Two stories from the US as covered by the BBC.
Note also that the second headline puts ‘voter fraud’ in inverted commas. For those who haven’t seen O’Keefe’s video it can be viewed here.
UPDATE. And don’t think for a moment that BBC reporters aren’t aware of what they’re doing and why. Here’s Philippa Thomas quoted in a recent article about coverage of the US election by the foreign press (emphasis mine):
Thomas, a 2011 Nieman Fellow in the throes of covering her fourth U.S. presidential campaign for the BBC, is used to pleading her case with campaigns. “The BBC News website has massive American readership and a lot of what it publishes is shared on Facebook and Twitter,” Thomas wrote. “A lot of the politicians know it: I reckon my challenge covering current U.S. campaigns is to persuade the gatekeepers that the BBC is seen, heard and read by enough key voters to get us on their lists.”
It seems the BBC are all about the visually subliminal,these days. For instance, check out the picture of the headline story on the BBC News website:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/
Suggestive, perhaps?
It’s in their DNA. But we have to pay for their propaganda.
Just like today’s ‘news’ story on early voting, headed by a large photograph of Michelle Obama and telling us
For the first time, the US president is voting early, and he’s not alone – 6.5 million Americans have already voted, nearly two weeks before election day. So is it possible the election has already been decided?
President Barack Obama will make history this week when he steps into a Chicago voting booth and casts his ballot – a full 10 days ahead of Election Day.
Vote early and vote often, eh?
I confess I’m uneasy with the whole idea as I think it gives even more opportunity for manipulation. However it must just be me as no-one in the article seems to have a bad word to say for it, except that it’s “anticlimatic”.
Why is he voting early?
‘Why is he voting early? ‘
It appears… because he can.
As can any other voter.
This is being spun, by SKY at least, as another ‘first’ by the only President that will ever be needed…eva.
Some might see it as a cynical move to lock down some votes that may stray as the normal course of campaigning evolves and a few things get highlighted that may not suit the narrative.
I am sure the BBC would prefer that the next licence fee hike had been locked down before the Savile affair showed just what they do with the money extorted.
But them’s the breaks.
Good catch. Always take screenshots for the day when evidence has to be produced. The Rep/Dem thing is duplicated in the UK with Tory/Labour (even lefty Conservatives are called ‘Tory’)
In the clip Patrick Moran did not endorse the plan, but nor did he tell the man to discard it.
Technically correct, but does not give the full picture at all and is thus wholly misleading. The BBC isn’t letting on that he offers advice on how to carry out the fraud. For example, he tells the pretend fraudster that he will need legitimate looking forged utility bills. He advises him to call people on his list and make sure that they do not intend to vote or have not voted early.
Agreed – the BBC’s report tries to downplay the extent and significance of Moran’s advice. He even tells the Project Veritas reporter, “I respect your initiative”.
The BBC seems to think that we`re all as stupid as North Koreans or Russians.
Those good people HAVE to/Had to play dumb , on pain of a mortar or a psychiatric injection….over here, we all KNOW what the BBC are up to…all the time, evry chance they gat.
Guess the role of Obama in getting the Libyan Ambassador murdered…or allowing Texas to be flooded with Zeta Gang guns and drugs by deliberate design gone wrong…are not “newsworthy enough” to merit the attentions of the BBC.
Just a “Savile” of a story then….but we`re learning, and will not forget the “traitors in our midst”, as defined by pounce.uk.
Hoping that Romney boots the traitors of the beltway back here to face up to their their “doing a Savile”.
So Thomas proves me right that I do have a real reason to be concerned about the bias of a foreign (to me) news organization, and that they do want to influence us. Thanks for that, DB. I’m saving it to show the next defender of the indefensible who sneers about my “strange obsession”.
Oh, and about the biased headline choices, Nicked Emus and Jim Dandy and Scott will tell you that you’re not a professional journalist and so have no idea how these things work.
Just a blogger. Like everyone at Newsweek from 2013.
And possibly the Guardian.
Lucky you, David. You win Mark Thompson for NYT. We are well rid of him from BBC but have Patten’s glove puppet George instead, though I am sure not for long.
Thompson was brought in to help revive the paper’s plummeting revenues. He’s probably expected to come up with new streams like he did at the BBC. Maybe he’ll also dumb it down a bit and get them to start producing “bespoke” video magazine pieces.
The NY Times is already plenty biased; he can’t make it any worse than it already is.
Wanna bet? Compare BBC 2004 with BBC 2012. On Thompson’s watch!
‘not a professional journalist and so have no idea how these things work.’
On balance, if they are defending the BBC and citing it as ‘how things work’, I’d hate to see what their vision of stuff not working might entail.
“CBS News Aided Obama’s Benghazi Cover-Up”
http://pjmedia.com/tatler/2012/10/25/cbs-news-aided-obamas-benghazi-cover-up/?
“Obama White House Knew Al-Qaeda Ally Hit Benghazi”
http://frontpagemag.com/2012/matthew-vadum/obama-white-house-knew-al-qaeda-ally-hit-benghazi/
Got a RT from the man himself.
Original tweet was a question to John Sweeney – more of a narrative guy.
It’s nice to see the BBC joining that American news tradition known as the game of “name that party”.