Bodo in the comments has highlighted this article in the guardian reporting that the BBC is to instigate a new investigation into its isupposed mpartiality.
The report will look into the BBC’s coverage of Europe, immigration and religion.
Now it may just me being cynical but this is just one in a long line of such reports which seem to be purely designed to cover up more than they reveal.
In 2006 the BBC commissioned Loughborough University to carry out a report into its coverage of the Israel/Palestine conflict…its conclusion…the BBC was biased…against the Palestinians.
THE BBC’S coverage of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict implicitly favours the Israeli side, a study for the BBC Governors has concluded.
Deaths of Israelis received greater coverage than Palestinian fatalities, while Israelis received more airtime on news and current affairs programmes. The references to “identifiable shortcomings” surprised BBC News executives, who are more used to accusations that their coverage is routinely anti-Israel.
The BBC Governors felt there was no bias at all:
The Governors received the panel’s report at their Board meeting last week and welcomed its finding of no deliberate or systematic bias.
Apparently the BBC does not have any bias towards Europe either……
We are pleased that the Panel found no evidence of deliberate bias in the BBC’s coverage of EU matters.
“That said, we note the Panel’s conclusion that “there is a widespread perception that the BBC suffers from certain forms of cultural and unintentional bias” and that “the BBC’s coverage of EU news needs to be improved and to be made more demonstrably impartial”.
The BBC’s 2007 report, From Seesaw To Wagonwheel into impartiality failed to tackle the Israel/Palestine conflict….one of the major, if not the major, area of contention about BBC coverage and bias.
The BBC then employed Scientist Steve Jones to review its coverage of science….Jones was hardly independent, his career having been saved by the BBC which essentially has him on a short leash. It is no wonder that the pro-AGW Jones found no signs of bias in the BBC’s coverage and in fact argued for bias in favour of climate change and global warming.
The BBC employed another of its own to investigate its coverage of Israel/Palestine…Malcolm Balen….who declared even before the investigation began that he believed that the BBC was not biased but that it did make mistakes…..which seems to be the kneejerk get out clause for all bias….it’s not deliberate or systematic just cultural, unintentional and a result of group think.
The Balen Report has famously been hidden from all eyes…you can only conclude that it must reveal something so damaging to the BBC’s reputation that it can never see the light of day…..what could that be? Something that shows the BBC’s coverage has consistently been anti-Israeli and may have led to the death of Jews and the legitimisation of attacks on Israel?
There does seem to be a pattern here……evidence of bias but a declaration that no bias exists….or as with the Seesaw to Wagonwheels and the Balen Report, a complete refusal to acknowledge concerns about the BBC’s Middle East coverage.
The new report can only be more of the same…regardless of the content of the report you can only conclude that it will be kicked into the long grass and quietly forgotten should its findings turn out to be uncomfortable.
David Liddiment, the lead BBC trustee for the review, said the BBC’s reputation and commitment to impartiality was in its DNA.
A report into Europe, immigration and religion…what’s missing yet again? Israel.
Presumably ‘DNA’ stands for ‘Do Not Answer’ any questions about our coverage of Israel.
This was announced in August according to an Independent report with Stuart Prebble as the investigator.
It never fails to amaze me how the bBC goes out of its way in which to carrying out damage limitation for ‘Islam’ an openly intolerant, bigoted,sexist and racist cult which masquerades as a religion of peace. For Example:
Due to the use of UAVs by the US/Israel and the UK in which to target terrorists in their lairs, the term ‘Drone’ is used as generic term by the media in which to highlight ‘cold blooded death from above’ which can strike anybody especially women and children.
Yet when the Muslims come up with their own drone and flew it into Israel the bBC described it as an unmanned aircraft so as not associate Islamic terrorists with…drone warfare.
Yesterday a young Afghan girl was shot in the head and the bBC headline was:Outcry over Pakistan attack on activist Malala Yousafza, 14 Attack bbc? she was shot in the head, but of course damage limitation bBC just cannot accuse the Taliban openly of shooting a 14 year girl in the head can they.
Then there is the big difference in reporting over how Turkey responds to shells fired into the country by its smaller neighbour and how Israel does. Turkey is promoted as restrained, magnanimous and of course righteous and Israel which gets shelled from next down on a much more regular basis is always deemed to be at fault. Of course when shells land in Israel nobody is ever hurt (so the bbC tells me) so actually the message they send is that retaliating against Hamas is just sour grape. Yet this year alone, over 547 missiles and mortars have been fired into Israel. Last year there were 680 fired. How do you think Turkey would have responded to such actions. Do you think they would have launched an air attack or two? Well for your info (but not the beebs) 12 Turkish F16s carried out an air raid in Iraq last night. Did the bBC publish that news?
How often does the bBC bitch when so called aid boats are stopped from entering Gaza by the IDF yet today the Turks forced down a civilian passenger jet and the bBC excuses this by claiming that it was only carrying 35 out of around 180 so it was deemed suspicious. Imagine the outcry if Israel had done the same.
The bBC, the traitors in our Midst.
Pounce you write ‘Israel which gets shelled from next down on a much more regular basis is always deemed to be at fault.’
The BBC attitude is in that phrase, Israel is always deemed to be at fault. The reason? It exists.
This case was so typical of the BBC.
The former Pakistani Ambassador to the UK was put on Newsnight…a woman(but of course, sisters!).
She smoothed oil and grease all over the issue…as a country we are all in sympathy etc…the classic Muslim double sided mouthpiece that we kaffirs get…but to be fair, they`re as venal, corrupt and sinister amongst themselves.
Basically Pakistan is an ungovernable hellhole, but able to take the rest of the world for every penny…and we saps in the west seem to think that their faith makes them truthful…Allah, we`re dumb!
How does a jumped up fat controller on the Kashmir branch line get £100,000 to reward anybody who kills a filmmaker or Rushdie etc?…maybe his tribe make posies for Saviles grave out of those dripping poppy seeds?
But don`t expect Kirsty to dig too deep…not when some infidel like Hirsi Ali dares to smite the uluma!
Disgraceful…that`s OUR BBC then!
DV , is there any way we can get in on the act here, either as individuals , or as biased bbc ?
– write to the DG demanding to make a submission , based on the number of items per topic that have drawn accusations of bias.
– Issue a press release to all other media outlets , highlighting our concerns that it will be another internal whitewash by the bbc and listing number of complaints as per above.
It is important to keep the pressure up on the BBC. Are they are still obliged by their charter to answer complaints by TV license holders within 6 weeks ?.( Five years ago, my local MP asked them to reply as they took too long) They would have to employ a lot of people to answer letters and this costs money ! They might even possibly think twice about airing programmes that would get masses of letters of complaint . Sites like this could play a significant part in getting people motivated into challenging the BBC directly.
As the broadcasting arm of the Labour Party it should come as no surprise that the BBC is so skilled at exonerating itself, in true Blair/Brown/Balls/Miliband fashion, from any accusations of bias or wrongdoing.
Until the BBC release that Balen Report, they can f*** off and expect nobody to bother with a single word when they choose to spurt about Israel and their Pals-prolonging active life wasn`t it?
The Pally cause is lost. If only the British Government would refuse any immigration from angry bird of a neighbour of Israel-the pressure cooker there would explode.
Instead, we continue to give the region a safety valve-safe to kill Israelis, and safe to terrorise us in the civilised West.
These Islamic basket cases like Pakistan send their own nutjobs to us by way of mental health/care in the community…and we get Hamza, Qatada as a result. Time to stop any immigration from all OIC countries until the whole Caliphate in waiting implodes and wipes itself out in large part.
Surely the BBC would support the bloodletting-good telly, but no USA or Israel to blame.
Israels enemies turn out to be mine too…we are all Israelis, drunk or sober….and the BBC is a PLO smothering blanket….stop funding them!
http://bbcwatch.org/2012/10/09/welcome-to-bbc-watch/
I made a suggestion that the B-BBC collective simply start our own Facebook Group and then by clever manipulation of Facebooks internal group linking coding it would make it nigh on impossible for the BBC Facebook Groups` pages to stop our infiltration and the ensuing chaos that can be created by as little as say… 20 of us…. all you do is make a profile, join one of thier groups and simply `Friend request each groups membership but it also adds to the fun if you pre-prepare a posting regarding thier most biassed topic threads that would normally be hit by thier team of middle Eastern based Facebook `moderators` … so whilst you have just sent a post that would normally be instantly removed as it usually would be…. were it posted for public view on thier pages which they have control of… you can wait about half an hour and then make a point of posting comments on the chosen topics and make them as liberal as you like…… I gaurantee that you will be targetted by the people who read your private msg which accompanied your `friend` request on the actual BBC FB pages by hateful Islamic bigots and lunatics who will be too wound up to pay any regard to the legalities of making deliberately offensive posts… This is the part where you should screencapture the all the action which you can then attach to the email you can now send an email to the press complaints department regarding the way the BBC allowed you to be called everything from a pig to a dog etc… and didn`t step in to censor what was going on…. The best part is that the BBC facebook posting guidelines mean that anyone who falls for your entrapment will instantly have his posting priviledges removed forever within that particular facebook group…. Also did you know that it`s possible to `clone` profiles using the exact same nametags of other FB users?? Facebook archives its users by thier nametags and not by email or mobile numbers… So you can clone a complete users profile including thier albums etc… and becouse your profile is the newest it will always appear before the original one should anyone try to search for that name from then on… So if someone attempts to get in touch with the clone victim they will send the private message to your profile and not the victim… People on facebook are invariabley stupid, they never bother to investigate links they get sent or offered and blithely click anything that appears on screen…. If anyones interested in setting up our own Facebook lair then they should perhaps suggest it to David Vance so he could start a thread regarding it… If we end up doing it, i will happily prepare a nice pictoral guide on how to find ways round the internal coding of the facebook network and how best to use it to your own advantage…. As long as I place a disclaimer on it that my guide is to ensure that users do not become victims of internet trolls etc.. I will get away with it… I will keep the link on my own facebook profile so that no blame can laid at Mr.Vances` door… Or we could all just act with good manners and see how welcome they make us after we settle down to business… ~We do need to get our views out there more… The BBC reamins untouchable within the Facebook social networking… They are currently brainwashing lots of imbeciles with unchallenged bias on just about every topic they have on thier collection of affiliated FB BBC sites….. We need to start playing them at thier own game… instead of us just sitting reading whatever vaccous drivel Dev and Nicked-Emus have to offer…. How`s about it???
I’ll have to re-read that, s l o w l y , because I’m not a Facebook user and not up to speed with its operation.
However, I applaud the sentiment of the post – I too feel there should be more urgency in getting the boycott the licence fee / break up the bbc , message across, rather than just grumbling to the same converts about individual bits of bias.
Like i said i will put a nice visual guide together demonstrating how easy it is to cause all kinds of disruption inside the BBC FB groups using simple common sense… Facebook users assume that that the networks Sys Ops will provide thier security as long as they are within thier networking…… But the facebook Sys Ops are just other Facebook users who just happen to have been members for longer… Mostly they are Zuckerbergs nerdy college friends… They have no knowledge of coding as they simply usded the same programming as Bebo and MySpace with 90% of the custom profile controls removed… If you want to test my theories… grab some tempoary email addys from here… http://10minutemail.com/10MinuteMail/
Use them to register multiple new profiles…. The email servers are based in China so it makes it impossible for Facebook sys ops to verify if the emails are genuine due to Chinas tight control over all net traffic in thier territories… meaning you won`t be identified as a multiple profile holderfor quite a while…. durinjg which time you can post the shit out of the BBC Fb pages and then simply make another set the next day… I will provide some tips on how to ghost your home ips when posting too…. it`s all really simple… most of it is common sense and a willingness to try stuff out… social networking sites have no actual security apart from that which is offered by the datacentres they lease thier servers and routing… and they will only get involved if thier equipment might be damaged by viral intrusions or if there is a danger to thier routing…. heres an example of how to find coding to suit any purpose… check out the free stuff at this site… http://www.pixel2life.com/ all coding types are covered in thier guide categories… and they also provide links to other sites which hold any info they themselves do not have in thier own archives…. also try out this websites search engines that only find code snippets for free via the opensource projects .. http://krugle.com/krugle-opensearch.php … like I said you don`t really need to understand how to make the codes you only need to add it to the URL… those opensource boys will give you whatever you ask them for free gratis… they hate the commercialisation of the internet and especially sites like facebook who have now launched on the stockmarkets… Just be polite and say thankyou after they have helped you out…. so long as you are not attempting to hack bank accounts or do anyone real harm etc. they will usually point you towards a solution… I never troll anyone who doesn`t deserve it…. I think the BBC and its` biassed staff and apologists need bringing down a peg or two…. Via social networking is the best and quickest and most public way to call them out on thier behaviour in all aspects of thier Corporations treatment of anyone they don`t agree with or like..
Hopefull Mr.Vance will not mind if a few of us start a group on facebook to annoy the BBC… I think it will be quite funny watching the BBC mods panicking and trying to work out what is going on … The BBC have too much thier own way online…. We should make social networking our next battlefield….. I can just see Dev and Nicked Emus telling thier pals every word that I have posted… i couldn`t give a shit…. and i promise you that I will shut both of them up for good…. wait and see…
It is possible to make waves at the BBC. Just get writing directly and perservere . Get MP’s involved with the injustice of “incitement to racism” which is what slander against Israel promotes. It just takes good people to do nothing for evil to triumph.
the bbc doesn’t hate ALL Israelis
just the ones who are still alive
In the scientific method, once you make an assumption, you then try to prove whether that assumption is right or wrong. The BBC is effectively teaching its Journalists that scientists trying to prove CO2 warming wrong are “Enemies of Science“. But outside of this moronic BBC bubble there are Journalists doing Journalism. Booker and Delingpole are doing the “trying to prove it wrong” bit of the argument. But none of these Journalists understand that science is about trying to prove an assumption both right and wrong at the same time so as to obtain the truth. This is also why the intelligence of BBC Journalists is being mocked by Mensa members with articles such as “Enemies of Astronomy”.
As an Astronomer, I think that a change in the Earths Cloud Albedo caused by the high energy Cosmic Rays that produce the Muons that reach the low cloud base, is the cause of Climate Change. I also think that the Unified Theory of Climate, which explains the atmospheric temperatures of all the planets of the solar system with adequate data, including the carbon dioxide atmospheres of Mars and Venus, shows that the warming effect of any increase in CO2 should be far too small to be detected.
But you won’t learn about this on the BBC.
An intelligent Journalist with scientific training would realise that there must be something wrong if a geneticist is asking the BBC to censor climate scientists challenging the basic assumptions about CO2 warming. But then do these morons at the BBC know the difference between an assumption and a fact.
I don’t find the BBC’s position on global warming a surprise as the whole movement is less about science and more about environmentalism, anti-capitalism, restrictions on personal freedoms and re-distribution of wealth – all to be effected through a totaliatarian world government (see UN Agenda 21 and books by the likes of Delingpole and Laframboise). In other words, all leftist ideologies the BBC holds dear.
What I find difficult to understand is right-leaning newspapers like The Daily Telegraph having next to no debate on the subject. As a case in point, there is a small news article in the paper today telling us that the cold wet summers we have been experiencing since circa 2007 are likely to become the norm as a result of the effects global warming is having on the Arctic. Now if that isn’t a massive u-turn by the so-called ‘climate science community’, including the likes of their own environmental correspondents such as Geoffrey Lean, who have previously warned us of hot dry summers, droughts etc. typical of the southern Mediterranean, then what is? So why doesn’t The Telegraph (for one) investigate what the hell is going on with this ‘settled’ science?
It’s a conspiracy theorist’s dream, but I prefer to try and make sense of the widely differing scientific opinions on the subject – pity our press and TV don’t.
Here is a clue to what is happening.
This is News from the space special interest group of Mensa.
I found out that attempts to get funding to have real-time daily satellite observations of the Earths Cloud Albedo have been unsuccessful. I imagine a real-time daily correlation with Cosmic Ray levels would be another nail in the AGW coffin. Especially when you consider that an increase in cloud cover in the Arctic would increase temperatures as clouds trap heat, and at least temporarily due to the oceanic temperature lag. Also the greenhouse effect is weakest at the poles and non-existent in the polar winter. As well as the fact that the Arctic has far more heat input than the Antarctic region, due to the jet stream.
Also I found this piece.
There was a large increase in cloud cover over the Arctic this summer.
Reflected solar radiation in the Arctic in July 2012 was considerably higher than July 2011 according to the CERES instrument on the Modis satellites.
http://bbcwatch.org/2012/10/11/jeremy-bowen-retweeting-joseph-dana/
‘Any responsible journalist would check out such a story, especially considering its prospect for “international waves”, before reporting it either on twitter, TV or radio.’
The ‘responsible journalist does also offer a hint, but maybe Jezza (Bowen) went to the same twitter seminar held by Hugs Boaden as Jezza (Vine), of ‘here’s an RT making an accusation I like about a bloke we at the BBC don’t’, to his many ‘followers’, and maybe some simply keen to keep tabs on him (those that challenge getting banned asap).
This whole trust thing is rather going down the pan, guys.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-19908656
Harassment vs. threat vs. offensive.
One presumes the BBC deems itself excluded on a free speech(ish) basis, but will roam in judgement of others as per usual?
Not clear how FaceBook is responsible for a bozo posting a joke in poor taste, but the BBC appears able to carry some less than conciliatory language sent to them via fax, in their capacity as a de facto PR and broadcast agency for any loon there is out there.
I am sure the difference can be explained to me, so long as it does not end up as another ‘unique’.