The New Cultural Forum’s review of the BBC’s coverage of immigration by Edest has been released:
Groupthink: Can we trust the BBC on immigration?
The Review of the BBC’s Coverage Of Immigration
Bookmark the permalink.
Search Biased BBC
Recent Comments
- tomo Dec 22, 17:53
Weekend 21st December 2024
[img]https://i.ibb.co/DMrTDjx/chrome-y-OIa6k-JNIt.png[/img] - atlas_shrugged Dec 22, 17:26
Weekend 21st December 2024
This guy is actually quite funny: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iaPbUvPOkD8 Apologies if this has been posted before. - Fedup2 Dec 22, 17:19
Weekend 21st December 2024
Excellent – the Marxists legislating to ban unapproved donations to other political parties – just a step to banning other… - atlas_shrugged Dec 22, 17:18
Weekend 21st December 2024
The wonders of bBC output. Where would we be without Planet Earth: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=d2A07ToxkTI This is a 100% genuine episode bBC… - Fedup2 Dec 22, 16:56
Weekend 21st December 2024
Far right on the march then ? Or is it someone else …? - Fedup2 Dec 22, 16:55
Weekend 21st December 2024
Yeah the dog don’t hunt – pure Southport disinformation … - JohnC Dec 22, 16:50
Weekend 21st December 2024
The question of why an anti-Muslim activist would carry out mass murder of Christians at a Christmas fair is a… - Lefty Wright Dec 22, 16:43
Weekend 21st December 2024
Pug Would a £100 million donation to Labour by Musk see a change in BBC reporting? How dare you Sir!…
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
The BBC does not report the news in an impartial and honest way. Instead it chooses to present news to support its own ideology. An ideology that is different to the democratic traditions and established cultures of this country. By doing this for over a decade, the BBC has already assisted changes that affect everyone.
The BBC have been complicit in denying the people a democratic choice over these changes. The “Groupthink: Can we trust the BBC on immigration?” document ends with:
More than any other policy, immigration has changed – and continues to change – British society. And unlike almost any other, this is a change that decent, liberal-minded opponents cannot reverse. For that reason, the issue of immigration must be treated sceptically, argued fairly and aired honestly as part of the national conversation. This is a conversation that can only happen if the BBC takes the lead.
The BBC will never take that lead. It would be contrary to the fulfilment of its ideological aspirations that it wants to impose on us all.
Yes, this is why the BBC’s disinformation is very serious, because the effects of mass immigration are hard – if not impossible – to reverse.
On climate change, the BBC bias will prove costly but we could go back to burning more fossil fuels after perfecting renewable sources as far as possible. Similarly, the UK could abandon nuclear power and/or weapons: facilities would take time and money to decommission but we could conceivably return to them later. We could even withdraw from NATO and/or the EU; I’m not arguing for or against, but it would be possible if membership was no longer worthwhile.
Mass immigration changes the country in a different way altogether; this much must be obvious to a teenager, let alone to supposedly educated media types. Short of voluntary and/or financially assisted repatriation, its effects cannot be reversed and are likely to increase because of higher birth-rates among newer arrivals. Islamic Fundamentalism makes the situation more threatening still. The BBC’s bias on this matter and lack of self-criticism have done Britain great damage.
Surely you mean “net migration”?
I find the BBC view on immigration quite amusing. I can’t help but get the sense they view it through their vain, metropolitan elite prism.
In their world, they see a Britain where everyday should be like an episode of Nigel Slater’s Suppers, where topics like the working class and immigration are games of semantics within erudite company over a fine wine and artisan bread and these topics allow them to pretend they’re “roughing it” a bit.
In other words they’re fine with it whilst it doesn’t impinge on that lifestyle, but they’ll probably be the first to bleat when it’s right on their doorstep. They’re a bit like those folk who move to the country and then want the cows to stop smelling and the cockerels to stop crowing so early
Exactly.
From page 21 of the report:
“Indeed, this was the complaint made about
people of middle class and middle income by East
Londoners in the Young Foundation’s report, The
New East End – that they saw ethnic diversity as
something to add spice to their lives, to make them
feel like they were on holiday, to visit, before moving
on up the housing ladder. They did not appreciate
that for locals it was their home.”
More immigrants equals more households equals more televisions equals more licence fees equals more champagne fueled drunken orgies at Al Beeb Mosque.
“The BBC’s coverage matched almost exactly that of the
Guardian.”
Who would have thought it?!!
I have read large sections of the report and thought it fair and balanced which is something that you can never say about the BBC’s coverage.
The BBC is the mouthpiece of the liberal elite which now run the country. Having ‘invited’ so many immigrants into this country without any mandate, from the British people they , indeed almost certainly against the wishes of the people, they are now trying to forge a multicultural society.
To do so they must ;
Suppress any opinions that raise doubts about the project, so they curtail free speech.
Try and make any resentment of the mass immigration socially unacceptable, so they pass laws to do so and use the BBC to the full to set and reinforce the new social norms by using the news , drama , documentaries to the full.
Suppress incidents where the immigrant population acts against the indigenous population, so they under report or suppress any such incidents in the news.
They must try to establish a history where Britain has always been host to groups of immigrants and been enriched by them. So they boost up stories like Mary Seacoal and generally try to re-write history to suit that narrative. Conveniently ignoring the fact that previous groups of migrants were very small in comparison to the present waves.
I am sure that the BBC believe that they are fully justified in abandoning their founding principles of truth and impartiality because they are acting on behalf of a liberal cause for the greater good. The fact that a majority of the British people don’t agree with them is unfortunate but no reason not plough on.
“I have read large sections of the report and thought it fair and balanced which is something that you can never say about the BBC’s coverage.”
Agree. However, “fair and balanced” does not mean watered down. I’m halfway through it and, in many respects, the damned organisation is worse than I thought it was.
Recommended reading.
“I am sure that the BBC believe that they are fully justified in abandoning their founding principles of truth and impartiality because they are acting on behalf of a liberal cause…”
They’ll reward themselves very well from your wallet, for such ‘sacrifices’.
I have only skimmed through the report. But one sentence in the conclusion that got me. “And what makes the BBC’s bias more pervasive
is that it is not intentional. The BBC takes an angle
on an issue not because it has an agenda, but because,
in an organisation as prone to the ‘echo chamber’
effect as any other, it has not suitably addressed
the ‘what if’ of another voice.”
Where is the proof of the assertion ‘it is not intentional’; if you analyse their output a fair minded person can only come to the conclusion that it is orchestrated. Therefore it IS intentional.
How could the BBC plod on like a tortoise for decades, leaving a trail of bias behind, without it being intended? My (skim) reading of the document is that it is trying to engage the BBC in a discussion on how it can reduce its inherent bias. It seems to not want to directly accuse the BBC of a policy of consistent targeted bias.
The document is very good in that it contains a lot of referenced evidence of bias. The content really needs to be easily searchable on the web – unfortunately the document format is not ideal.
The BBC’s attempted cover-up of their CMEP meeting (28gate) looked pretty intentional to me.
It’s both. 28-Gate, Mark Thompson’s statement about how the BBC treats Mohammedans, and the memo from Helen Boaden about not using the “T-word” lest they offend a certain segment of the World Service audience, among other things, prove that there are times when there’s a directive from the top. The directives we know of are all from the Left, from a specific metro-liberal approach.
Then we have instances like Helen Boaden admitting that their “commitment to diversity” (a phrase one could parse for eternity) is so entrenched in Beeboids’ minds that they often let it interfere with their journalism, the clear groupthink on certain issues evident in our Twitter collection, and Mark Mardell’s Left-wing musings at the BBC CoJ meeting with absolute approval demonstrate that the bias often happens naturally, due to the inherent nature and personalities who make up the vast majority of production staff. There’s no need for an orchestrated approach if they all think the same way about major issues.
There’s much more evidence for both manifestations of bias, as we’ve all seen. Upgrading the management structure will fix none of this.
It’s intentional all right.
There is a rule that no programs with political content can be shown during the five weeks before a general election – except of course for news.
On 24 February 2010, shortly before the five-week “cut-off” for the May general election the BBC showed a prime time BBC1 documentary called “The day the immigrants left”. It was a ridiculously contrived programme comparing European immigrants (often with degrees) with long-term unemployed British. The conclusion the BBC arrived at after comparing these two carefully selected but totally disparate groups, was inevitably used to reinforce the ‘hard-working foreigner versus lazy British scrounger’ narrative so often trotted out by pro-immigration groups.
Immigration was a major factor in the political debate at the time, the BBC knew this, but sneaked in this prime time documentary just before the deadline. I remember reading comments on the Guardian and other websites which showed the impact it had had; “well that pretty much blows the Tory anti-immigration argument out of the water doesn’t it” was a typical reaction of many of those who saw it.
It was a great bit of propaganda for Labour, who probably benefited by one or two percentage points.
And after that the BBC turned into the Lord Ashcroft Channel for a week, pounding away on all outlets about Ashcroft’s non-dom status. Poor call me Dave has gone for a fixed term parliaments, so expect more of the same in February/March 2015 .
Immigration is the major issue which affects all other matters that are of vital importance to the country .You name it immigration is bound to affect it.
The coming change to a majority minority population for London and other cities is without historical precedent.
The people have been changed and so inevitably will these cities and the nation. The motives of those who permitted it are now irrelevant .
We all know it was done without any mandate. It was the liberal fantasies made into a reality .
Liberalism is still in the ascendant. Weakening but still able to damage England. The BBC is at the core of this liberalism. The hive has been busy recruiting the bees.
The BBC is not on my side. It stands for a discredited way of looking at the world.
Liberalism is cowardly. It fears what it sees as strength- Islamic fundamentalism- and bullies those it perceives as weak- the traditional conservative Englishman and all those who reject the tenets of fantasy liberalism .
It is doomed to fail. Without a basis in reality and lacking courage it has nowhere to go but oblivion.
We must not underestimate it’s viciousness as it declines.
“Liberalism is cowardly. It fears what it sees as strength- Islamic fundamentalism- and bullies those it perceives as weak- the traditional conservative Englishman and all those who reject the tenets of fantasy liberalism .
It is doomed to fail. Without a basis in reality and lacking courage it has nowhere to go but oblivion.
We must not underestimate it’s viciousness as it declines.”
Superbly put Dave. well done
BBC-NUJ: paving the way for further Turkisation of Britain.
Further to the 500,00 people of Turkish origin already in the U.K., BBC-NUJ does its political bit to give a voice to Turks in U.K on their current Islam problems in Turkey:-
“Turkey protests ‘dividing UK’s Turkish population'”
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-22753256
As the Germans have found, Turks bring their Islamic and Turkish affiliations with them when they immigrate/colonise.
And this will be on a massive scale if/ when the West’s political class (inc BBC-NUJ) get 80 million Turks into the E.U, as everyone from Obama. E.U., Erdogan, Cameron, Clegg, Miliband, BBC-NUJ, etc., campaigns for.
‘White flight’ etc from Londonistan; a ‘RT’ not a INBBC report-
(inc video clip)-
“Londonistan: Lebanese Immigrant Complains There Are Too Many European Immigrants”
http://islamversuseurope.blogspot.com.au/2013/06/londonistan-lebanese-immigrant.html
I read somewhere:
“‘Multiculturalism’ is a politically correct word for ‘apartheid’.”
Multiculturalism is the manure in which Islamic extremism grows.
Immigration and pressure on Hospital A & E depts.
MP mentions the politically unmentionable (to BBC-NUJ) re-immigrants and pressure on A & E-
“Migrants partly to blame for A&E waiting times, Tory MP says”
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/health/healthnews/10097888/Migrants-partly-to-blame-for-AandE-waiting-times-Tory-MP-says.html
BBC-NUJ:-
“NHS ‘misses A&E waiting time target'”
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-22758157
” How soaring immigration has piled on the pressure.”
By Chris Skidmore, MP.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2334860/CHRIS-SKIDMORE-MP-How-soaring-immigration-piled-pressure.html
the immigration debate is out of are control,there is nothing we can do about,we just have to put up with having millions of people coming to are country with customs and cultures that are alien to us,i bet you this,if your still alive in 40 years time we will be still having the same debate about immigration with false promises and lies by the goverment in power that they will try and limit the numbers of people coming into england,the sad fact is this is one important issue we will never have control over ever.
It is very well argued, although West could have used more evidence, particularly regarding the US coverage. I wonder if it’s worth sending him data at this point.
Ed West’s ‘Groupthink: Can we trust the
BBC on immigration?’ is well argued.
But will it have any effect on reforming BBC bias on immigration?
BBC’s political position seems unassailable, with no political party prepared to take it on.
The weakest part of the Review is the concluding ‘Recommendations’ which are like to remain a ‘wish-list,’ rather than something to be implemented.
The BBC presumes to be the Government we all would like to have, if only the politicians would scoot off to the Lords.
Martin Bell was the first BBC candidate…and ever since, the white linen suits of the BBC see themselves as Pollys parrots in exile, forever in rebellion with the demos.
If only we`d all just swallow the Guardian once it had been laid over the poor and vulnerable. If only we`d just concur with their Common Purpose agenda, and let them lead us into the EURabian House of Yusuf Islam.
If only it`d be an eco friendly lagging for the coffin of whitey and his incessant racist, Christian view of law and t`ing…didn`t Blair deal with that one?
The BBC is just the multikulti chocolate fountain and queasy fondue for the nation as it sees it. It has long given up on entertainment..it`s all about Gerbils for Goebbels these days.
Stuff `em…I don`t intend to be buried in their broadsheet bullsheets…they don`t deserve the peace of our graves, or those of our kids either.
Time to neuter them…these fops would want nothing else really!
In the collective mind of the BBC it is only ever acceptable to discuss the thorny topic of immigration if you use safe phrases such as “vibrant, colourful, enriching and diverse”. Anyone straying from these positive words should be treated with suspicion, challenged and, if possible, exposed as a racist; the greatest sin of all in Beeb land. Sadly they are not alone. The entire political establishment become schizophrenic when confronted by an irate voter who hasn’t read the script. I often see a politician interviewed in the garden of his beautiful home in the shires. He’s telling us how good immigration has been for our nation, how we have benefited culturally and financially. The man is so enthusiastic he’s almost salivating. It always leaves me wondering why this honest chap isn’t living in Peckham…
I drove through Londistan the other day, full of immigrants and strange looking whites….must be Beboids.
An excellent report. Turns out it’s even worse than I thought – detailing alot of pro-immigration BBC bias I missed when out of the country from 2000-2002. Shocking. I guess Ed West can kiss goodbye to any hopes he might have had of breaking into television now. He’s gone straight to the top of the BBC’s blacklist – except for the odd occasion when they need the an unappealing anti-immgration speaker for ‘balance’ on a panel with 4 pro-immigration speakers.
Apparently British people get a better picture of the mass immigration crisis in London from Russian TV (‘RT’) than they do from the mass immigration propagandising BBC-NUJ:-
“White Flight: Diversity extremes push Londoners’ exodus”
(4 min video clip)
Weird how I can’t find any comments over at Ed West’s site from Scott or Dez or Albaman or the rest of our critics. Why, it’s almost as if they aren’t actually interested in defending the BBC at all, and have some other motivation for commenting here.