Last one has rapidly run out of space…….
OPEN THREAD
Bookmark the permalink.
Search Biased BBC
Recent Comments
- Terminal Moraine April 24, 2024 at 12:47 pm on Midweek 24th April 2024Definitely haram, anything with a 'berg' alone can trigger a few riots.
- Terminal Moraine April 24, 2024 at 12:43 pm on Midweek 24th April 20242-3 years ago the security guard at Aldi in my part of London (not diverse — more duoculture) had started...
- Terminal Moraine April 24, 2024 at 12:33 pm on Midweek 24th April 2024The BBC did in fact celebrate St George’s Day yesterday on the home page yesterday, did anyone spot it? "Classic...
- friend of yogi bear April 24, 2024 at 12:21 pm on Midweek 24th April 2024Alistair Campbell aka "Riviera Gigalo" l am told ,the pen name he used when writing pornography for Forum magazine. Has...
- tomo April 24, 2024 at 12:18 pm on Midweek 24th April 2024Bluidy good question https://twitter.com/7Kiwi/status/1783089068496109635
- tomo April 24, 2024 at 12:13 pm on Midweek 24th April 2024https://twitter.com/FUDdaily/status/1783026186945212713
- tomo April 24, 2024 at 12:11 pm on Midweek 24th April 2024Must be something to do with all the coal power stations? https://twitter.com/James_BG/status/1782794450697060353
- Rob in Cheshire April 24, 2024 at 11:53 am on Midweek 24th April 2024Fed: Actually not the same refit at all. All ships need maintenance, QE has done a lot of sea miles....
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
couldn t find anything on al bbc news for this
http://www.unwatch.org/site/apps/nlnet/content2.aspx?c=bdKKISNqEmG&b=1316871&ct=12531747
Mauritania – North African Islamic state where conversion to another faith is punishable by death.
The country’s criminal code provides for a three-day period of reflection and repentance for any Muslim found guilty of apostasy. ‘If he does not repent within this time limit,’ it states, ‘he is to be condemned to death as an apostate and his property will be confiscated by the Treasury -both slavery and the death penalty for apostasy are prescribed by Islamic law.
hmm perfect for Vice-President of UN Human Rights then 😀 … i mean what could go wrong
Incredible, isn’t it? The BBC and the entire lefty rainbow-coloured cardigan brigade are all too eager to find fault with Christianity and their stance on gay marriage but never a word on the most intolerant religion of the modern era; gay rights, awful gender equality and completely medieval blasphemy laws… . But, the BBC promotes Islam as though it were Zen Buddhism.
Never underestimate the power of self deception allied to the self loathing of our liberals.
Liberalism in it’s modern form is their way of coping with the emptiness at the heart of their lives.
If it is any consolation it is that modern liberals are a declining demographic and will eventually die out.
That is why it is so important that they do not get to our children and grandchildren via the media and the education system.
The term “Liberalism” has long since been hijacked by Socialist scum to make it look as if they are the “humanitarians”….It’s what the BBC/Guardian elites crave most, Socialism by stealth.
I think the term socialism has been hijacked by the liberals, too. It used to mean decent pay for white working class breadwinners – the very people that modern “socialists” hate the most.
Have a watch of ‘News’night from last night; the analysis of the Census was yet another pathetic diversion away from the negatives of this appalling ethnic cleansing of native Brits. Words such as ‘astonishing’, ‘diverse’ and extraordinary’ were used as sanitizing terms to describe what has been a clear imposition of Marxist ideology on a public who were neither asked nor considered. How can we continue paying for this haggis when the likes of Gavin Estler asks questions such as ‘does it matter that white people are now a minority in the Capital’, and ‘is it significant’ etc. Unbelievable! This country could be sinking (as it is!) and the BBC will continue to refuse to debate this appalling set of statistics. And why are they inviting lefties on from other countries and with clear bias views to comment on this? Beyond belief. The most pressing aspects for the BBC were the arts, tolerance and diversity.
sorry, here’s the link… Warning: if you suffer from high blood pressure do not watch.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/iplayer/episode/b01pdy79/Newsnight_11_12_2012/
Looks like the interim progress report on the destruction of British identity and culture ( it does exist even though some of panel didn’t seem to think so) is up to the BBC’s expectation. We are on schedule and it can’t be stopped.
This last point is depressingly correct. The country I grew up in is being destroyed before my eyes. I feel angry and sad . Only the British liberal left elite, led by the BBC , could actually promote the destruction of their own country’s identity. They make me sick.
“Arts, toleration and diversity” – like tube train graffiti, wearing a mini in Tower Hamlets , and diseases from TB to the plague.
Gavin Esler, like so many of the well-heeled metropolitan Left, is a voyeur of the multicultural onslaught; you can be damn sure he’s not at the sharp end. Let’s turn Gav’s question around. ‘Does it matter that comfortable white people are now a minority in Esler’s cosy enclave?’ Perhaps when Mrs Esler goes out of the house to confront a pack of Somali thugs, & gets called, ‘a f*cking white whore’, Gavin will realise that too many of London’s new arrivals are nothing like Mo Farah, & that once you relinquish immigration quality control, it isn’t long before our streets become war zones. Anyway, Gav, let’s open another bottle, & get into Plan B’s ‘ill manors’: watching, but from a distance.
So let me get this right. The area of the UK with the highest White population, Wales, has no crime.
And all the crime in Ulster is caused by who?
There was no crime in the UK under Queen Victoria either.
So let me get this right. You pretended someone had said something they hadn’t, so you could attack it.
yep, bit windy in here and we nearly missed the massive straw man Prole propped up.
Who said anything about there being no crime before mass immigration? But we didn’t have this:
http://www.thecnj.com/camden/020206/news020206_03.html
Or this:
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2070562/Muslim-girl-gang-kicked-Rhea-Page-head-yelling-kill-white-slag-FREED.html
Prole, I live in Wales but don’t you worry, soon if fools like you get your way, we will go the same way as London. It has started already in the cities and the towns aren’t far behind. Now I can tell you I certainly don’t want this and neither does just about anyone I discuss it with so you tell me why are we getting it regardless and why shouldn’t we be angry.
Oh and crime here isn’t nearly as vicious as in London and other cities although ‘Black Gangsta’ culture amongst the youth isn’t helping. And it’s funny isn’t it that most of the time you hear about a vicious stranger rape, the name of the miscreant doesn’t seem to be Davies or Jones.
Unless it’s Winston Jones !
check out the other” kneeslapper”, at the bottom of that report – about Syria being rushed on to the H.R. Council 😀
is that before or after?, the vids got out
showing the much vaunted Obama/al bbc/William Vague endorsed ahem … “opposition”?, getting children to behead helpless prisoners …
i think they were (boo hiss-Assad bad all bad) captured Gov soldiers, which means it must be alright then?
…. you literally couldn t make it up
The idiocies of Western policy concerning Syria may be reaching a new Feydeau-farce like low if my favourite alarmist middle eastern newssheet is to be believed:
“If Assad fails to stop the al Qaeda fighters from reaching Al-Safira and its poison gas stores – and an al Qaeda affiliate succeeds for the first time in arming itself with chemical weapons – the United States will have to mount an air assault – not on Assad’s army but on the Syrian rebel forces fighting him, because if they do manage to seize control of the base, rebel fighters may decide to send the chemicals-tipped missiles against Assad regime centers in Damascus.”
http://www.debka.com/article/22608/Assad-fires-Scuds-to-stop-Al-Qaeda-arm-seizing-chemical-arms-at-Al-Safira
But at least the beeb got the islamic, er, Arab spring about right.
” Obama/al bbc/William Vague”
Could be they believe that us mere plebs don’t get to see such nasty censored shit like that. They are the elite you see. The all knowing super-wise, sages who just know what is best for US. Just so long as they don’t have to live amongst the crap they create.
Interesting, as we reach another point at which the Pollard Report doesn’t appear, or delay getting explained, the most trusted national reputation smearer gets another outing:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-20697738
Of course, first and most crucially…
‘Meanwhile, police have set up Operation Fairbank to investigate allegations by Labour MP Tom Watson of a paedophile ring in high places.
Mr Watson said in October that police should investigate claims of a “powerful paedophile ring” linked to a previous prime minister’s “senior adviser” and Parliament.
What’s that? An allegation only. But… by Tom Watson… noted man of ethics and moral rectitude.
Seems when our Tom ‘says’ anything, even if his motives stink, the BBC still replies… ‘how high do you want it, Tom’?
Unique. If hard to justify on any grounds, as they avoid the Sword of Damocles that is the truth they are running out of ways to avoid or cover up.
“Mr Watson said in October that police should investigate claims of a “powerful paedophile ring” linked to a previous prime minister’s “senior adviser” and Parliament.”
They’re still trying to smear Lord McAlpine by the look of it, but I think Watson might be referring to Dunblane and PM Blair.
I mean they were trying to smear McAlpine back in October. Hope he reads this and sues them.
I fully endorse Max Hastings views in his Daily mail column of 10th December. he was writing about Patrick Moore and his ilk:
“Today, it is unusual for any TV company to fund more than six parts of anything save comedy or soaps. As a result, hapless presenters parody themselves trying to gabble the story of say, Christianity or the Theory Of Relativity, inside 50 minutes.
In the past “vast audiences watched enraptured. They marvelled as the pioneer telly-don A.J.P. Taylor gave history lessons without notes or D-Day veteran General Sir Brian Horrocks likewise described great generals and military battles.
Today, by contrast, television companies argue that the public lacks the attention span for anything that goes on a bit: audience figures fall off a cliff after four or five episodes, regardless of merit; people are no longer willing to be lectured at.
That is the TV bosses’ story, anyway. That is how they justify using actors and actresses to present many of today’s documentaries, heedless of whether these thespians know a Norse helmet from a chamber-pot.
Only if viewers get their dose from a celebrity they fancy — for example, Stephen Fry, Martin Clunes or Joanna Lumley — will they risk taking a swallow of cling-filmed knowledge.”
Bravo!
One little anecdote about the great Patrick Moore and his mastery of his subject. When he was commentating on the BBC broadcast of the first moon landing, the BBC discovered they had mistakenly linked into the American NBC network, hence commercials popped up at regular intervals.
“Don’t worry, boys,” said Patrick. “When NBC goes to commercials, cut to me and I’ll talk.” And so he did, all evening. He filled dozens of slots with cogent, informed and interesting words – all ad lib. (By the way, his “Sky At Night” programme was never scripted.)
Jacob Browonski was the same. I saw the rushes. (The uncut daily film delivered to the cutting room) The director let him talk, but as he talked he often he veered off subject. The team stopped him and brought him back to the point and off he went again. Even his deviations were fascinating. It was all in his head. Remember his subject was nothing less than “The Ascent Of Man” – how scientific endeavour had advanced humanity.
As Max Hastings says: “Their most conspicuous quality was that before first getting in front of a camera, they had acquired a store of experience and knowledge of their subject.”
Great post!
Add Brian Waldon’s marvellous two series on Heroes and Villains. I doubt that will ever be repeated, not least because his take on St Nelson Mandela (pbuh) was not exactly a fawning hagiography.
Super post, Louis, thanks !
Like all media organisations, the BBC has changed over time – the Mail just as much. Even when it was explicitly supporting fascist organisations, its front page headlines were nowhere near as short of words, and in far smaller type, than today’s. And in print, it’s puritanical view on life is in direct contradiction to the Mail Online’s reliance on female celebrities in bikinis to generate page views. Of course, in Biased BBC world hypocrisy is OK if you’re right wing enough.
For what to worth, some of BBC4’s documentary series are more akin to the style Hastings harks back to – and the success of Prof Mary Beard’s Roman documentaries shows that BBC2 isn’t completely unable of hosting decent series too. I wish there were more series of that calibre, but to deny the existence of the few that do exist is, at the very least, extremely disingenuous.
(And yes, it’s/its – and “for what it’s worth”, rather than “…on worth”. I swear iOS’ autocorrect has a vindictive streak.)
This is from Prof Mary Beard’s wikipedia entry, referring to 9/11 –
She opined that many people, once “the shock had faded”, thought “the United States had it coming”
No doubt that’s how she got to be a BBC programme maker.
She is certainly of the BBC mold. I’ve always found her irritating, ever since I first encountered her as an undergraduate nearly 30 years ago.
Having said that, I was pleasantly surprised at how much I enjoyed the first episode of her recent Romans series. Other episodes were a tad disappointing.
Maybe Scott ought to set up a Daily Mail complaint website. Oh wait a minute, there would be no point, because nobody is forced to buy the Daily Mail.
Too many long drawn out shots of an old lady on a bicycle for my liking.
Mind, I think the BBC does a generally excellent job on BBC4. The past few months have been especially good with more content and much less padding.
Narrow gauge railways and how many engines have been saved and restored on Monday was an example of the great British spirit that is probably still around. because people care; even had Jenny Agguter doing the narration Next Monday is about Severn Valley Railway; don’t miss it.
The BBC is not all bad you know; it just has this narrow gauge left leaning Virgin train mentality when it come to politics and so-called comedy
Any idea when the Manchester Guardian stopped being an apologist for stalinism? 1953?
Did it ever apologise for being Stalinist? And as some one pointed out recently, this red herring of the Mail being fascist is a bit pathetic considering they gave up praising Hitler long before Reith and the BBC did. And after all, what does being right wing have to do with being fascist (left wing)? It would appear that the Scottytron needs its circuits checked.
The biggest threat to democracy in the west is the Left’s fascistic determination to kill off debate, from immigration (‘racist!’) to global warming (‘denier!’) and including gay rights (‘homophobe!’), Islam (‘Islamophobe!’) and the EU (‘xenophobe!’).
I’m sure there’s more.
Hi Scott
On a positive note, you do seem to be tacitly admitting that the BBC has dumbed down or as you rather euphemistically put it “Changed over time” which is a start. Yes the BBC is not alone in this and print media can be just as lowbrow, but wasn’t the point of the license fee to uphold standards?
That the BBC is just as bad as its commercial rivals is bad enough but all too often it is leading the race down market. If you had said to someone 50 years ago that the BBC would be an entire channel dedicated to such programmes as Unsafe sex in the city My small boobs and me and Snog Marry Avoid, frankly no one would have believed you. And here we are. Even the supposedly highborw channel BBC4 is mainly dedicated to 60s and 70s nostalgia now.
One was pick out one or two half decent programmes on the BBC, but then so can one on any channel. There is now more serious programming on Sky than on the BBC and Channel 4 has for a long time been a more responsible broadcaster than the BBC. But the most challenging programmes have for a long time come from the USA, a completely commercial market.
I’m no fan of the Daily Mail, but using generalised ad homs against what is a serious and thoughtful article, every word of which you would agree with if it was not directed against your sacred cow.
Of course the cultural malaise of ‘dumbing down’ goes far beyond the BBC, but the entire raison d’etre of its existence was to uphold this culture. If it fails to do that, which manifestly it does, a fair person should ask: what is it good for?
Sorry, I forgot this web site was called “Biased Daily Mail”.
Any other 1930’s axes to grind? Shall we talk of cheerleaders for the Soviet Union and the support for showtrials expressed within left wing organisations and their members of the time…. and after
Scott, I don’t think commenters on this sight ‘deny the existence of the few that do exist’. I flagged up Neil Oliver’s recent, excellent, series (BBC4) on The Great Explorers, especially the David Livingstone programme, which was a measured, informative, rounded appraisal of a great, though flawed, man. Sometimes, BBC4 is a bit of an ‘Alamo’, surrounded by the forces of PC & the dumbing-downers, but when a quality programme does turn up, believe me, it’s noticed, because it stands out from the majority of the BBC’s output like a mullah in a gay sauna.
Prof Mary Beard is a ghastly little Marxist historian. She claimed in her programme that she would tells us about the lives of ordinary ‘working class’ Romans. Yet to do this she used the funeral plaques of middle class Romans. To Marxists the middle class only appear in the 19thC!
“Working class Romans” – what a hoot! I missed that. Thank you +james. It’s long been a theory of mine that the protagonists in historical dramas – and now increasingly modern documentaries – are simply modern people with modern views and sensibilities in fancy dress. It takes an intellectual jump to understand what historical figures actually THOUGHT.
The Romans, for example, “enjoyed their work, prosperity and good professional reputation without seeking recognition from their betters or the transient satisfaction of momentary public glory.” – A History of Private Life -from Pagan Rome to Byzantium. (Belknap-Harvard). I don’t see any evidence of a pre-Marxist Marxism among the togas of ancient Rome.
But I expect more left wing revisionist history on the media – and yes, Scott, it IS called “dumbing down.”. To be honest it isn’t the BBC who is the worst offender but the History Channel.
Roman society had no ‘working class’ as such. It was divided into free citizens (who would roughly correspond to the middle classes) and slaves (corresponding to the working classes). This distinction was fairly rigid, although a slave could become a free citizen at the whim of a favourable master.
Rome sounds like Rotherham, except that the children aren’t usually freed.
Did she make any mention of the global warming which was happening during the Roman period?
” the Mail just as much. Even when it was explicitly supporting fascist organisations,”
That would be back when,one time hero of the left ,H.G.Wells was lecturing oxford students on the virtues of fascism ,imploring them to become enlightened Nazis (would you have cheered as they did Scott?) and his lover,fellow socialist and proto-feminist,Margret Sanger was giving sexual health lectures to the KKK.
But still context is everything isn’t it?
I think you’re right about BBC4, some of its programmes are brilliant.
Tho’ as for Prof’ Beard, I find her a patronising, left wing pain in the arse.
‘ television companies argue that the public lacks the attention span for anything that goes on a bit’
Interestingly, they take a different approach elsewhere.
A complaint to BBC CECUTT can only be 1500 characters max, limited by system.
If the complaint is valid, and needs crushing, they will spend months, scores of staff and vast resources producing multi-hundred page reams of MB-sucking .pdf guff to grind you down in attrition. And then claim that they can’t carry on as it is a waste of resources… ‘Beware… a Leopard!’
And they are smart to do so.
Because today’s ‘powers that be’ will whine if anything is brought to them that is more than a page.
Yet they will also refuse to handle anything without full facts for fear of getting things wrong.
Douglas Adams must be spinning in the special part of heaven for those who used satire as a caution.
Let us not continue to whinge about BBC bias, join with me to hit it where it hurts, and refuse to pay our licence fee until they comply with their obligation of political neutrality.
Many of us have long been concerned that we have to pay a tv licence fee regardless of political affiliation, only to be forced to have a steady barrage of left wing propaganda aimed at us. Surely, even people of a left wing persuasion, be they fair and just, can’t possibly think that this is acceptable, but despite it all, individuals like Polly Toynbee call for a progressive politicisation of programmes like “The Archers”, what more do these people want?
The situation is so dire that principled individuals are moved to write books and publish articles about it. In effect the Labour Party have, a dedicated, ubiquitous, public funded propaganda platform, vilifying Conservatives (or anyone else not of the left) and their ideas, while promoting everything that is dear to the left of centre mind.
Am I overstating the case? Just listen and view a variety of BBC programmes, though various genres for a week, and then, only a fool, or a rabid leftie would fail to detect a decided political agenda. Indeed, if anyone from “Auntie” reads this missive, I challenge them to let me have a live 45 min show with people NOT handpicked by them, and I would provide all the evidence anyone could possible need to decide the truth of the matter.
Twenty-five years ago I left South Africa and was amazed on reaching the UK to discover that the BBC was every bit as politically biased as the South African Broadcasting Corporation had been during the apartheid years. As the BBC is on the back-foot right now, there may never again be a better time to demand fairness. Help me take the fight to them, and oblige the BBC to be truly politically neutral.
If you can help, please contact me davidward41@btopenworld.com.
David Ward Cornwall
I’ve tried to make the point before that if the BBC were getting it about right there would surely be another website accusing them of too much right-wing bias, bias towards Israel, bias aginst Islam etc. Of course there is no such website and we know why.
I fully endorse David’s views.
How many more times. There are plenty of sites claiming this. Medialens for one.
40 likes!
Thanks Jim, just spent a few minutes having a look at that.
Interesting to see things from another perspective.
Is this the site where I’ll find the BBC have, in fact, been asking questions from a right-wing point of view and I’ve just not been tuned in at the right time? Or maybe I nodded off briefly when Andy Burnham (as an example) was asked ‘What did you do about it during the 13 years you were in power’ when he was accusing the Tories of kicking social care for the elderly into the long grass.
Right-wing bias my arse.
Have you had a look?
I liked the one where it accused the BBC of covering up for Blair and Bush over the Iraq war.
This is from the article in the Newsletter of the Space Special Interest group of Mensa, about their complaint to the BBC Trust.
Surprisingly the most blatantly biased statement by the BBC said that “Anthropogenic Global Warming is a fact” the IPCC using an assumption says “very likely” and the BBC which claims to be impartial says “fact“. This also does not come from the Royal Society. This evidence proves that the BBC takes a more extremely Biased view than the IPCC or the Royal Society and conflicts with the BBC Trusts claim that impartiality is important. This also now leaves open the possibility of legal action against the BBC Trust which has continually refused freedom of information requests for details of how this decision was made by what the BBC calls “the best scientific experts“.
I understand that next year they are making a complaint to the BBC Trust about misleading Mensa members about this seminar being comprised of the best scientific experts. I believe hardly any of them were scientist. Most shocking of all for the members was the fact that none of the few scientists at this seminar was qualified in the basics of Climate science such as Atmospheric Physics or Solar Astronomy.
I do not think that the members have many links outside Mensa or the University of Oxford, so we do not know anyone else fighting the morons at the BBC over this. But although we do not think that we would win against the BBC Trust, at least it gives members an idea of the nature of the Orwellian left-wing mindset at the BBC.
Funny how our tame trolls could not find it within themselves to defend the BBC’s indefensible position on holding a secret meeting with ‘climate change’ activists and their assorted hangers-on, claiming them to be ‘the best scientific experts’. So even they might be a little too ashamed to back up what amounts to a big fat lie.
Funny too that the BBC should be doing this on the issue that has the biggest political, economic and sociological implications for the planet. The stakes are massive, and the BBC has planted its jackboot firmly in one camp.
I am still gobsmacked this hasn’t escalated beyond anything we’ve seen over recent weeks – in fact times a thousand. Just wtf is going on in this country?
The BBC’s lie of the century can be seen in black and white by anyone: on page 40 of the PDF of the BBC Trust Report:
‘From Seesaw to Wagon Wheel’ (Jun 2007):
“The BBC has held a high-level seminar with some of the best scientific experts, and has come to the view that the weight of evidence no longer justifies equal space being given to the opponents of the consensus”
Click to access report.pdf
Why there has been no outcry / apology / enquiry / disciplinary action / explanation / change of policy, in view of that statement being a blatant untruth, is beyond me.
Because they ,the liberal inquisition
who’s foremost pulpit is the BBC
not only hold all the cards,ie the Major institutions of the state. but set the rules of the game.
you’ve a better chance of getting a
fair deal in a las vegas casino.
The criticism described in the article and based on the story is one we here observe continually, and are frustrated by. It is part of what we detest about the BBC, besides its propaganda. It shows the contempt the BBC truly has for its customer, in more ways than one.
‘Culture of denial’ operating at top of BBC, says Royal Television Society chief
Thanks Alex for the Newsnight link. I’ve just watched it and found it more amusing than a lot of their comedy output.
As a Londoner I find it laughable when Estler talks about the white British minority in London and says “do you think day by day people notice it” then “they notice it now because we’re talking about the census” Amazing truly amazing. I never saw it coming until the census pointed it out.
Essler is the epitome of an illusion filled elitest. Reality is something he just about knows how to spell.
No probs RB. The left’s contempt for the white working class is utterly loathsome.
This not going to end well at all.
Credit where it’s due – tonights newsnight EU debate was pretty balanced – with 3 against 3. IMHO the ‘better off out’ side won most of the arguments pretty convincingly. In fact the Ukippers even outnumbered the Brussels stooges at one point when a Hong Kong business man who was sat on the EU side turned out to be in favour of withdrawal saying it will make ‘no difference’ to trade between the UK amd China. My only criticism would be of the time wasted talking to Irvine Welsh who appeared to have nothing coherent to say either for or against the EU.
Too much attention given to that pro-Europe lady who the cameraman was continually lingering upon.
Not near enough Terry Smith…but better tna we`d have expected, given that it`s the BBC.
How though did that Emma Reynolds get on though from Labour-who the hell is she?
Not another taxi-driver pretending to know stuff was it?…but certainly displaying all the clueless mimicry and bandwagon hopping, drum-following
Grannys Footsteps game being played by NuLabours shells in suits.
That pro-EU woman was a gift to the anti side of the debate. She exuded the kind of superiority typified by those wealthy, sophisticated world citizens who hold in contempt the parochial, narrow outlook of the little people, most of whom will live their mundane lives within the confines of their country of origin, unable to see beyond their own petty national interests. The attitude is one of “Do as you’re told. It’s good for you. We are your betters. Do as you’re told”.
It seems to come naturally to them. The more they are exposed to the British public the better. They just don’t understand how they come across to most of us here.
You mean Katinka Barysch –
http://www.cer.org.uk/personnel/katinka-barysch – from The Centre for European Reform. According to this she’s an expert on Germany, Turkey, the Euro, Eastern Europe etc etc. Is it really possible to be an expert on all these subjects? Anyway, no evidence of that last night, Farage wiped the floor with them.
That’s her – haughtiness personified.
“…time wasted talking to Irvine Welsh who appeared to have nothing coherent to say…”
I thought the same. He wittered on and on incoherently about, “sortalike, y’know, kindalike neo-liberalism and like, y’know sortalike more neo-liberalism, kindalike”.
Who pulled his name from the Rolodex?
…but at least we were spared the televisual excrement so often discharged from those other ‘regulars’ (pun intended) – the likes of Will Self(disappeared up own rectum), Bonnie Greer(already been on this week), Billy Bragg(not St’ George’s Day yet) etc…
Shame they didn’t get the insights of Grayson Perry, he was much missed from the debate.
1.Yesterday the BBC were getting their retaliation in first over the unemployment figures by interviewing experts who query the validity of the then yet to be announced figures( Wake up to Money).
2. Today I learned the BBC is worried about Fracking and the fact that there will be in one experts opinion no major impact on gas supplies even though we sit on hugh amounts of of shale gas.
The shale gas fracas, is getting the usual bullshit treatment, with claims yes it will no significant impact on gas supplies. Are these knobs serious?
What will we have next, a brand new gas fired power station in Pembroke getting closed down before the year end because the cooling water is discharged 8 Deg c above its intake temperature.
Someone is having a bloody laugh.
Last one out of the country turn off the light, oh hang on they are off already.
And don’t forget it’s an EU criticism of the 1 billion pound new power station.
The laws of thermodynamics dictate that you can’t run the generating process without waste heat, just as entropy ALWAYS increases.
Swampy and Co seem to thinks we must go back to caves.
it will no:
should read : it will HAVE no…….
oops
Excellent article in The Spectator showing just how little regard the BBC has for the country and society in the pursuit of its own agenda.
I’m just glad the government finally had the guts to start developing this form of energy. It could solve more than one problem in the world.
BBC vs Fracking
Ed Balls a bully who can’t take it, says David Cameron – http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-20692896
Er, only he didn’t! ‘
“I’m surprised the shadow chancellor is shouting again, because we learned last week, like bullies all over the world, he can dish it out but he can’t take it.”
There is a huge difference between saying that someone shares a behaviour trait with a particular group and saying that they’re a member of that group!
The BBC are trivialising bullying to make a cheap political shot at the Tories.
Jeff
Latest dutiful Labour HQ spin from Stephanie Flanders on good economic news: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-20697050
BBc North west Pravda. Show a group of hippies protesting against “fracking”. Ho ho hardly any of them there but the camera angle set up to make it look like there was. Give up Beeb I know that trick.
Wonder if the hippies will stop using gas and electric if it’s produced by shale – I imagine not.Oh no back to breakfast and two minor EARTHQUAKES caused by “fracking”. Now whered is that wall to bang my head on.
It`s all too tiring keeping up with BBC bias…a full time job.
Let me leave Scott above with my Thought For the Day…and a chance to think out his liberal reflexes in the mind gym later!
How come the BBC refer to the “controversial technique of fracking” repeatedly in their bulletins on Radio 2 and 4 this morning…but don`t think that the EuroFederal Bank that the EU are in the process of setting up for themselves does not need that word “controversial” lobbed onto the item…anywhere.
And what if Hollande in France is happy with it..and the French are engaged in it already…does this make it controversial?…you know, linking the EU/Socialist wagon to the whole “fracking thing”?
Or is controversial only applied to Big Oil(Shell etc) or to anything not approved by the liberal
elites…the BBC for example?
Just asking!
I noticed the ‘controversial’ tag too. funny isn’t it that when you are aware of how the BBC operates, (a lot of thanks go to this site for that) you tend to notice these things straight away.
I think ‘controversial technique of fracking’ will have to join ‘settlements that are illegal under international law’ as one of the well known phrases and sayings that the Beeb is determined to get into Brewer’s Dictionary of Phrase and Fable.
How would the Left stand on coal mines then, given the subsidence caused by mining, and the Left’s historical sympathy for miners.
All those mines closed by Fatcher, would get re-opened under new labour of course!
So errr…how many reopened?
You sure?
The old romance between the Left and the miners ended after the NUM was no longer powerful enough to be used as a socialist battering ram to bring down Conservative governments.
Correction Dave666, the earthquakes were caused by ‘controversial fracking’. And an expert was wheeled out to show that shale gas would increase the cost of energy for the consumer, not reduce it as it was admitted regarding the US. Even the BBC presenter was baffled by this claim.
As any court lawyer would tell you, you can always find an expert to say what you want the jury to hear.
Like social workers hiring experts to fool county court judges. Interesting that Auntie doesn’t seem to mind such blatant child snatching.
It annoys me that they use the term “earthquakes,” they are not.
Even if they are caused by fracking, which the experts say is only “likely” as apposed to “definitely;” there is little to none chance of them being anything more than a minor tremor of a magnitude equal to an HGV passing, or as is the case in notts the passing of the tram (quite disturbing the first time you feel it) as its not about tectonics so it can’t get more powerful or destructive.
Well said, Jonathan. But whenever do you hear this scientific perspective on BBC? Oh, forgot – the science is probably ‘settled’, so ‘earthquake’ it is.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2247421/Fracking-resume-search-shale-gas-Ed-Davey-promises-tougher-rules-prevent-earthquakes.html
Daily Mail NB first word in headline.
Telegraph too.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/9743730/Communities-could-be-paid-to-accept-controversial-gas-fracking.html
And Fox News
http://www.foxnews.com/world/2012/12/13/uk-govt-gives-approval-to-resume-controversial-gas-extraction-method-known-as/
It is controversial.
But only to competing natural gas firms, environmentalists, LibDems and one Tory MP, going by those link pages.
No, it’s used by right leaning media organisations. So not left wing bias. Just a statement of fact.
So where do you stand on fracking, Jim? Do you think the UK can afford not to?
Fine by me.
Is it official NUJ policy?
The Daily Telegraph is pro-AGW – didn’t you know that?
And a few hacks getting excited over a headline is nothing to do with science – bit like the BBC, really.
How frequent were earthquakes before the fracking and how frequent afterwards?
Will anyone at the BBC put in some context. For once?
We are hearing the usual eco-fascist alarmism. No different to the AGW scaremongering, so expect the science on fracking and ‘earthquakes’ to be ‘settled’ sometime soon.
Hope the following puts things into perspective:
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/06/15/fracking-earthquakes-low-risk_n_1600515.html
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/06/15/fracking-earthquakes-low-risk_n_1600515.html
I wonder if Nick Pollard is on a fixed fee or whether the BBC is paying him on an hourly rate?
The ex- head of Sky News (as the BBC like to call him) or as he might equally be described – former BBC man – is supposed to have delivered his report into the stifling of the Newsnight investigation into Savile within 4-6 weeks.
That was as of 23rd october 2012 when George Entwistle was called to Parliament to answer questions from a Select Committee of MPs.
I make that a timescale of 28 to 42 days. So here we are 51 days later.
Yes, you guessed it, I’ve been looking at my advent calendar. And the other thing that keeps reminding me are the almost daily BBC reports trumpeting Labour Party calls for full public inquiries into this, that, and the other.
Let’s not forget who it is who are paying , yep, the Licence Payer.
http://www.guardian.co.uk/media/2012/nov/16/bbc-nick-pollard-alan-maclean-newsnight
‘BBC legal costs may spiral as Nick Pollard inquiry hires Hutton lawyer’
What bugs me is given that the BBC top brass are as honourable as Lord Patten insists, how come someone doesn’t simply put their hands up? OK fair cop, it was me that spiked Newsnight!
I think most knew that when you have the BBC in trouble, legal costs spiralling are a given.
But where’s the advice about the moving target that is the report delivery?
The chances of someone saying “OK fair cop, it was me that spiked Newsnight!” are as likely as Alistair Campbell admitting that he ordered the stiffing of David Kelly. This inquiry will be a whitewash, just like the Hutton one, and with the same toerag lawyer.
Just read that Jo Brand given top female comedy award.
Just goes to show that hatred of men and tampons can make you a career.
Who gave her the award?
Reminds me of the Bob Monkhouse joke:
“they laughed when I told them I was going to be a stand up comic. They’re not laughing now….”
Ch4 comedy awards. Main sponsor Fosters lager.
I personally wouldn’t give her one even with 2 bags on her head.
As they say in the N.E. way I luv fart and give us clue.
Channel Four. Well at least they have avoided Miranda Hart and Sarah Millican, beloved of the BBC…
or have they?
Suppose it was a bad year to give it to Jimmy Carr or Frank Boyle.
Being an unfunny windbag can make you a carrer …..
Brigstocke, Hardy, Steel and Thomas…that Iranian dollybird…chunky at best!
Now…Jimmy Tarbuck!…THERE`S the unfunniest man ever…useless Scouser who was Brucies caddy, and was lucky enough to find one of Lennons Beatles wigs in 1964.
And a fat windbag to boot…if only he`d let us!…arf, arf!
Then we have that revolting duo off the children’s programmes – Dick and Dom in Da Bungalow, whose anarchic stupidity helped in part to nurture a generation of disobedient, hyperactive children.
Iranian dollybird = Shappi Korsandhi.
Good call.
Makes Miranda Hart seem funny
sheesh! … that bad 🙁
Jo Brand’s joke that the best way to a man’s heart is through his sternum with a carving knife is a cracker. She’s great. Dick and Dom too.
Bet you hate mother-in-law jokes 😉
Can we add Eric Schmidt to the very few heroes of Capitalism, who stood firm whilst the poltroons at Starbucks let Occupy charge up and blag a latte last year…and now capitulate over paying taxes to Hodge and Entwhistle?
Let`s now hope that all those agitprpo “pay yer taxes” scumbags will now dump their laptops by Google HQ, and all pledge to never use Google again…and Google could inform the rest of us when the likes of Monbiot and Hodge dare to use their search engines again.
John Bull printing presses and a return to hotplates of Fleet St?…and just before they close, due to no-one reading their dead trees gargles like the Guardian?
Yes please Santa baby!
Arggggh! You’ve just triggered a flashback to Wapping in the 80s and all those battles by the valiant secondary-picketing miners to save the noble printing press and the jobs of their closed shop brethren! How we miss those loveable Luddites.
Unfunniest comedians ever
10. Arthur Askey
9. Dickie Henderson
8. Ted Rodgers
7. Hope and Keen(that count as two?)
6. Lenny and Gerry
5. Ade Edmondson
4. Lenny Henry(but of course!)
3. Russell Howard
2. Julian Clary
1. Alan Carr
1*…Russell Brand …who else!
6
10. John Bishop
9. Vic Reeves
8. Jimmy Carr
7. Stephen Fry
6. Vic Reeves
5. Rik Mayall
4. Lenny Henry
3. Dawn French
2. Jo Brand
1. Ben Elton
Correction: No.6 is Alexei Sayle
Alexei Sayle…sorry to omit this hopeless Hoxha harpie… and has never raised one laugh as far as I can recall!
Ta Mark!
I only know one joke and now at last I can tell it.
What was Arthur Askey’s last film role?
A low down bum.
He had both his legs amputated … I didn’t say it was a nice joke.
He was going to leave them to Douglas Bader who just beat him to the pearly gates.
Hat Tip.. Bernard Manning.
Cannon & Ball should be somewhere on that list, surely? And Little & Large.
But comedy is very subjective. Particularly at the BBC.
Cannon and Ball were mainly on ITV, but IMHO they were a poor copy of Morecambe and Wise. As for Little and Large, they were just too idiotic !
“comedy is very subjective. Particularly at the BBC.”
too right have you seen citizen khan?
even the title is a rip off of another failed, crap comedic endeavour
… power to the people eh!
I feel I must insert (oh perhaps the wrong expression) Miranda Hart and Jennifer Sanders. Both darlings of the beeb not matter what crap they dish up. Have to agree about the Brand creature. Complete oxygen thief who’s only use in this world or the next would be body part donation.
Hope and Keen!
I had forgotten them – and it took years!!!
Plenty of old timers – all rubbish. Do you remember another denizen of sixties comedy shows – Ray Martine. Terrible.
However, Jimmy Carr, Jo Brand an Ben Elton have it for me.
Oh of course – Jeremy Hardy – Radio 4 NewsQuiz.
The News Quiz, awful show!
Role call of shame:
Jeremy Hardy, Andy Hamilton, Fred MacAulay, Francis Wheen, Sue Perkins, Phill Jupitus, Miles Jupp and Susan Calman and that odious host
Sandi Tosswig!
I did rather enjoy ‘Harry and Paul’.
However, I have noticed after the last episode which was buried late on Sunday night, all the other episodes have been taken off iplayer poste- haste. I wonder why.
Sue Perkins has done well out of the BBC licence fee. Last time I had the misfortune to see her she was in a car with Liza Tarbuck (I think) doing a television drive up the Ho Chi Minh trail or some such.
While I think of it – does Victoria Coren (BBC 3) count as a comic?
If so put her in on the list
‘does Victoria Coren (BBC 3) count as a comic?’
No, but a few HIGNFY outings gets her my vote for some nifty one-liners, though I’m guessing the topic of nepotism will be a no-no.
I just admire the way her sneer can make Jezza Paxo in full flow look like Poos… in Boots.
Oops – I forgot Sandi Toxic !
i do remember, a painfully dreadful
sitcom, where they exhumed “blakey”
from on the buses, to play a porter?
dr beeching??? … where 25 mins felt like reading war & peace .. gives me the shivers
Oh, Doctor Beeching From the team that brought you Hi-De-Hi!
many thanks, i checked the link
” it’s infectiously joyous to watch ”
WHAT !?!*?*!? …….
who wrote that? … paul shane
Why does it actually surprise me that the twitter feed of the head of the BBC’s ‘telling you about them’ department basically says he…”..should not relied upon to tell you anything about the BBC that the corporation will stand behind”?
Julian Payne @juliantelly
Head of Press & Media Relations for the BBC. The tweets here are my own personal views.
What other corporate senior employee could write that, get away with that and still keep their credibility & job?
Full Aplology by Daily Telegraph to Margaret Hodge for tax story slur.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/newsbysector/industry/9740964/Margaret-Hodge-MP-apology.html
Where is BBBC’s apology for repeating the slur ad nasseum?
Guido has another…. take on ‘apologies’.
On the need for some and what causes others.
Like this one.
The BBC of course doesn’t ‘do’ apology unless through gritted teeth, insincerely or with a mate in the Graun signing ‘he doesn’t need to really’ as it oozes out.
And as a precedent, censure for mentioning other bodies’ ‘reporting’ when in error would mean the BBC may as well give up the day job.
You might try reading outside your comfort zone to get a more rounded view on slurs vs. necessary actual reporting.
ps: Aren’t you the Spellcheck Nazi on duty too. In which case… ad one more to your list.
That’ll be the apology in which a >£1million shareholding is described as “small”. Which says a lot about what relationship the apology has to reality.
Or, indeed, your average politician these days.
I don’t know about any other commenter here but her hypocrisy – in respect of accusations of which I make no apology whatsoever – relates to her taking advantage of the avoidance of inheritance tax/estate duty which was at least one consequence of her father’s settling the trust of which she is a major beneficary: AFAIAC what that trust is invested in is immaterial.
As to the Telegraph: the apology is primarily to Stemcor which the Telegraph acknowledges does not use transfer pricing to avoid tax. The Telegraph apologises only secondarily to Lady Hodge for asserting that she was “hypocritical” in respect of her personal and trust holdings in Stemcor since Stemcor does not avoid tax in the way the Telegraph alleged.
If accusations vis-a-vis Lady Hodge’s hypocrisy is the best prole can do to “embarrass” B-BBC then he is clearly getting desperate to demonstrate to his employer that he is earning his keep.
Poor, poor prole.
Thinks he`s started a pigpile…only to find that he`s the only one.
Look Prole, the woman let kids in her Islington childrens homes get abused-then described the one who complained as a “fantasist”…
and you`d expect anyone to apologise to THAT!
Oh, sorry-that was last months issue wasn`t it?…so doesn`t apply.
Stick around for Peter Hitchens later , on Q.T…it may not educate you as such, but you`ll be better informed at least!
The BBC has taught me to patronise…and if you take offence, then do send a complaint in to BBBC!
BBC’s house magazine Ariel has a feature known as “Overheard at the BBC”
I wouldn’t really bother; it’s more of your gentle rib-tickler than a laugh out loud roll on the floor in danger of losing your own behind sort of thing.
Oddly enough this feature has not been updated since 17th September 2012.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/ariel/19558501
And of course it was on 3rd October 2012 that ITV screened their documentary into claims of Savile’s underage sex abuse.
See Jimmy Savile sexual abuse timeline
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/home-news/jimmy-savile-sexual-abuse-scandal-a-timeline-of-events-as-they-unfolded-8221894.html
Events in this timeline run to 22nd October the day prior to George Entwistle promising MPs a report into the spiking of the Newsnight investigation within 4-6 weeks.
By my calculation that would have been a deadline of 4th December.
Any BBC insiders care to comment?
Anything “Overheard at the BBC”?
That Indy timeline is interesting, but given a week is a long time in politics and now 30′ a lifetime on twitter, the silence is deafening.
You could drop the BBC a line to ask ‘what’s up’; they just love to hear from viewers I am told.
Especially on stuff about them, their reporting… or lack of.
ps: That Ariel feed is precious.
So many to choose from, and most maybe explaining the cessation.
My fave though is:
‘…My male cat is lactating…’
Look out David, Schukman and Susan Watts, the ‘sciency-stuff’ beat has a new contender!
‘…It’s Gateway, not Gayway.Hmmm, you may want to delete your internet history!…’
‘…I’ve done a lot from park benches in the past…’
‘…The problem is that everything’s been rear-ended this year…’
Who was that bloke that used to come on here unfairly accusing the BBC of being some sort of gay mafia?
Richard Pinder ( 13 DEc at 12.36am) about Mensa,the BBC and climate bias.
Tony Newbery of Harmless Sky blog (http://ccgi.newbery1.plus.com) and Andrew Montford of Bishop Hill blog (http://bishophill.squarespace.com) have been involved with this for several years. Montford has written a pamphlet called The Propaganda Bureau documenting BBC developments on the subject, available at the BH website in various formats for 99p. Why not get in touch with them?
I see that Sally, the twaterer, Bercow has been served with a 50K suit for libel *wide evil grin face*
Epic fail, there was meant to be an evil chuckle embedded in there!
http://soundbible.com/200-Evil-Laugh.html
Myopic pretence of ‘Guardian’: there is no BBC-NUJ-‘Guardian’ full-tilt propaganda for gay marriage going on at present!
‘Guardian’ conclusion: there must be more such propaganda!
‘Guardian’ –
“BBC ‘should be bolder’ in depiction of lesbian, gay and bisexual people.
“LGB people ‘still relatively invisible’ on television and still stereotyped, according to BBC-commissioned report ” (!)
http://www.guardian.co.uk/media/2012/dec/13/bbc-depiction-lesbian-gay-bisexual?
Alternative non-advocacy view, largely censored by ‘left:
Brendan O’Neill:-
“The iron fist in the velvet glove of gay marriage
Under the radical cover of being pro-gay, the state is expanding its sovereignty over all of our private lives and most intimate relationships.”
http://www.spiked-online.com/site/article/13164/
Next week?: ‘Guardian-BBC-NUJ on why the ‘white British’ non-‘LGB’ minority of London must not be under-represented.
(Kidding.)
The traditional family is the major obstacle facing the liberal lunatics in their desire to get complete control of our lives via state sponsered viciousness.
The Spiked- on- Line article sounds about right.
Hands up those who ever really trusted Cameron?
I thought not but until the election we are stuck with him.
The best we can hope for is a collapse of the Conservative party before that date.
Despite Victoria Coren being a properly paid-up member of the leftist intelligensia (I think) and that I am poles apart politically, I have to say I don’t find her objectionable in any way. She has quite sharp wit and turn of phrase; her little asides on “Connect” make very nice little links in the programme.
… when she described Mad Gordon Macruin as, ‘a great man’ , I’m afraid that did it for me even if her poonts on Only Connect do remind me of baking bread.
She plays poker professionally and it shows in her almost always impassive facial expression: perhaps whether she is left wing or not is one of those things she has decided not to give away.
On the contrary, I think she has ruined Only Connect by talking too much, mostly about herself and her alcoholic urban life. She should just shut up and let us enjoy the contest.
If one of your parents worked at the BBC, does that guarantee you a job too?
Ricahrd Pinder
ps Forgot to say that Montford has also written a pamphlet , Nullius in Verba, charting the decline of the Royal Society in regard to climate matters.
D Murray – once again abbas denies the facts of history
bbc – ah … there are two versions of history here, though surely
yep! i agree THE TRUTH, and the bbc narrative
Good old Douglas Murray.
Amazed that the BBC still let him in, maybe it`s `coz he is gay or suchlike…certainly not because he knows his stuff on Israel…for that would make the likes of Bowen very sad.
Maybe we need a Douglas/Melanie/Peter H alert here-when they`re on, we should fire our guns into the air a la Gaza( or Harry and Paul of course!)
I wonder had Murray been a Palestinian sympathiser and complained about indiscriminate Israeli shelling of residential areas whether the BBC anchorman would have pulled him up on it as a view that’s ‘contested’.
Impartiality, BBC, it’s all we’re asking for.
The Queen seems as persuasive on the financial crisis as anyone from the ranks of the BBC-NUJ economics/ finance/business sectors such as Peston, Flanders, Davis, etc, etc:-
“Queen talks of ‘lax’ bankers and ‘toothless’ regulators behind financial crisis”
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/queen-elizabeth-II/9743032/Queen-talks-of-lax-bankers-and-toothless-regulators-behind-financial-crisis.html
Looking at that ‘Telegraph’ photo of the Queen at the Bank of England gold reserves, I wonder if she commented or thought: ‘there was much more gold here before that Mr Brown sold it?’
It’s not a fact which BBC-NUJ is inclined to mention much:-
‘Daily Mail –
“Revealed – How we lost out on £9 BILLION by Gordon Brown selling gold on the cheap .
“Price of bullion was at 20-year low when Brown sold 400 tonnes for £2bn in 1999.”
“Shortly after the price rallied from $300 an ounce to $1,920.30 in September 2011.
“George Osborne says the Government is now rebuilding the country’s gold reserves.”
By RICK DEWSBURY
Link to above:-
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2118319/Budget-2012-How-lost-9BILLION-Gordon-Brown-selling-gold-cheap.html
With no mention of Brown decoupling the Bank of England from political influence as his first “eye catching” initiative back in 1997 either.
Nu Labor caused all this…and merely apeing Majors cack-handed bunch of misfits is and was no excuse!
Things could only get better eh?
“Things can only get better”
“An end to Tory boom and bust”
“Whiter than white – an end to Tory sleaze”
“Edumacayshun educashon edukation”
“Tough on crime, tough if you’re a victim of crime”
They were good, weren’t they! With some help from the BBC, we’ll have them back soon, and all will be well.
http://www.labour-watch.com/brokenp.htm
Peter Hitchens on QT so I might just relax my boycott just for tonight. I bet I regret it-)
Thanks for telling us Mr Cheese!
Will be watching the great man, a stop watch to hand simply to time the % common sense before he gets hissed, booed or interrupted…my tribute to Craig etc.
It is the pantomine season, the great Hitchens will understand.
Topics?
Fracking
Syria.
Europe.
Ecomic plan B (continued)
…as for Entwhistle? Balen? Savile?…the new Led Zeppelin DVD?…probably not!
This will be Peter Hitchens’ sixth appearance in four years.
He now equals Melanie Phillips and second only to Kelvin Mackenzie among hacks.
Oh Jim…dear Jim.
Let us know how many times
a)Polly Toynbee.
b) Yasmin Alibiah-Brown
c) David Aaronovich
or indeed any other broadsheet wannabe Bonnie of Shirley has been on?
Were one to be of a mischievous disposition, one might suspect that Sir Patrick Moore just setting out on his BBC TV expert career in 2012 would do well to consider doing a Tootsie – or a perhaps in his case that should be a Mrs Doubtfire.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/ariel/20670305
‘The BBC wants more specialist women presenters’
‘Hosted by the BBC Academy and Broadcast Magazine, the pilot event is designed to get more female experts on television and radio in fields like science, politics, business and technology where they are under-represented.’
Really? Has someone been counting?
‘This was highlighted most recently during a Today programme discussion on breast cancer treatment when presenter John Humphrys asked a male contributor to imagine he was a woman, since no female experts were available.’
‘It prompted one journalist, Caroline Criado-Perez, to set up a website where women with expertise in particular fields could register their details for future media engagements.’
Oh that will be Caroline Criado-Perez ‘a freelance journalist, feminist campaigner’ (Huff post attribution – BBC doesn’t bother to tell us about Ms Criado-Perez. Perhaps Beeboids just know)
‘Criado-Perez says that three quarters of the media’s ‘experts’ are men and she believes the BBC ‘doesn’t try hard enough’ to identify female contributors for its programmes’
I wonder how fair and balanced Ms Criado-Perez is in her judgement? Given that the BBC is taking her views so seriously she must be a fair-minded commentator, not just a self-publicist and exponant of extreme left agit prop, no?
Here’s an example of her jounalism.
http://www.newstatesman.com/politics/2012/10/trenton-oldfield-our-pussy-riot
‘Is Trenton Oldfield Our Pussy Riot?’
‘Attack the elite and they won’t take it lying down, writes Caroline Criado-Perez.’
For a moemnt I had forgotten the name Trenton Oldfield. For just a second I thought he must have been the dog that ran amok chasing deer in the park (of course that was Fenton!) No in fact he was that berk (Cockney rhyming slang implication fully intended) who wrecked the Boat Race.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-20715623
Britain outside Europe – a bleak future?
Newsnight asked its Economics editor Paul Mason to sketch out the possible consequences of Britain leaving or staying in the European Union. Here he reports on how leaving the EU might be bad for us by the year 2020.
Leaving how a ‘sketching out’ becomes ‘reporting’, how is it that the possible consequences appear to only be bad? Or is this ‘us’ another inclusivity job speaking for the nation again, as he did with the toys out the pram?
It’s another superb piece from the home of the world’s top investigative journalists. You know, the sort who only ever get as far as looking at one side of the equation.
I should point out that there is ‘another’ view in balance, but between the structure of their blog page, the sequence on their twitter feed or the orientation of their FaceBook page, most would not easily notice.
It’s one thing to rig polar bear nocternals with an ‘it’s explained elsewhere’ excuse in a quickly closed for comments The Editor thread a week later, but trying to skew views of the EU options like this (and the ‘whatiffery’ fake footage is awful and, I would suggest, itself skewed) is really dire.
SHALE GAS go-ahead in UK
– Hurrah!
‘Cuadrilla’ (the exploration company):-
“Cuadrilla Resources welcomes Govt decision on fracking”
http://www.itv.com/news/update/2012-12-13/cuadrilla-resources-welcomes-govt-decision-on-fracking/
BBC-Harrabin:-
“Gas fracking: Ministers approve shale gas extraction”
By Roger Harrabin
BBC’s arch anti-shale gas propagandist, HARRABIN, is very annoyed, and continues his usual biased vitriol.
In sentence one, the whole thing is ‘controversial’.
(Note BBC-NUJ does not routinely use the word ‘controversial’ to describe homosexual marriage in its first sentence of any such report on that matter.)
And, of course, the last two uncritical paragraphs, Harrabin gives to the Labour Party.
Will Harrabin now resort to propagandising for undemocratic, high-cost ‘greenie direct action and occupation of drilling sites?
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-20707574
The complete twat from the DECC was able to spout made up wildly inflated figures of the rise in bills if the UK pursued gas as a method of generating electricity as opposed to the wildly deflated costs of continued subsidy to the windmill fraud. No challenge from the beeboid at all, made up fantasy figures based on mandated reductions in a harmless plant food, it would be hilarious if it was not destroying the economy and costing millions of jobs in Europe. Ending the insanity of reducing a plant food would slash our bills and give industry the boost it needs to create real jobs. The nut cases and whack jobs that infest the EU and its client regimes like the UK are destroying Europe in the quest to limit a plant food, that Monty Python territory.
“Not even that Evan Davis at the BBC can bend these statistics.”
By Quentin Letts.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2247227/Not-Evan-Davis-BBC-bend-statistics.html
‘Not even that Evan Davis at the BBC can bend these statistics’
Dunno, like my favourite Futurama robot, he seems genetically predisposed (h/t ‘Hugs’) to doing just that.
BBC-NUJ should be shamed on its IMMIGRATION cover up.
“Immigration and Labour’s unforgivable betrayal of the British people”
By STEPHEN GLOVER.
[Excerpt]:-
“In July 2011 Mark Thompson, the then Director-General of the BBC, wrote in a magazine article that ‘there have been occasions when the BBC, like the rest of the UK media, was very reticent about talking about immigration’.
“Isn’t this a shaming admission? Shouldn’t the BBC reflect the anxieties of decent, ordinary people? Mr Thompson declared in his piece that the Corporation has changed, but I doubt it really has.
“For example, on Tuesday evening, BBC2’s Newsnight brought together four people to discuss the census figures. Only one expressed any reservations about the pace and magnitude of immigration, which he did in the most measured and civilised way.”
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2247258/Immigration-Labours-unforgivable-betrayal-British-people.html
The BBC weren’t reticent to talk about immigration they were a) reticent to talk about it in a negative way and b) reticent to have it debated it in any way that could be called impartial.
Another blatantly biased piece against fracking on North West News, featuring a ‘residents’ group who are ‘against fracking’. Nice set of questions primed to elicit the ‘right’ answers e.g. ‘Was the fact there was a delay informing the Cuadrilla board of the earthquakes of concern to you?’ and not a single challenge from the point of view it will bring prosperity to the region, reduce wholesale gas prices (in the U.S. now a third of what they were), potentially provide energy security for the country for the foreseeable future, reduce CO2 emissions (can’t believe I just said that), that the U.S. has been doing it for years on a huge scale without any significant problems etc etc etc. Then back to the studios where the Cuadrilla exec is given a hard time (same set of questions) by a huffy BBC presenter.
But strange how this ‘residents group’, despite the perceived benefits to both the area and the country and the fact the process is very new to the UK, have already made their minds up they are ‘against fracking’. The practiced mantras their spokewoman was coming out with and the well-organised ‘feel’ to their website makes me smell a rat. This lot are definitely worthy of consideration for some ‘world beating investigative journalism’:
http://stopfyldefracking.org.uk/
Yes, BBC-NUJ-North West is following the anti-shale gas propaganda of Hampstead Harrabin.
Their thinking?: ‘let’s not examine economic benefits to Lancashire and Britain, let’s spread scare stories.’
BBC-NUJ North West is NOT fairly reflecting opinion of North West people; in fact, like the rest of the BBC-NUJ, it is reflecting the non-stop anti-shale gas propaganda from Hampstead Harrabin.
just listen to this 28 mins 30 😀
brought a tear to a glass eye, it did
old panto had to sit in the shallow end
http://www.bbc.co.uk/i/b01p6yhc/
Mystery voice being
a)Harriet Harman
b) Patricia Hewitt
c)Tessa Jowell
d)Caroline Lucas…
or was it Margaret Thatcher `avin a laff” with us all.
Give that lady another onion, some Fishermans Friends and some fags…what a panto performance!
I never laughed so many…listen and learn, Jo Brand!
I heard that in disbelief. She had an astonishingly good phone line, didn’t she? Sounded as though it was broadcast quality.
Cheers for this, Noggin.
Mother Earth! I weep! 🙂 🙂 🙂
“Lizzie, you got through that…”
So did I, just about…and without pissing my panties. 🙂
I hope they sent a councillor round to get her through this difficult time.
After a bit of research on t’internet, I’ve found some footage of an earlier appearance of ‘Lizzie’…
That is actually a very funny satire.
Kinda cute the ‘anchor’ asking if they can say ‘box’… all things that transpire later on.
But the set-up of an earthy Northern DM reader, batshit-deluded easy on the eye earth mother, one-track ‘artistic’ type all overseen by a clueless host pretty much describes the SKY or BBC Breakfast review/ers.
Only SKY now has Gillian Joseph. The BBC of course is still in a different, hideously unique time.
PS apologies to those who have already covered this above (that’ll teach me to read the whole thread through before hitting the keyboard).
Domain name: stopfyldefracking.org.uk
Registrant: Mr Simon Foster
Registrant type: UK Individual
Registrant’s address:
The registrant is a non-trading individual who has opted to have their address omitted from the WHOIS service.
Agreed the site looks too professional with the custom animated artwork and twitter embed. I smell a Greenpeace FOE rat – with Gazprom money.
“Green pressure groups get €66 million from the EU”
By Daniel Hannan (2010).
http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/news/danielhannan/100029193/green-pressure-groups-get-e66-million-from-the-eu/
Any chance it could be THIS Mr Simon Foster:
http://www.linkedin.com/profile/view?id=4254298&authType=NAME_SEARCH&authToken=wLoF&locale=en_US&srchid=e1b4a535-d34c-4d6e-ba1c-baf4cad80c79-0&srchindex=2&srchtotal=1997&goback=.fps_PBCK_Simon+Foster_*1_*1_*1_*1_*1_*1_*2_*1_Y_*1_*1_*1_false_1_R_*1_*51_*1_*51_true_*2_*2_*2_*2_*2_*2_*2_*2_*2_*2_*2_*2_*2_*2_*2_*2_*2_*2_*2_*2_*2&pvs=ps&trk=pp_profile_name_link
Digital Strategy & Product Development at BBC Worldwide Channels
Thanks but the guy looks too ‘clean’, if you know what I mean – not a hint of eco-fascist baggage.
Would be nice to find a BBC connection in this, though, as it felt like an utter con-job.
Note how Hampstead Harrabin not only presents his anti-shale gas bias on misnamed ‘Science/Environment’ pages, but gets the same propaganda stuff on ‘Business’ pages too!
So despite BBC-NUJ having a large number of economics/business/finance journalists, they have nothing to say on shale gas development; that is politically assigned to Hampstead Harrabin as the ‘business’ voice of bias, where he has a fracking axe to grind.
TUNISIA:
-INBBC’s Pollyanna Doucet (‘the humanity of the Taliban’) still doesn’t get the inherent threat from Islam.
Ms Doucet, revisiting Tunisia about two years after the misnamed ‘Arab Spring’ (now being re-branded ‘Arab uprisings’), falls for the trick of presuming that 71 year old Islamic leader, Ghannouchi, is a ‘moderate.’
For Pollyanna Doucet:-
“Ghannouchi Makes His Plans For Tunisia Perfectly Clear”
http://www.newenglishreview.org/blog_direct_link.cfm/blog_id/44541
” For Pollyanna Doucet:-”
She will not want to know, and will ignore any views contra to her own.
Do the Taliban poets have anyone who could write me an apposite pithy little verse for my Winterval cards?
I’m sure they could wire up some surprises for whoever opens them.
Let`s hope that they still are all being taught by Richard Reids Chemistry teacher then.
Take one pair of underpants from M&s…or maybe nick a trainer from JJB sports.
Get your burka bride to crush up some kidney beans for you…
Thankfully, most of them can`t read so well-hence their killing of girls that may be able to, one day…
Still-I`d not be buying glass fronted doors in case they choose to crash through them with full tanks of paraffin…what rhymes with Allah Akhbar?…not much in Arabic given the fact it`s the only line they ever seem to quote!
Nah, back to Doggerel Bank!
LIBERIA.
The misnamed British Broadcasting Corporation has been doubling up for some time as the ‘Liberia Broadcasting Corporation’, especially on ‘Today’.
Why is this expense series being broadcast?
Was there a poll of BBC listeners asking what series they wanted, and there was a clamour for an unending series on ‘Liberia’?
Or was it something which simply appealed to a handful of like-minded BBC-NUJ people in London?
There’s no denying that the 4 million Liberians have had plenty of BBC licence payers money spent on them (how much?).
Was it this which appealed to BBC-NUJ about Liberia?:-
“The Liberian constitution restricts citizenship to only people of black African descent”.”
(‘Wikipedia’.)
Would BBC ‘Today’ approve the following?:-
The British constitution restricts citizenship to only people of white European descent.
Come on!
Like John Humphrys always suddenly taking an interest in Greek interest rates when his olives begin to ripen in June…Liberia does dried guava and mangoes to die for, my dears!
Hence the Today stiffies queueing up to bag that flight to Malmaison, Freetown…and what a fruit punch that darling Filipina will be able to concoct for drinkie poos at Winter Solstice, my dears…and Freetowns drugging community may well be trickled down upon.
Still-we`re paying…so what the fuss?
BBC-Democrats: hammer Republicans still, but go easy on Obama, of course.
E.g., Mardell is not keen to analyse Obama’s foreign policy.
Perhaps this is one reason why:-
“Syrian Jihadists Get Obama’s Blessing”
http://frontpagemag.com/2012/joseph-klein/obama-gives-his-blessing-to-islamist-dominated-syrian-rebels/
By Joseph Klein.
Every news break seems to mention Maria Miller. Always trying to imply that her parents live there and Miller has received £90k, but not mentioning that:
She owns the house;
She lives there;
Her parents have lived with her for a long time.
More black propaganda from the bBC.
And absolutely not ‘identical’ to the Tony McNulty case, as the BBC report.
Ali Bongo’s Ol’ Snackbar!
Jeremy Bowen is putting in a shift for the 10 o’clock News. This time he is in Bahrain attending a demo that for intents and purposes appeared to have been set for his very own benefit (or so some people might say).
Hey BBC! I’ve got Arab Spring fatigue. It’s true, I went to my GP yesterday and got a sick note for it. So it’s official. I’m hoping Victoria Derbyshire will do a piece about me on her show – I think it’s called Radio Greviance – so I should be a shoo-in.
Just heard the introduction to Question Time.
Will Self is introduced as “Professor of Contemporary Thought” -at Brunel Uni, no less.
As opposed to the coke-snorting hack who got turfed off John Majors plane in the 1992 election campaign.
No doubt, there`ll be talk of “dumbing down” in education-but no possible link to how the likes of Self get to become “Professors”…even at Brunel Uni!
I stand corrected to myself!
Having heard Selfs couple of answers to the usual stuff(gay marriage, immigration and legalising drugs…yada, yada!)…his title is a true one.
He professes nothing but his own smug virtue-none of that God crap…and I can`t recall a better mouthpiece for the self-satisfied, drug-addled, louche, amoral zombie cult that is “Contemporary Thought” as mirrored by the BBC and its Guardian-hugging chums..
Truly frightening…dig the new breed of easy empty headed and shallow types like Will Self…you`ll be racist and homophobic if you dare argue with Professor Self!
a lofty “Professor of Contemporary Thought”
yet devoid of an original one … how drole
I always thought was thought.
It appears there now is a need to have another version of it that is, solely, ‘contemporary’.
I presume this means it therefore precludes history, and especially learning from it.
Mayfly-level commentary for those ill-equipped to handle much beyond basic functions.
Which explains much but excuses little.
Question Time again.
First question is whether the minority of Conservative MPs who oppose gay ‘marriage’ are out of touch.
Yes, that’s definitely the most important issue of the day. How can the bBBC find a way of attacking the Conservative party?
gay marriage is all everyone at work talks about, every single day, it’s getting a bit boring
well thats life at the bbc for you 😀 mavis
how does Will Self earn a living?
Journalism. And he writes books, his last one Booker short listed.
Jim, if you are going to respond, please answer the actual question, which was how he earns a living.
Charity gigs from those who need a one-degree of separation mouthpiece to invite on say what they can’t or don’t dare… yet is not a job.
And critical acclaim from fellow bubble-heads only impresses those who like hearing their own views coming back in a different accent.
gollem impressions
When a Guardianista writes about deceit at the BBC you know its serious – at least in their world. I read recently about people being really annoyed with this documentary, now it turns out there were fake scenes used, though the BBC denied it – at first.
Why doesn’t that surprise me?
BBC’s Biking Documentary Is Even Faker Than We Feared
Peter Walker, The Guardian
Educate, inform, and if that is not enough… fake it.
The new BBC for the noughties.
Stuart Hughes would approve, though one supposes his line manager would have a word… if pushed.
Gay people still “invisible” on television, BBC study finds
The BBC are really concentrating on the issue that are important to most people in this country. ::)
I’m being sarcastic
Not having seen the questions being posed to arrive at their conclusions I can’t make a real judgement, but from my experience I’d be willing to bet they were loaded in the usual BBC style.
I think so many in the BBC were conceived in a gay relationship – that would account for their output.
‘…a report has found…
… The study, commissioned by the BBC’
A credulous Telegraph clearly has not heard of PR-generating BBC ‘research’.
Highest recommended comment refers.
Another BBC non-story:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-20715253