al Qaeda, “we are moving into a whole different phase.”
It was not a theoretical question: Mr. Obama has placed himself at the helm of a top secret “nominations” process to designate terrorists for kill or capture, of which the capture part has become largely theoretical. He had vowed to align the fight against Al Qaeda with American values; the chart, introducing people whose deaths he might soon be asked to order, underscored just what a moral and legal conundrum this could be.
Mr. Obama is the liberal law professor who campaigned against the Iraq war and torture, and then insisted on approving every new name on an expanding “kill list,” poring over terrorist suspects’ biographies on what one official calls the macabre “baseball cards” of an unconventional war. When a rare opportunity for a drone strike at a top terrorist arises — but his family is with him — it is the president who has reserved to himself the final moral calculation.
I guess if you win a Nobel Prize for Peace, you’re allowed to pick your targets. How about it, BBC?
Nah, better to show Him giving out Medals of Freedom, basking in a more positive spotlight, and then give the US and international readers what they’re really hungry for: an update on that drugged-out naked cannibal shot dead in Miami. It’s an award-winning combination!
just turn the sound off when viewing any BBC programme and take the piss out of them with your own voice over
So the BBC has decided to report on the huge Sikh demonstration outside Luton police station after a young Sikh woman was sexually assaulted, what word is missing from the story?…..Yep the woman was assaulted by a Muslim man and that the Sikh community are up in arms that the Police failed to investigate the claims correctly
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/crime/9299139/Luton-local-Sikh-community-protesting-over-sex-attack-police-failures.html
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-beds-bucks-herts-18260017
When you compare the two articles it is embarrassing how poorly the BBC goes out of its way to not mention the religion of the offender.
Suppressio Veri as usual by the BBC.
It is worth remembering that Sikhism was founded specifically to push bank against the Muslim invaders of India.
I have a Sikh friend from Nottingham who can remember being told when she was little to stay away from Muslim men for this very reason.
I wonder what Dez/Scott, Jim Dandy and David Gregory think of this?
We know you’re still there, boys.
This could be a BBC report:-
An Asian woman was beaten and raped by an Asian man. A group of Asians are protesting outside a Police station.
There, that’s easy and tells you virtually nothing. I ought to get a job as a BBC “News” writer.
No no no, you are missing the fact that it’s quite OK to be specific when it comes to victimhood:
A Sikh woman was beaten and raped by a man.
See? Much better.
Very early in the Today programme Mardell was commenting on the electoral scene in the US. He made some fairly patronising remarks about Romney – and then convceded that Obama’s position is looking a bit ropy. But I nearly fell out of bed when he said that most pundits believe that Obama will “scrape by”,
THIS IS SIMPLY NOT TRUE ! Many pundits say that Obama will lose.
Why might he lose ? Well, how about the overwhelming poll data suggesting that most people feel that the US is heading in the wrong direction ?
http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/other/direction_of_country-902.html
How about the worsening this week in consumer confidence ? How about the clear chance that the Supreme Court is days away from striking down all or the guts of Obamacare ? How about the clear signs that Obama is in serious trouble in swing states ?
………………….
Oh dear – even as I type this, Webb is now interviewing the loony Paul Krugman – feeding him with the line “What is we borrowed and spent another 2% of GDP ?” Pure Keynesian tosh.
Is this the usual case of Mardell drawing his info from the Washington Post and the New York Times whose poll samples are seriously overweighted with registered Democrats ? And reading only a narrow spread of pundits – WaPo, NYT, HuffPo and the rest of the Journolistas ?