The BBC….Just Slow or Wilful Blindness?



The BBC’s latest review on impartiality says:

Today’s BBC gives due weight to all significant strands of opinion on the subject of immigration. 


Well Sir Andrew Green from Migration Watch was certainly given a fair interview recently on the Today programme, and David Goodhart from Demos has had a few interviews on his ‘controversial’ book about the effects of immigration…but he is a ‘safe’ lefty.

How much longer the BBC will maintain this approach to reporting or discussing immigration might be open to question….the possibility is that this new approach is merely a response to the knowledge that they were under observation for the purposes of this review.


Certainly when you listen to everyday programmes on the BBC the same old attitudes prevail….talk of school overcrowding, and immigration usually doesn’t get mentioned, the same with housing or the NHS….occasionally the presenter will refer to immigration but only because he/she has been deluged with emails or texts pointing out immigration is the main driver of overcrowding and other problems and he/she realises they can’t get away with not mentioning it. 


By coincidence the government has today published its own report into the effects of imigration:

Immigrants create overcrowding and fuel tensions, report finds

Asylum seekers, refugees and low-skilled immigrants are creating overcrowding, fueling community tensions and putting pressure on the NHS, a government report has found.



Never mind schools, housing and jobs, more cars on the roads and increased crime.


The BBC’s own report states:

The BBC was slow to reflect the weight of concern in the wider community about issues arising from immigration.” wasn’t ‘slow‘…it deliberately refused to cover the damaging effects of mass immigration and repeatedly pushed  a positive narrative of ‘immigration is beneficial’ to the UK both economically and socially.

The effect of this is that politicians have been allowed to put into practice immigration policies that are politically and ideologically motivated and against the interests of the existing population with highly damaging effects. 

The BBC has been complicit in this and has ‘aided and abetted’ what amounts to corrupt political practice by the Labour Party.

What is needed, rather than evermore internally generated reviews,  is an independent ‘Leveson Inquiry’ for the BBC that looks into how its own political leanings effect its output and how that output then effects the politics and society as a whole.

The inquiry should be legally based and have the power to force changes upon the BBC…should they be needed…..perhaps we might also have running alongside a trial of the polticians who implemented such corrupt policies.



The power of BBC news is once again confirmed by this report from Reuters…though one of the co-authors is ex BBC man Richard Sambrook….which tells us of ‘the importance of mainstream TV bulletins for communicating significant international news. BBC TV news programmes still play an important role in setting the wider news agenda.’

The Reuters Institute for the Study of Journalism has looked at the BBC’s coverage online and on its main TV bulletins – and has looked at the audiences’ behaviour. There are some surprises.

Firstly, TV bulletins still rule. In spite of all the discussion of the merits of online, of social media, of interactivity, choice and convenience it was clear that more people got their news of these big international events from the main bulletins at 6 and 10 on BBC1 than from the BBC website.

So editors of the main TV bulletins still set the agenda for other outlets and platforms and provide the mass viewing experience. We found no evidence of online coverage driving TV viewing.


Bookmark the permalink.

33 Responses to The BBC….Just Slow or Wilful Blindness?

  1. stuart says:

    try sending an e mail to nicky cambell ,vicky,shelagh,bozo bacon,peter allen,stephen nolan on radio 5 live with your concerns over immigration,you have more chance of winning the national lottery than having your e mail read out. thats why the daily mail and exists to give a different point of view that is never raised in the so called mainstream media.


    • noggin says:

      “sending an e mail to nicky cambell ”
      but not this morning … he s too busy
      droning on about “is it a disaster for democracy ” in Egypt? … (he s got a row of political islamists on the line
      no doubt, like the rep from the MB, fresh from her monologue on Paxman last night).
      HELLO! … by that, does he mean MB democracy? … one vote thats it, pharaoh Morsi democracy?,
      perhaps he didn t see the dancing and fireworks in the against camp …
      … along side the eye popping, vein popping fury of the islamists outside the mosques … and over 100 revenge rapes to boot.

      deja vu, almost back to Mubarak days, before the Brotherhoods 30 yr plan, came to fruition isn t it.


      • noggin says:

        and Drearybyshire carries on the Egypt narrative, Obamas concern ya da ya da
        (yep always consistent: support pro-Sharia, Islamic supremacist elements).
        before a god-awful drone/report on the wonderful benefits mass immigration has bought us?
        Roving around the multi kulti erm utopias?
        of Rotherham, and Birmingham.

        just nauseating


    • uncle bup says:

      yes amazing ain’t it.

      Chucklin’ Nikki only ever seems to get lozotex with safe leftie cuddly comments in them.


  2. Anthem says:

    For: “The BBC was slow to reflect the weight of concern in the wider community about issues arising from immigration.

    Read: “We failed to influence public opinion on this occasion.”

    You can’t keep telling people that 1+1=3. People are generally able to see the truth of the matter for themselves and the truth will out eventually.


  3. Joshaw says:

    “You can’t keep telling people that 1+1=3. People are generally able to see the truth of the matter for themselves and the truth will out eventually.”

    Eventually, yes. But they’ve got what they wanted. Only extreme measures, possibly in response to extreme provocation, would change things now. Job done.


  4. Ralph says:

    The best thing to do is let the BBC carry on on its slow death spiral. As they keep pandering to the dwindling readership of papers like the Guardian more and more people are cottoning on to their bias.


    • DP111 says:

      It wont work, as the BBC is effectively taxpayer funded.


      • Ralph says:

        The telly tax works on consent. If the BBC lose that by appealing to a narrow group.


    • Kingmaker says:

      The best thing to do is to remove the license fee, and force the BBC to become self-funded. It can take on advertising like it’s commercial rivals.


      • Joshaw says:

        I don’t think the demand is there. In time, however, internet streaming will become the norm and the country will be forced to overcome its apathy and decide what to do about the BBC Tax.

        The BBC will want to tax PCs (I believe it has already been mentioned) but the inevitable widespread debate might not go the way the BBC wants.


  5. Umbongo says:

    According to the Telegraph item on the Prebble Report, David Liddiment, a BBC trustee, said: “We deliberately chose some complex and controversial subject areas for the review in immigration, religion and the EU. The BBC’s reportage on “climate change” (the subject of other slanted and tendentious items by Harrabin and Shukman yesterday) was apparently not a part of Mr Prebble’s investigations.
    So here is a report on BBC bias where an industry insider* is the investigator and the organisation investigated chooses the major elements of what is to be investigated**. Imagine the BBC’s indignation if the Met had chosen both the investigator and the subject matter for the original and (I’ve little doubt) upcoming Lawrence inquiries – you wouldn’t hear the last of it.
    * Prebble worked for the famously lefty Sidney Bernstein’s Granada TV and has produced programmes (as an independent) for the BBC.
    ** OK the BBC Trust actually commissioned the report but since the perceived interests and agenda of the Trust and the organisation it’s supposed to oversee are identical, effectively, the BBC investigated itself.


    • chrisH says:

      He also worked for the BBC as the Look North straight man to Mike Nevile up in Newcastle…that Prebble!
      Bit like relabelling horsemeat as mince…Prebble is a Beeb toady, as indeed are all hacks.
      The BBC are too much of a monopoly to be anything other than a threat to independent thinking. The BBC groupthink depends on the likes of Prebble knowing who buttered their bread…and will do so again if they play nice.
      Love the idea that the BBC were gulled by all those Westminster titans into going easy on immigration, the EU and religion(well ,Islam)…so neutral, so objective re Israel, Savile, MacAlpine….oh if only the BBC could be a little MORE certain of its rights to speak for the nation, then these kerfuffles wouldn`t happen would they?
      Even Webb seemed a bit embarrassed at the cringing of Prebble this morning…bloody pipecleaners to be bent into Beeb ciphers.


  6. Umbongo says:

    BTW is it necessary to have three separate threads set up by B-BBC to comment on the Prebble Report? Surely if Alan wishes to add to his initial thoughts/posting he could slot in, either an extended comment or just add an update to his original posting. As it is, Alan’s, B-BBC’s and various commenters’ criticisms of the Report’s deficiences are needlessly blunted.


  7. DP111 says:

    As I’ve maintained for three decades, the real effects of uncontrolled immigration will become manifest when authors and speakers will be hounded and “fatwed” for stating the truth, bombs will be placed in public areas for maximum devastation, and even beheadings will become so common that they will not deserve media coverage.

    What did you say? Really?

    I really must watch BBC news to know what is happening in the UK.


  8. Dave s says:

    Is anybody listening to a word the BBC and it’s executives/reporters/apologists say any more?
    It is a busted flush .
    Just a matter of time. Technology and arrogance will put paid to it.


  9. +james says:

    Look how the BBC responds.

    BBC should reflect more ‘extreme’ views
    BBC Broadcasting House BBC coverage of immigration, religion and the European Union was examined

    BBC orders impartiality follow-up

    A review into impartiality in BBC news reporting has suggested the broadcaster should find ways to report more “extreme” opinions.

    So according to this article those who do not like the EU, open door immigration and the glories of multiculturalism are “extreme”.


    • Ken Hall says:

      I oppose Islamic people beheading their victims on our streets in the name of Islam, and will not appologise for that crime by following it up with weeks of Pro Islamic propaganda.

      I oppose our indegenous culture always taking the back step to any other culture that wants to practice its own cultish perversions and insist on banning our traditions so that they may be allowed so.

      I oppose the EU making more and more of our laws without any democratic legitimacy to do so whatsoever.

      I support our country being self-ruling.

      I support real equality, meritocracy and fairness, instead of politically correct prejudice.

      If this labels me an extremist, then I wear that badge with pride.

      Personally, I think that anyone who promotes policies which overthrow centuries of Christian tradition in a cultural genocide of the English culture, the replacement of English law, giving over our streets to Sharia law at local level, and EU dictat nationally, and which preaches the equal value of every form of sexual perversion, is an extremist view.

      Compared to what were considered common sense, tried, tested and working social norms for centuries in this country, the BBC’s current philosophy is extremist.


    • hadda says:

      That’s what the article would have you believe. But as I noted in another thread, that’s not actually what the report said.


    • Chop says:

      Since when was being patriotic been “Extreme”?

      Another buzz word for the BBC to throw at anyone who disagrees with their groupthink, it stinks.

      Extreme is the new Waaaaaaaysist.


    • Sir Arthur Strebe-Grebling says:

      If this were any other country, the bBBC would label these views as ‘conservative’, which they are, but in the bBBC’s leftie bubble, they seem ‘extreme’.


    • Anthem says:

      Looks like just having an opinion is now “extreme”. I think we’re supposed to go, “Oh, I don’t know what to think about that. What does the BBC say?”

      Hmm… maybe I shouldn’t think that… I don’t know what does the BBC say on this matter?


  10. George R says:

    Mass Immigration-Multicuturalism-Labour-BBC NUJ political agenda.

    This propaganda has been going on years, with disastrous consequences which we are seeing today in UK.

    “At last we know the truth: Labour despises anyone who loves Britain, its values and its history”


  11. George R says:

    “BBC pays £175,000 to discover it has a ‘liberal bias’ on immigration”
    By Toby Young.


    • Guest Who says:

      “BBC pays £175,000 to discover it has a ‘liberal bias’ on immigration”
      They do seem to have a lot to splash around… of late.
      Maybe, in Beebworld, every yesterday will be, semantically, accurately… ‘a different time’.
      ‘So she’s banked close to £60,000 for being off air for four months’
      So… what’s that in the side-stepping stakes? Quarter of a Boaden? Tenth of an Entwistle?
      So many market rates, so much time on their hands, so hard to keep up…


  12. chrisH says:

    Humphrys wasn`t happy about that Egyptian oppostion leader having both a good phone line and a good grasp of English was he?(Today, 4/7/13, 7.10 am)
    The bloke toasted the ignoramus in London, but-seeing he was only Egyptian, only out there and only a victim of Morsi`s Bortherhood….he`d not really know the BBC nuances about democracy would he.
    So our Egyptian pal got the rare foreigner accolade of being howled down by Humph…but the Egyptian plastered him( “you really need to get sources other that those of Morsis goons, in effect”).
    Bravo our Egyptian friend…we`ll not be hearing from you again, but thank you nonetheless.
    The next piece was about the BBC choosing who it goes easy on, and who it howls down…the Egyptian bloke a few minutes before was not even thought of…neither was the soft pedal crapola with the Muslim Brotherhood bloke, who was(and Humphrys kindly helped him to say this) “prepared to die for Morsi”.
    Now that`s the BBCs view of all this…well done our garbled buddy, Humphrys will articulate your pain for you dear!
    What bias BBC?
    Oh, and weren`t the Army removing a democratically-elected President when they toppled Mubarak?…but the BBC welcomed this, as opposed to dumping Morsi?
    Oh-didn`t Humphrys purr when Papandreou and Berlusconi were removed by stabilising forces in the EU, replacing them with technocrats as well?…or is that different to the BBCs ciphers and blunt pitchforks like Humphrys?


    • David Preiser (USA) says:

      Mubarak’s elections were never proper ones, so that doesn’t count. But the Army definitely staged a coup, removing an undemocratic regime in response to the people’s wishes. Since Morsi ignored what he was elected to do, unconstitutionally expanded his powers, went against the original agreement to have an inclusive government, and started putting Islamists in charge of things, he turned it into an undemocratic regime. The Army has now removed him, in response to mass protests that dwarf the original. I think we know what the people’s wishes are here.

      The BBC is, like so many in the Left-wing media and in high school history classes, somewhat confused about what democracy is. It’s not only a comfy constitutional republic with a fairly elected representative government with timely, regularly scheduled terms, where the leader is chosen by the people for a fixed term. Hell, you don’t even have that in Britain. Egypt hasn’t quite evolved to that point yet, and this is a kind of mob rule situation. But the people, the demos, have spoken. And they’re getting their way.

      Contrary to what your darling Occupiers used to shout when they wanted to crash meetings and disrupt conferences, this really is what democracy looks like, BBC. It’s old-school, original instruments, period performance democracy. It’s not the pleasant, regulated, comfortable system we have in the West. Not yet, anyway. We’re not supposed to impose our Imperialist version of things on these people, right, BBC?

      The Beeboids may not like it, but after all, we’re supposed to allow the Egyptians to choose their own path, respect their opinion, aren’t we? Not when the BBC doesn’t like the result, I guess.


  13. sc says:

    would anybody support a military coup in england and start of fresh by installing a ukip govement to sort out this country


    • Anthem says:

      Not sure about that but I’d be prepared to investigate the possibility of living on the Moon and starting afresh.


  14. Jeff says:

    “Immigrants create overcrowding and fuel tensions report finds.”
    Good heavens! That’s about as obvious as telling us that if you walk about in the pissing rain you’re likely to get wet.


    • Joshaw says:

      Does the Pope shit in the woods …. or something?

      I wish I could get into the “report” business. Money for old rope.


  15. George R says:

    “Counting the cost of Labour’s open door”