David’s already commented on this but I thought it was worth contrasting the far more serious nature of the BBC’s actions in comparison to ‘phone hacking’.
The News of The World hacked a few celebrity phones and of course Millie Dowler’s…..tasteless, intrusive, immoral and illegal.
But not the end of the world and nobody died as a result of it.
However the BBC’s own undercover/underhand operation to obtain a story about life inside North Korea may well have put lives at risk……and how about those BBC’s ‘lies and deceptions’?:
LSE professors ‘at risk’ over BBC’s film on North Korea
BBC reporters who posed as students to gain access to communist North Korea have damaged the reputation of British universities and put academics at risk, higher education leaders have said.
A bitter row has erupted between the LSE and the BBC over a programme, due to be shown on Monday, that seeks to expose conditions within the “most rigidly controlled nation on earth”.
‘The university called on the corporation to pull the plug on the programme because of claims that students were fed “lies and deception” before the trip.
Prof George Gaskell, the university’s deputy director, said the trip posed dangers to other LSE academics.
“Some of my colleagues are in Africa, China and various other sensitive countries,” he said. “If their independence and integrity is challenged they may find themselves at considerable risk.”
The BBC says this:
‘The students were all explicitly warned about the potential risks of travelling to North Korea with the journalist.”
Really? Then the students are remarkably naive or they weren’t told that at all and the real dangers not emphasised. I imagine ‘spies’ are not treated with a great deal of sympathy in North Korea.
It looks as though the BBC will be shown to be either lying or downright disingenuous.
And it is getting to the point where evcen if the BBC’s account of events is true and the LSE professor is wrong – people won’t believe the BBC anyway.
“people won’t believe the BBC anyway” 😀 becoming such a regular occurrence isn t it?.
strange the insistence on airing this now … they know the possible danger, the harm that could ensue, even if it is for london school of extremists?
also … they have another option, if they are so, so keen to strike while the ahem! “iron is hot”. and be seen to be “on the ball”.
The dangers of sharia courts special … they had used the advertisements already too, and in light of moves by the mosque council, to hilariously try and make itself some kind of “viable” option, (shakes head) absurd, very viable programme to air.
The dangers of sharia special … on the panorama bbc site … yep! must have folded quicker than a cheap bedouin tent, appears to be all gone
do i smell “Napalm in the morning” ? … someone helpfully pressing the delete button? at al bbc?
It could make a national issue, even maybe an outcry while those concerned in its propagation, are desperate to keep it, under the radar
MPs are concerned about it – link
http://www.wharfedaleobserver.co.uk/news/10352126.Ilkley_MP_speaks_out_against_Mosques____Sharia_law_bid/?ref=twtrec
au contraire … anyone recall, douglas murray, the ukip call to concerns, local mps, even al bbc pet hate the edl , mel phillips, etc etc.
from a post yesterday.
“… meanwhile
bradford council for mosques – Muslim leaders in Bradford want to set up a islamic court in the city to set a good example for (ahem!), all other towns and cities in the UK to follow. …. UH OH! HELLO!
Talks were taking place for Bradford to have its own Sharia panel … hmmmm get this
“There is a strong case for the Shariah councils to be better resourced and supported to make their work standardised to ensure consistency and quality across the board.”
Mo Mushtaq “the work of the Shariah council now needed to be recognised at Government level and better resourced with an agreed framework”. ???????
oh! other sterling brainwashing … i mean enriching BCM projects
Young Girls Development Project: The project provides a safe space, (who are they in danger from, one asks?) for Muslim young girls to meet, plan activities and receive support from each other and a trained Muslim women youth worker …
(trained in what? and by who?, sharia compliant?)
sounds slightly suspicious to me, for all these “endangered” little cherubs … i d be interested in the list of the allowed “activities”
“no conspiracy after all” … erm what? … to instill sharia courts? 😀
just kidding 😀
This ‘cloak and dagger’ investigative journalism approach might satisfy those who would normally criticise the BBC for holding a more risk averse ‘health and safety’ policy, compared with their commercial counterparts. In my experience they are wrong to think that way
For all the LSE shortcomings, (and they do have quite a few, (http://sheikyermami.com/2011/03/06/the-lse-scandal-is-just-the-tip-of-the-iceberg/ ), this educational institute does have a valid complaint against the BBC.
Things could have gone horribly wrong had the accompanying Korean security mandarins got wind of the broadcasters role. What would have in normal circumstances been an incredible educational adventure for the LSE students could have easily turned into a much more detailed look into this ‘socialist utopias’ mindset.
Just watching the usually pants Sky paper review, and even the mellow media luvvie Sam Delaney appears less than BBC supportive.
Seems no one yet knows what the actual facts are, as there are two versions, but the BBC’s usual airy self-justifications were not being bought… At all.
This is the supposed most trusted broadcaster in the world with, for once, a named senior market rate on record with the BBC’s version of what happened.
Well, there seems a queue of folk with an alternative, and if this is borne out that would mean the BBC has been either grossly misinformed or opted to persist in inaccuracy. And has opted to pass this on to the paying public.
That is not a good basis of education or information one needs to be compelled to fund to trust.
But one presumes a few side-steps, garden leave, rehiring and extra staff hires will be the BBC’s trusted moving on response.
It will be an interesting programme tonight, and its ratings are guaranteed. The insights garnered will be with luck be worth it… Presuming one can rely on the BBC editorial filter not making it more of a ‘narrative’ than reporting.
And no members of the group used in cover get a funny feeling in their calf when a guy with a brolly brushes past a few months’ hence.
Over dinner last night, this was discussed around the table. It was a consensus by us all that, if they had been *caught out* for what they were, (spies) then in all probability we would not have heard from them or seen them ever again. Those around the table were from all political divides and we all came to the same conclusion. Crass stupidity from the management of the BBC and one has to ask the question, just who is telling the truth here?
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/culture/tvandradio/bbc/9994176/Risking-students-lives-in-North-Korea-was-worth-it-says-BBC.html
An interesting response.
Some commenters noting the variability between the usual BBC ‘in-triplicate’ H&S demands before any project for staff, but what appears a casual record-free conversation (maybe one of those corridor jobs the astoundingly uncurious bbc market rates like to hold) with the LSE representatives… When engaging in a covert mission to what could hardly be equated to checking out food hygiene at Butlins.
Exactly.
Just imagine the BBC’s response if the head of Mega Bank had explained that they had totally explained the risks before advising widows and orphans to invest in the Emerging Markets Mining Death Or Glory Fund but – gosh darn it – they just couldn’t find any evidence of that.
I don’t think the interviewers on the Toady program would be quite as ready to shrug that off, which is what really grates. The BBC demand that either everyone on the right drop their trousers and submit to a full prostate exam or they get the full, ‘have you got something to hide’ treatment, complete with sinister music and black & white photography. Meanwhile, fellow members of La Costra Lefta get tea & sympathy about the tin-foil hat wearing loons questioning their integrity (see ‘Climategate’ for further details).
Yep,remember the BBC’s response to G4S apparently abandoning some employees under a brdige…for a couple of hours.
This comment (of several, factual, calm points made) seems worthy of a share:
‘keithlondon
More BBC hypocrisy on Radio 4 this morning when Ceri Thomas agreed that all BBC staffers are required to sign-off a WRITTEN warning/statement on the risks involved of such activities – but justified only a VERBAL (and apparently very mixed/muddled) statement to the students on the grounds “that it wouldn’t have made any difference”.
If a WRITTEN warning/statement makes no difference, then why do BBC demand it in the case of their own staffers?
If a WRITTEN warning/statement makes no difference, then what possible reason was there for NOT asking it of the students?
Unfortunately so typical of the Beeb – one rule for itself, and another for everyone else. Total hypocrisy!
It seems, sadly, only too likely that the BBC and those at the top will ride their latest stuff-up out on the basis they really are unique, and unaccountable.
In the spirit of factual knowledge sharing, and the ideological empathy that must surely be felt for fellow-travellers from the LSE, can any of those usually quick to fill these threads with explanatory thoughts on BBC statements and actions care to chip in these?
Or is this another one being treated in the same way as narratively-inconvenient stories are by the £4Bpa most trusted BBC ‘news’ filters?
I just feel we are not being told everything on the BBC. Did the LSE staff approach the BBC or did the BBC approach to North Korea? Did the BBC ask the people leading the trip if they could join it? If they did surely the LSE staff should have asked their seniors for approval. The BBC explained that when the students got to China they were asked again if they were willing for the BBC to join them – but what if one (or two) had said ‘no’. Would the students have had to drop out or would the BBC not have joined them? What were the students studying? Might the BBC have suggested they could have had some work experience with Auntie if they had said ‘yes’?
So many questions and so few answers.
‘but what if one (or two) had said ‘no’
It would appear the thinking is much the same as that articulated by the BBC and some in sterling defence of the unique funding model the BBC licence fee is supported by, namely the freedom to say no, but in consequence essentially live in a cave and hope no thugs come calling anyway.
“So many questions and so few answers.”
Absolutely Deborah. My take (subject to having been out all day and not kept up with breaking news) is that the BBC,through the the good offices of Mrs Sweeney, did in fact do a deal with the LSEs politburo but they neglected to tell their proletariat.And now its hit the fan Prof.Graig Calhoun is handing off the blame to his erstwhile comrades at the BBC.
Just a correction, Alan; the Leveson enquiry established that there was NO EVIDENCE to support the claim that NofW hacked Millie Dowlers message box. It was concluded that either the phone carrier techs or the police deleted messages in the in-box. This goes to show how successful the brain washing of the media is. Despite the evidence they have successfully kept the info under a rock.
This was confirmed by Jeremy Vine on his show at the time. The BBC and other media outlets continued to implicate the Dowler cause without actually making assertions to the veracity of the claim.
In the meantime Murdoch donated £2m to the family in compensation for the alleged claims. The Dowlers seem not to have heard the news and have neither offered to return the donation or offer any form of apology. They have kept a low profile though.
Damn right.
There is no evidence that any journalist accessed Minnie Dowler’s phone beyond a vague statement that one journalist had her number written down.
It must be simple enough to prove after all. Do not the phone company have a list of all numbers that successfully called the phone?
There is some irony in there somewhere.
A lefty biased broadcaster called the BBC (with loads of commies) and not known for its hard hitting investigative journalism. When did they last win an award? The BBC (student journalist wing of New Labour) dupes a lefty academic polytechnic (full of commies) by using them as cover to spy on a country that is reported to have one or two commies. The result of this country getting wind of investigative journalism would most likely have resulted in a kangaroo court condemning these western commies of spying on this commie country.
Beautiful, you couldn’t make it up
Dear BBC since when has not knowing something stopped the torture to see if you know anything ? not telling the students everything won’t protect them one bit in! fact giving them all the info and instructing them to hand it over to the authorities if arrested would have at least given them a chance !sod your reporters as they made the informed choice that you denied these young people ! !
I am most worried that the bBBC spies will have learned even more
broadcastingbrainwashing techniques from their friends in North Korea.“BBC crew ‘used students at top university as human shields to film undercover in North Korea.’
“Three Panorama journalists said to have put lives in danger by secret filming.
“School authorities had ‘no knowledge of trip’ or of its planning’ they said.”
By VANESSA ALLEN
Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2308876/BBC-crew-used-students-university-human-shields-film-undercover-North-Korea.html#ixzz2QXKixoqD
And yesterday’s story in the Daily Mail:
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2308705/Inside-North-Korea-A-rare-dispatch-deep-lunatic-rogue-state-enslaved-Zombie-Sons.html
The only thing concistent with the “newspaper” you continually quote is their inconsistency.
Consistency can be over-rated.
Just as to some the source can add or detract value (depending) vs. the veracity of any content depending on the tribal top trumps that controls their mindset. Might it not be that the story is less now the BBC scooping a sneaky peak within NK, than how they set about managing it as the background oozes forth into the public domain?
There are some key questions posed of the BBC outstanding on the current state of play that you and your colleagues have been invited to contribute upon, but so far have steered well clear of.
But a tabloid rag does what tabloid rags (and the the BBC) do, and turns on anything that may offer the greater story ratings as things ‘evolve’, and all of a sudden you are citing the DM’s dubious editorial continuity in defence of the BBC failing to perform as well as it might?
That is consistent, at least.
Nothing new revealed by Sweeney here. One assumes he saved the juicy stuff for Panorama. Otherwise, one might have to wonder if this retread of every single other article on North Korea was worth the risk.
And since when did military officers carry weapons when going to the circus? Why is Sweeney suspicious at them being unarmed?
Consistantly clutching at straws?
The gig was organised through BBC and sweeney must have sold it on to Mail before Calhoun started squeeling to the press.
Also, compare the news reporting of the news hacking scandal with the thousands of premature deaths in the NHS…….compare the country being made nearly bankrupt by the Labour government with a few thousand spent on a funeral.