Here you go, a new Ope thread to keep detailing the bias! Off you go and share what is bothering you.
MID WEEK OPEN THREAD….
Bookmark the permalink.
Search Biased BBC
Recent Comments
- AsISeeIt Nov 17, 08:10
Weekend 16th November 2024
You wait ages for a Labour-supporting Reach plc red top tabloid to turn up in the BBC online press line-up… - MarkyMark Nov 17, 08:00
Weekend 16th November 2024
Murray was good friends with Hitchens – Hitchens said it would be terrible for Trump to be president…. would be… - Fedup2 Nov 17, 07:50
Weekend 16th November 2024
Double – Murray regularly pops up on the sky Australia channel ( the way TV should be ) and was… - Doublethinker Nov 17, 07:02
Weekend 16th November 2024
I think all site users would agree that Douglas Murray is a brave and wise chap who can see far… - Zephir Nov 17, 06:08
Weekend 16th November 2024
Police refuse to prosecute over swastika sent to Jewish students because it is ‘not offensive enough’ – amid social media… - Zephir Nov 17, 06:07
Weekend 16th November 2024
And.. the COP 29 wine list for the “elites” [img]https://i.postimg.cc/KYZ3fQwW/Captkkure.jpg[/img] - Zephir Nov 17, 05:57
Weekend 16th November 2024
“Britain has an astonishing 470 DELEGATES at climate change summit that’s a 5,000-mile round-trip flight” https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-14091247/Keir-Starmer-Britain-delegates-climate-change-Baku.html - Zephir Nov 17, 05:54
Weekend 16th November 2024
“Four months after furore, with no sign of any CPS action… Nigel Farage mounts private prosecution against brothers over brutal… - Zephir Nov 17, 05:43
Weekend 16th November 2024
Part of the problem discussed here: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=COWxHrjUWVI
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
A propaganda piece on the BBC website to tell us that Africans are not welcome in the UK (see http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-africa-25111177). Despite the hostile response they receive in waycist Britain, it doesn’t seem to have much effect on the numbers: according to the article, the number of African-born residents living in England & Wales increased from 809,000 in 2001 to 1,300,000 in 2011, whereas the number of Nigerians and Zimbabweans more than doubled. We have the usual examples of Really Deserving Cases, such as the woman who came from Malawi 12 years ago on a student visa and who now “work(s) for a charity in London focusing on religious freedom” – presumably another one of those essential jobs that lazy Brits won’t do. We also have a quote from “rights campaigner Lee Jasper”, a well known racialiser. They forget to mention that he was the Respect candidate in Croydon North last year, was Senior Policy Advisor on Equalities (sic) to Ken Livingstone, is a member of the Coalition of Resistance (COR) anti-cuts campaign and also co-Chairs Black Activists Rising Against the Cuts. In 2011 he allegedly compared Anders Breivik to Alexander (“Boris”) Johnson (well, they are both white I suppose). We also have a wonderful photograph showing how “Diversity is celebrated at London’s annual Notting Hill Carnival” (let’s put aside the fact that it originates in the West Indies and has no association with Africa. Or Britain for that matter). Classic BBC.
I’ve noticed that as well, what a disgusting article where the British are only promoted as….racists. (and this in an article where it points out Millions have been allowed to come into the country) But here’s something the bBC doesn’t mention, each and every African country won independence from Empire, since Independence whites were (And still are) treated as dirt. Not surprising in each and every new multicultural country in Africa everybody lives in a land of milk and honey, every bodies rights are respected and if by chance somebody fucks up, well there’s always the West to bail you out when you utter racist, which funny enough every African nation has done. Now these children of nepotism, genocide ,over-breeding and pure racism are bitching about how their movements are been restricted when trying to enter the Uk. My fucking heart bleeds, even the letters on the bBC (HYS) bash the bBC for this blackwash of an article.
“rights campaigner Lee Jasper”
Aka Jasper the Grasper.
BBC propaganda again. HYS was shut down quite quickly on this one. No one agreed with the Balkanising Britain Corporation on this article. Disgraceful to imply Brits are lazy. Anyone who works in TV, as my partner does as an independent, know the Beeb are the laziest bastards in the British TV industry. Massively over manned jobs for lifers. Maybe they mean themselves when they say lazy. Don’t see many Africans on the Beeb…maybe more immigrants should take Beeb jobs. Oh no its a nepotistic closed shop…
I note that paedophile baby rapist and Lostprophet singer Ian Watkins was once partner of tattooed BBC fav Fearne Cotton, current Radio One DJ and Top of the Pops presenter…
Of course this in no way implicates Ms Cotton, but yet again a BBC childrens presenter is uncomfortably close to this sort of thing….
Steady on!, Geoff. You know Al-Beeb never does any of that sneaky guilty by association stuff.
It does seem odd that fans who spent only a few minutes in his company or who listened to rumours realised that there was something not right with him, yet none of those close to him admit knowing anything.
Fearne who gets to shout ‘wanker’ and ‘piss off’ on that Keith lemon rubbish, but that’s being ‘edgy’ right.
Say ‘nigger’ you wouldn’t see her for dust.
She can’t say that. She’s not a rapper or gang warrior thug.
Say the F word or C word on Graham Norton, that passes for comedy these days on the BBC, on the other hand say ” nigger ”, well, it’s the crime of the century !!
This is an idiotic comparison. The F and C words do not have anything like the same historical connotations. If you had said “golliwog”, and added “in private”, you might have had the sliver of a point.
It’s not private if Jo Brand the supergrass is listening.
The liberal inquisition is all ways listening
I think the comparison is valid in that all three words are offensive to some but only one is beyond the pale in BBCland.
Historical comparisons should be meaningless in a ‘progressive’ society. It’s still just a word.
Depends how far you want to go back, historically, it was derived from a word meaning black, nothing more.
Wasn’t it also the name of Guy Gibson’s dog? But the history books will soon change that!
That’s just great. Please continue to heroically stand up for your right to call someone “nigger” loud and proud.
Great niece of Bill Cotton. Nepotism at the Beeb? No surely…
BBC News 24 and Norman Smith pops up to tell us all about some new annoucements from the PM addressing EU immigration.
Tell me BBC, suppose I just require the facts about a news item and would prefer to make up my own mind about the implications?
Any chance of narrative-free news any time soon?
I won’t hold my breath.
Oh, by the way, Norman Smith tells me ‘this is all about politics!’
Perhaps he should be wary of commenting then?
Good story for our Norman however. He gives us a quote from some Eurocrat I’ve never heard of.
‘These measures will turn Britain into “THE NASTY COUNTRY”‘
And kiddies, just in case you didn’t get that referrence, our Norman spells out the link to THE NASTY PARTY narrative.
BBC : agenda/narrative/agenda
Bang on the button! Superb!
Al JaBeeBa currently interviewing Jonathan Portes of the ‘INDEPENDENT’ NIESR. Of course he insists the current crop of EE immigrants are net contributors.
Another lie from Blair’s chief statistics liar.
He gets in the lie the other ZaNuLaB liar Danny Blanchflower put up in the Independent on Monday about youth unemployment having increased mainly under the coalition.
Carrie Gracey was no inquisitor, of course.
Lynn Faulds Wood was on ‘The Papers’ on the News Channel last night, she came out with the most amazing left wing nonsense only the deluded left can emit.
‘The taxi driver who brought me here tonight was Romanian, he was here to earn money to send back to his family in Romania, and if you ask me that’s the kind of person we want in this country!’
Totally out of touch with the people of this country, totally naïve, totally BBC biased. But then as another Scot, what can you expect? Having destroyed their own jobs through years of strikes they come to the UK looking for work which they then set about destroying !
They’re not the Loony Left for nothing!! lol
I wonder if she would be singing his praises if he:
raped her like that Romanian in court this week
His kids pick pocketed her
live on her street like they do in Sheffield and openly shit in public
Skimmed her credit card
Lets be honest the vast majority of bad press Romanians received is well earned, nothing racist about reporting the facts, unless of course you are a leftwing split arse.
Prepare yourself for prolonged power cuts and long term loss of internet access as the Romanian horde’s descend on the country hacking away in their droves at the copper power lines on the National Grid and digging up the copper cables underground.
Good for the AGW brigade I suppose but a bummer for the rest of us.
I was wondering the other day how much money is sent out of England by immigrants. Their supporters and apologists bang on all the time about how they enrich and add value to the nation, but by how many £millions/billions has the nation been impoverished by all this money being sent out of the country. In the case of the taxi driver, straight out of Lynn’s pocket – well not really, straight out of the BBC’s expenses pot, my Licence fee money.
Tell me Lynn.
Lynn Faulds Wood also said ” Britain needs all these clever people from abroad to come here to pay our pensions when we get old !! ” You couldn’t make this BS up.
Yeah, Sub Saharan Africa is full of rocket scientists and nuclear physicists, desperate to come to Britain so that they can work hard and pay Lynns pension when she’s 90 !!
Exactly.
Perhaps the BBC could explain in precise terms, at what stage in the immigration process (I use the term loosely), and by what means, the “clever people” and the not so “clever people” are identified. Or is the BBC saying that it’s not necessary because they’re all equally clever (as you say), unlike stupid native Brits?
Also, the recreational activities favoured by these rocket scientists in Woolwich town centre on a Saturday night strike me as very unusual, and very different from those employed in other centres of excellence such as Oxford, Cambridge, Aldermaston, Harwell etc.
Takes all sorts I suppose.
Maybe if the Romanian immigrants were working as journalists and media gobshites Lynn Faulds-Wood would be less keen to see them? Obviously, British taxi drivers are subhuman racist scum, so their views do not count.
Very good Rob, i mentioned this a while ago, inviting the govt to scrap adverts for BBC positions in the Guardian, and trawling Eastern Europe for educated, english speaking journalists and TV people who will be competent and will work for half the rate we pay at the moment. See how that goes down with the NUJ and BBC staff, see how others have had to suffer with our ‘open borders’ policy. And where were the Unions when immigrants undercut British workers? Sat on their hands with tight lips. The *unts, that is the only word for them. Vote Labour.
Haha, you think Labour are the solution to the immigration crisis that THEY created. How sweet.
I was being sarcastic. You utter twit.
Lol
I agree. Most recent immigration comment on the BBC is about EU immigrants who actually have a legal right to come here to work. But what about all the immigrants from outside the EU who have no right to be here. And what about all those from Asia who have one family member here and then pile in behind them.
The BBC allows some discussion about EU immigrants but allow none about immigrants from the rest of the world.
On this , the most important single issue affecting Britain in the 21st century to date , the British have never been allowed to have a democratic voice. The BBC has continually lied to us about it . I feel that I have been cheated, that my country has been invaded. I don’t like what i see, but if the British people had voted for these changes I would have to accept them. But they haven’t and I don’t.
No doubt the BBC would accuse me of being a rampant racist rather than being what I am , someone who wants Britain to make a democratic choice about immigration.
And this evening we had to endure José Barroso lecturing us on what it means to be European and “nice”.
I didn’t vote for this clown so, as far as I’m concerned, he has no legitimacy whatsoever.
Same applies to Van Rompuy.
Complete nobodies.
Just addressing the first sentence – that clearly demonstrates how stupid she is – it is Macroeconomics 1.1 that money earned here should be spent here, exported money is value lost.
I thought the response would be just below the offending paragraph – so here is Lynn Faulds Wood quote I was referring to :
‘The taxi driver who brought me here tonight was Romanian, he was here to earn money to send back to his family in Romania, and if you ask me that’s the kind of person we want in this country!’
BBC News 24 and we hear that Angela Merkel is leader of ‘the conservative party’ (is that a new one from the BBC rule book of terminology?)
The report is about 17 hours of talks leading to a new coalition with the SDP ‘centre left party’
Steve Evens of the BBC then tells us about some chap from Bavaria who wants to upset Europe – no not that one – some guy from Angela’s ‘sister party’ who wants to charge non-Germans extra tolls to use the Autobahns. Oh dear free movement within the EU? The guy must be an oddball.
Anyway my real gripe is about being lectured at by BBC talking heads who can’t just give me the news but instead insist on putting their BBC talking head interpretation on every story.
The BBC news anchor ends on a cheery note for our Steve Evans in Berlin. …
‘It’s great doing this on TV rather than radio because we can see your little facial expressions which tell so much more of the story’
And that folks is what I’m talking about. Stop it!
Hang on, haven’t we been told over and over again by our journalist commenters that it’s wrong to infer anything from reporters’ facial expressions?
As for the interpreting and explaining of every story, that’s just the ongoing legacy of John Birt, expanded and solidified by his successors and made worse than ever by Helen “Hugs” Boaden. Even Charlie Brooker complained about this a while back.
Then of course, you’d give anything to see the faces of the reporters covering this event–
http://twitchy.com/2013/11/26/heres-your-wtf-moment-for-today-obama-says-he-can-identify-immigrants-just-by-looking-at-their-faces/
and then compare them to the faces of the reporters covering a Nigel Farage appearance who would dearly love for him to make a similar remark.
WTF indeed. All defenders of the indefensible past and present – especially Dez – will remain silent. And prove their lack of integrity.
Now for the sarcasm: Hey, Mr. President, takes one to know one, eh?
Not at all. Tonight’s edition of ‘Pointless’ had a round in which contestants had to identify U.S. Presidents from clues, e.g. “Was President on VJ Day”, “President during World War One”, “The teddy bear was named after him” etc.
And lo! The first one on board #2 ? “This President was born in Hawaii” 🙂
So there we have it: take that, doubters !
Mea culpa.
For a while now, I may have given the impression that I want Libby Purvis surgically removed from the BBC.
Bluestocking gasbag, only there because she`s one of those women who need to get to Honduras or Uzbekistan to be among the worlds “happiest women in a country Index”.
Well-I heard her interviewing a banker on Midweek at the start of her show this morning…patronage aside( he`s a young Obama type who raps as well).
She let him speak, asked decent enough questions and didn`t howl down or splutter crap throughout his answers. She did a good job.
Yes I know it`s light entertainment for the yummy mums and grannies…but I learned more about banking today that I ever would of the so-called “serious interviews” on Today…which is now frothy-light entertainment, albeit unintentional.
Libby for Today please.
Take Libby out of the Hindenburg please…
Libby Purvis co-presented “Today” in the mid-70s. Covered the major tube disaster at Moorfield(?), the one when the train was concertinaed into the buffers. Was replaced as the programme became mainly focused on politics.
I can’t say I find her particularly entertaining. Or acute.
Sounds about right.
But for the “focussing on politics” which may have applied in the good old days, but is a mackery today.
What was it this morning at 8am?…emoting about some poor bloke with his son in brain trauma-this is not news, but rubbernecking grief and tragedy?
Then Humf promised something about northern accents being seen as the new black or wha`eva!,…and this must have been the best that had to tempt us to stick around.
News it ain`t…mere cud for the consenting adults that think it worth the breeze…and if we`d just service them and not fuss, then we`ll all be fine.
Terminal decline.
EU says….Cameron….Nasty. BBC headline hat-trick. I’m sure the majority of people in the UK reading about the proposed changes were thinking “yes, but what does the EU employment commissioner have to say about all this?” Wonderful journalism getting to the core of the issue.
I see the BBC (and to a large extent) the MSM have enabled the reps of the political class (ConLabLib) to move the immigration “debate” onto “safe” ground. The “debate”/the “news” is all about EU immigration. The immigration from the subcontinent and Africa has more or less been dropped as a topic for comment/reportage.
Admittedly, the immediate public concern is with the 1 January 2014 inwards queue at Dover (and the “delayed” – by Cameron’s fatuous “hard line” – 1 April 2014 queue at JobCentre Plus). However, as Grieve has recently reminded us, it’s the non-EU immigration (and, no, not the one comprising citizens of Australia, Canada and the US) since 1997 (and before) which has the most deleterious long-term effects. The Roma, for instance, might be an upcoming problem, and an existing problem in certain areas. However, the post-1997 immigrant settlement constitutes a far more serious continuing and increasing threat to our way of life, let alone our economic well-being.
And yes, it’s another example of the Chomskeyan-identified characteristic of our faux-democracy of avoiding discussion of questions which are . . er . . . unwelcome to our masters.
Sky are on this, no mention on the BBC
http://news.sky.com/story/1174234/kenya-two-britons-arrested-by-terror-police
I bet they’re not generic Britons …
Look for ‘enrichers’ on the search function.
The key word is ‘nationals ‘
IE as in’ british nationals’ the less treacherous press give us this as a clue
The BBC just refer to the scum as Britons !!
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-25114890
“A European commissioner has warned the UK risks being seen as a “nasty country” after Prime Minister David Cameron outlined plans to restrict access to benefits for EU immigrants.”
Hmmm now where have a I heard the Tories called the nasty party before?
Well you won’t find any references to this unelected EU commissioner who doesn’t have to behave in a manner where the people approve of his work or what he says.
All the BBC tell you about him is his name – Laszlo Andor What they don’t tell you is where he’s from (Hungary Eastern Europe) nor where he gained his degree (Karl Marx university) nor his politics, where he is considered as the ‘most left wing of all the 28 commissars oops sorry commissioners!
Have a read of this profile in the Daily Telegraph and see for yourself which vitally relevant information the BBC has deliberately left out!
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/immigration/10375366/Laszlo-Andor-The-EU-mandarin-fighting-for-migrant-payouts.html
Interesting background on the Hungarian. It has to be said when he was interviewed on ‘Today’ this morning by John Humphries he got the most abrasive interview I have ever heard on the BBC about immigration. (He is overtly agitated about UKIP sweeping the board in the Euro election.)
Compare this to last night’s newspapers round-up on BBC24 TV around 11.30pm last night (Tues) when the two leftist guests led by the (regular) male Beeboid agreed wholeheartedly, and at length, that Cameron’s ‘initiative’ was pure evil.
So we were carpet-bombed with 500 hours (and counting) of adverts for (zzzz) Dr Who, the world’s greatest television programme ever fact (give or take every single minute produced by HBO).
Now it’s time for a 500 hours neutron-bombing with Sports Bore of the Year.
Of course these are not adverts for programmes per se, they are nothing more than extended adverts for the BBC itself. (Remember that next time you hear someone saying the BBC doesn’t do adverts.)
Dr Who and Sports Bore of the Year – is that all you got for FFS. (aw no I forgot Strictly).
Well, since I’m being contrary on this site today, I will add that I thoroughly enjoyed Dr Who on Saturday.
Especially when Tom Baker appeared.
Yerrr, but did you enjoy the utterly pointless 500 hours of advertorial about it.
Hear, hear! (but I agree SPOTY sucks donkey balls).
SPOTY has no credibility these days what so ever, 2009 is a classic example, through an internet campaign Ryan Giggs won it for achieving absolutely nothing in that year, meanwhile Jenson Button and Ross Brawn had just won the F1 world championship in a team that almost ceased to exist.
Like every other BBC ‘event’ its a dumbed down celebrity fest with commercial overtones.
I guess Mr Balding will be presenting?
I agree. I used to like putting a bet on some of these awards but SPOTY is so random that I am almost certain there is manipulation going on in the background. Though this feeling worked in my favour one year when I was certain the BBC guy Chris Hollins would somehow win Strictly so I bet on him at 30-1!
There’s a legend that (back in the dim and distant) motorcycle legend Carl Fogarty ‘won’ at least once in a landslide against the wishes of the BBC and that staffers were to be observed shredding thousands of two-stroke scented ballots.
Whether this is true or not, it’s an odd thing soon afterwards was institued the Auntie-approved list of worthies for plebs to vote from, just in case any of you subversives were thinking of voting for a naughty modern Foggy-type candidate .
Er, Buggy, slight error….Fogarty was riding a 4-stroke Ducati. Lovely sound by the way.
Yes, but I’m not suggesting Foggy was sending in thousands of votes for himself, am I ? Hence the heady wisp of “Eau du Ducati” would likely not be as prevalent on the fans’ ballots as “t
Yes, but I’m not suggesting Foggy was sending in thousands of votes for himself, am I ? Hence the heady whiff of “Eau du Ducati” would likely not be as prevalent on the fans’ ballots as “Parfum de stroke deuxiéme”.
😉
Lord, what is going on with the comments box ? Grinds to a halt after one letter, waits for you to re-type the missing ones and then comes madly to life and chucks the lot on, originals and replacement alike.
Or is it just me that this is happening to ?
Still mustn’t grumble BBC does produce some very fine comedies still. No, no, hear me out on this one.
Take last week’s Panorama where John Ware cut ‘n’ pasted tales from a couple of recent books on ‘black ops’ during the war sorry ‘troubles’ in Ulster.
He had three MRF soldiers on with the usual droid idea that they’d be full of regret and at some stage give us the money shot whereby one or all broke down sobbing with contrition and asked the cameradroid to stop filming.
Not a bit of it – where they didn’t handle Ware’s deliveries with a dead bat they promptly whacked the leather over the pavilion*. Three great comedians.
Squaddie: We were tasked to draw out the IRA and minimise their activities.
Ware: To minimise their activities; In what way?
Squaddie: Well if they needed shooting they’d be shot.
Brilliant. As the nation’s libby-wibby drippy-wippies howled, I was cheering to the rafters. Firstly give the lads a VC each, then give them their own programme. They’d fit nicely in the slot that used to be Panorama.
*the cricket allegory was brought to you by Metaphors ‘R’ Us (bargain shelf)
Didn`t watch this, but did hear a few clips on the radio.
Clearly these lads are the real face of Britain…and their “shameless” performances as I heard them were brilliant.
The BBC are endangered every time a REAL person who did a real job and knows a bit about the reality of life among the crims and bastards so beloved by the BBC/Left gets in front of camera. No emoting-stupid questions thrown back into faces…no media Queesfairy Rules of PC World language?..and the BBC f***ers run away in a halitosis cloud of Islamic Stonewall contradictions.
Thank you MRF…I was an IRA tard and plastic paddy myself back then….so I can see the adrenaline rush of those scary balaclava`d “men” who shot grannies in the back, butchered soldiers on waste ground and who threatened us all with their caliphate at that time..Marx/Lenin/Mao. The BBC are thrill seekers that need bodies and tears by 6pm deadlines.
For IRA -read Sharia4UK these days….pig sticking thickies and psychos can hardly read-but they see how yesterdays “men of violence” are todays “democrats and statesmen”.
Where`s todays MRF…and will we have to set up our own in every county town next time?
We had that nice Mr Brand on the BBC again.
This time he was selling his ‘brand’ to the ‘people’ i.e. tickets for his latest messianic tour on the Front Row, Radio 4.
What a complete hypocritical idiot. This ‘comedian’ is soo intelligent with his ejaculation of the word ‘Paradigm’, so many times that he must have been at the Owen Jones school of lefty bedwetters .
Revolution! Yearr right! You will be first up against the wall and shot.
Just listen to this clip, as Mark Lawson slowly unravels every single statement he makes, but then lets him off the hook and begins to worship him at his feet as he found out that Morrissey(who he?)apparently went to one of his shows, pathetic!
http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/b03jb36x
starting at 12m.27s.
Too much oxygen on the BBC for this waste of space.
I don’t watch the BBC much nowadays, particularly not the BBC News because of its odd ball and unrealistic take on everything. I know that view is referred to as ‘left wing’, but that says nothing really, it’s not a proper description for the BBC’s strange unworldly analysis of national and global events and its support for politically correct, anti-British, climate change rubbish and of course the inept Labour Party.
The other reason I don’t watch it much now is that the BBC continually throws propaganda into soaps, children’s programs and light hearted rom coms. A little example of that last night in Last Tango in Halifax, a seemingly pleasant programme that my wife likes. I have however been waiting with trepidation for the unrelated political propaganda, and I was not to be let down.
A young unmarried girl is giving birth at the hospital and her parents cannot be contacted, the girl says her parents have in fact have thrown her out. The granny character then asks; “ are they Christian?” Implying that only Christians would be so horrible. It was not relevant to the plot and none of the characters are said to be Christian. It was just a slur. They would dare not have written the character’s lines as “are they Muslim?”, which just might have been more appropriate or “are they religious?”, which might have had more of an ironic ring to it, without of course being offensive to Christians. But no, out of the blue, let’s have a pop at Christians.
Should I now expect gangs of marauding Christian “men” on the street threatening to kill the makers of this blasphemous program? And should I then expect an apology from the Prime Minister stating that this was a terrible mistake and that the BBC producer will be prosecuted for a hate crime? Will the Twitter folks go incandescent with rage and boycott the BBC? Yawn zzzzzzzzzzzzz. Is X Factor on?
Once again the BBC slyly promotes that which is wrong and against this country and its Christian values. An organisation that has done all that it can to promote anti-social, anti-Christian, anti-British behaviour. It has also promoted known child molesters into every living room in the country and then got away with it. The BBC has done more harm to the people of this country than any enemy ever could have.
Only watched the first couple of episodes of the first series, although the OH still watches it, its a good time to take the dog out.
It ticked a lot of boxes, I was put off by one daughter having an ethnic partner, another daughter married with kids deciding she was a lesbian and the main male character played by an obviously gay man …
Wonder why it’s rarely ever a white bloke with a black/ethnic partner…?
The adverts are worse when it comes to miscegenation, look out for McDonalds and Halifax bank adverts.
Blacks getting you down again, David?
I think David Brims is referring to the obvious diversity propaganda that pass for TV adverts nowadays, David P.
The mixed race couples, Afro-Caribbean and Asian characters are given pole position in nearly every commercial. A white face is almost an afterthought and minor character. The propaganda is about as subtle as housebrick in the face. I don’t think it has anything to do with ethnic minorities per se, more about the intentions of the commercial makers. Check out the “Creative Diversity Unit”, an organisation that has much of our media signed up to it.
Indeed the white fellow (always a male) is the fall guy or half wit.
Careful, the ‘Ism-finder General has awakened from his slumbers after events have kept him bunker bound, and any reference, even critical, to anything he deems out of bounds, incurs full flounce.
Which is as barking as it gets, but can as always distract from matters of BBC inaccuracy, lack of objectivity and integrity.
Just as DavidP had him pegged on earlier as he was choreographing his latest circular firing squad.
Well BBC regular Dotun Adebayo thinks there’s something in it.
See his C4 documentary ‘white girls are sluts’ . (watch it before you take issue with my ‘paraphrase’)
Strange how no one seeks to examine the reverse of that medal
i.e. Why do so many black men seem to find black women , shall we say, unattractive?- (tiger woods being a high profile example before I’m asked)
Two friends of mine (white northern males all) married black girls while another married a Pakistani background girl (whose family then disowned her and have never spoken to her since). So this does all seem to be fairly common but you are right this can never be reflected on TV. While the other combination (white girl and black bloke) has to be on all the time. Odd.
Look at ’em
Because, Leftyloather, black men lust after white women, blondes in particular, mostly because they are ‘easier’ than black women, who are more fussy about their ‘men’ and know how useless and feckless too many of them are, fact. I rarely see a black woman with a white guy. See plenty of white women with brown kids, on their own.
Is that a ‘fact’, Robert? Do you have any statistical analysis to back up that ‘fact’, or is it just your own prejudice against white Brits coming into play?
“I rarely see” well, that’s fair enough then. If you rarely see it then that means it doesn’t happen. Out of sight, out of mind eh?
I am a white ‘Brit’ by the way, no i have no stats on this, and unlikely to ever see any, so i do use my eyes, and what i see is exactly as stated. I feel free to assume my conclusions in the lack of official figures, so unless you find some, get out there and use your eyes.
Tacky, simplistic tosh, Robert, and doesn’t explain broadcasters strange imbalance presenting mixed couples at all. Back in the 80’s I myself had a one night stand with a black girl and then a two year relationship with a black American woman based here, “fact”.
I believe that this is the programme that in the last series had the two elderly lovebirds extolling the virtues of the ‘very misunderstood’ Gordon Brown.
Owen Smith, the ever so, loyal ‘on message’ Shadow Welsh Secretary, on DP comes across as a particularly vacuous fellow.
A dedicated lefty, he is disclosed as a former BBC staffer from the Toady programme.
A hard lefty burrowed in on the Toady programme? A Labour supporting Beeboid? Shock, never!
On the matter of the Spaniards reneging on their treaty obligations re Gibraltar the BBC writes “It is the latest in a series of disagreements between Spain and Gibraltar.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-25116641
No, the Spaniards are showing their contempt of the UK .
Reading the full piece the whole thing stinks to high heaven, with excuses being contradicted by bluster. On both sides.
But agree, the British national broadcaster seems astoundingly keen to make this a shared issue when so far it seems like the Spanish are seeing what they can get away with under some odd new EU version of ‘the rules’ the Chinese are trying out too.
Maybe time for a B-52 to tootle over again? That said, there may be a few memories stirred.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1966_Palomares_B-52_crash
Parliament- Today T May said in Parliament what many have guessed a long time ago. That immigration was deliberate by Labour, to one keep the wages down without a fight with the unions. She said 2.2M had been allowed in and labour also get the side effect of additional Labour voters.
I await for the headline news from bBC to proclaim how Labour had been the ultimate traitors to the country. Yes, I know it will be a VERY long wait.
She’ll be made to apologise for telling the truth, like Dominic Grieve. Then no-one on the BBC will mention it again.
Well we are several days on and no national scandal about Labour. To reinforce what May said, I have raided Hansard and cut out the relevant part. ” In the five years following Labour’s failure to impose transitional controls, more than 90% of the increase in employment in Britain was accounted for by foreign nationals. Under this Government, thanks to our measures to control immigration and reform welfare, two thirds of the increase in employment has been accounted for by British people.
But if the right hon. Lady does not want to listen to me or the former British ambassador to Poland, perhaps she should listen to the succession of former Labour Home Secretaries who have admitted what the British people already knew. Mr Straw describes the failure to impose transitional controls as a “spectacular mistake”. And let us remember: it was not just European immigration that Labour let get out of control, but all forms of immigration. Under Labour, net immigration reached 2.2 million, which is twice the population of the city of Birmingham.
I come again to the right hon. Lady’s point about what is being done on wages and jobs. The Labour Government knew just what they were doing. Jon Cruddas, the Leader of the Opposition’s policy guru, has said that Labour were
“using migration to introduce a covert 21st century incomes policy.”
Labour, which claims to be the party of the working man and woman, admits that it used immigration deliberately to keep down wages.”
Well if that statement does not cause a stir what will it take to get the Public to understand how they have been had.
Looked at the BBC news page , and heard a bit of wee Martha Kearney.
Not one story worth a damn.
Here is my agenda
1. SAVILE
2.BALEN
3. LEE RIGBY/Trial
4. PAUL FLOWERS
5. MAOS HOUSECHURCH in LAME+BETH/slavery
6. REGRESSIVE HOUNDING OF THE SQUEEZED MIDDLE FOR LICENSE FEES/use of Capita.
7. FALKIRK
8. McSHANE
9. UDDIN/AHMED and ethnic Lords troughers
10. IRANS humbling of OBAMA/Ashtons PLO connivances.
These are the only stories and the BBC can STFU…they can`t bleat about slavery or fatcats and then shut us up when they`re lefty scummers doing it all.
Sorry Beeb…none of these are in any way a done deal…so let`s not respond to their latest efforts to deflect or distract.
The nasty country?…overreactions?…pleb?…are we REALLY that easily led bu the nose ring by Lefty scum like the BBC?
If we only had our brains…and not mulched straw…we`d be dangerous to them…that Jenga Tower of Babble needs a Dalai Lama candle and a paper plane…and it`ll fall!
There’s a story brewing in the US media over the last few weeks about the White House preventing the press pool, especially photographers, from having good access at key situations. Instead, for some time now, the White House has stepped up its practice of releasing official staged photos of the President in various situations (like that ridiculous one of Him with one foot up on His desk we saw recently) instead of allowing press photographers to do their job.
After years of this practice, and not a little embarrassment over being lapdogs for a failing Administration, various publications are objecting loudly to the practice. USA Today issued a public statement that they would no longer use White House photos, except in extreme cases of emergency. Other publications are following suit, as they see this as essentially “visual press releases”. They don’t automatically reprint White House press releases as news stories (well, not any more, anyway), so they figure they won’t do it with photos either.
It’s gotten so bad that even the palace guards are starting to notice, but the BBC won’t report it:
Obama’s photo policy smacks of propaganda
“As surely as if they were placing a hand over a journalist’s camera lens, officials in this administration are blocking the public from having an independent view of important functions of the executive branch of government,” the White House Correspondents’ Association, joined by the Associated Press and other news organizations, wrote in a letter to White House press secretary Jay Carney last week. “You are, in effect, replacing independent photojournalism with visual press releases.”
New York Times photographer Doug Mills likens the administration’s actions to Tass, the Soviet Union’s news agency.
Even while condemning the practice, Milbank uses the weakest outlier example possible to dismiss the fears as being mostly unfounded (no surprise there, since he threw in a non sequitur dig at Birthers right up front, an opening sop to confirm his right-on bona fides to the Obamessiah-worshiping WaPo audience). But he’s still saying it, and the list of publicity shots he provides pretty much discredits the White House professed excuse for doing it. Worst of all, Milbank mentioned Stalin and the Soviet Union as an analogy to what The Obamessiah is doing. I have to wonder if Mark Mardell and Jonny Dymond and Daniel Nasaw and the rest of them will now think Milbank is a racist, because that’s what they’ve said about everyone else who criticizes the President and His Administration with similar comparisons.
The BBC, of course, hasn’t reported on any of this. Even though you can be sure they all know about it, as it’s been in all the major US news outlets they follow for a lead on how to report US issues. They’re still dutifully acting as a foreign bureau of the White House press office. It’s not newsworthy. You don’t need to know about it.
See the BBC have allowed a HYS on Camerom’s immigrant benefit cap proposals, titled “UK not a soft touch on benefits – PM”. It then says “Have your moved to the UK recently? Tell us what you think”. So, suprise suprise, they are interested in the views of recent immigrants, but maybe not those of the people whose taxes pay for their benefits. Fortunately the most recommended reports realise this, amazing they were allowed by the infamous Beeb moderators.
So the Royal Mail made a profit, and on comes the young female “finance reporter” to talk about how much they made and of course the sale share price. This particular “expert” somehow overlooked the £35 million VAT refund that was shown as profit – Sky News did point it out though!!
The Biased Broadcasting Commune news drones are in overdrive today following Cameron’s immigration stance. First up, some unelected EU non entity calling the UK the “nasty country” followed by a stream of diversity and immigration loving lefties from various sewers telling the ignorant British public that we are all having the wool pulled over our eyes by the scare mongering right wing media and that we should open our eyes and celebrate the diverse bounty that we have been blessed with. Then more EU unelected clowns warning us that free movement within the EU is “non negotiable”.
Well here is the real news you socialist wet dream tossers..the majority of the UK public are sick and tired of seeing their country being invaded, their NHS being swamped, their home towns being turned into ghettos and above all else being insulted and patronised on a daily basis by the never ending biased shite from the BBC.
R5L “Your call”…..The Smoking Ban debate (again) a fair and balanced discussion?……hahahahah
Pants on Fire?…does that count?
Is that why the Fire Brigades get called out to Salford so often these days?
The Telegraph reports…
“Lord Hall has said the BBC must be “less British” about telling the public the £145.50 licence fee is worth paying, as he insisted it is “quite wrong” to accuse the corporation of dominating the media”
Original here
You couldn’t make it up if you tried.
Just noticed this myself!
How much more “less British” can the BBC get?
It already does Hitlers work under EU lime green auspices, and then does Allahs work by popping Lee Rigbys case down the sewer pipe, and then sticking its collective rump in our faces and away from Mecca…with its finger in the air at us or in lubing its hole for Anjem or any passing groomer of Islamic niceness.
Depending on how scary the dyed beardy ones are at the time…and the price of cut opium in White City(that name will have to go Kwame!)
Still-the Telegraph did well to tell us…and Obornes onto the BBC re the Bollox Report into Saviles Saveloy…and so I sense they`ll get theirs again very soon.
Obornes an Islam shill all too often…but he knows the nature of the BBC/political class and their ceaseless lies…and will give `em a tug for us!
You have SO got a way with words! lol
Ace entertainment and definitely couldn’t agree more!
As Lord Hall Hall wants less British, OK… ‘Say what now????!”
‘audiences had seen the number of services increase – with four times as many television channels and twice as many national radio stations, compared to 1993.’
Yes, and all shovelling simply more sh*t out to keep more and more flower bed cubicle munchkins off the streets, and the top floor in Bolly to scatter along the corridors.
Quantity does not mean quality.
Especially when…. no one has any choice in funding it.
The man is an idiot.
And as an exercise on trying, again, to tell it often enough until it sticks, this technique is getting frankly tired.
He’s shaping up as a one man foot in mouth epidemic.
How much is the PR numptie feeding him these lines taking away from programming?
Hall is a man who knows nothing about keeping balanced budgets. He’s been sucking on the taxpayer’s tit for most of his working life, so he’ll know very little about the financial risks of using his own money to run a business. Like most Beeboids, really.
The BBC have announced that they are going to use their airwaves to defend the retention of the licence fee, an arbitrary poll tax that allows the continual pumping out of politically correct left-wing propaganda. http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/entertainment-arts-25126118
If this is not a corrupt abuse of power, I don’t know what is.
Good news, they’re devoting all future programming to just one thing:
http://www.destinationfame.co.uk/images/Vote_For_Me_Logo_Red.png
The best part is, the public pays for it!
And finally, a public service message from the BBC….
And this is the main reason lots and lots of money is demanded to maintain the BBC:
http://tradingaswdr.blogspot.co.uk/2013/11/pillars-crumble.html
‘Heads of Pillars have already been appointed, mostly internal promotions, and the consequent gaps filled. This may cost something to untangle….’
They seem the only organisation that responds to cost pressures by promoting internally and filling consequent gaps. This seldom results in lower numbers or the pay expectations of elevated staff reducing.
You know that story refers to the Telegraph not the BBC?
But no doubt it will still get lots of “likes”!!!
It will now
Hey, Albaman! Have you nothing to say about the BBC bias alluded to in this current Open Thread? Or have you just nothing to say, as usual?
No, clearly I did not. Do now.
And was obviously guilty of failing to check the link as thoroughly as I should. My bad.
Quite what made me think of such employment practices applying to the BBC hierarchy who can imagine, but no, not them this time. And not alone in media monopoly excess.
At least the costs will not be borne by the public.
Were it that the BBC’s actual spending spree on senior management did not impose a burden.
Oddly matters that have been religiously steered clear of consistently by Mr. Like Envy.
But you are correct to correct me, and I appreciate the courteous manner.
I consider it adorable.
Beeboids have been widely criticised, not only on this site, over several years for their biased, pro-mass immigration political propaganda.
Even today, when attempting to report on the latest crisis of untold numbers of Bulgarians and Romanians coming to live in the U.K on social benefits from 1 January, 2014, Beeboids concentrate on a ‘groundhog day’ report from Mark Easton on the small town of Boston and the impact of mass immigration, backed by Brussels technocrats telling us that Britain is a ‘nasty’ country and must (I tell you MUST) strictly abide by E.U rules.
“Is the BBC stacking its audiences against UKIP?”
http://www.ukip.org/newsroom/news/1000-is-the-bbc-stacking-its-audiences-against-ukip
‘Daily Mail’:-
“I DO share your concerns on migration, declares Cameron days after Mail’s explosive poll: PM unveils sweeping new restrictions on access to benefits”
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2514136/I-DO-share-concerns-migration-declares-Cameron-days-Mails-explosive-poll-PM-unveils-sweeping-new-restrictions-access-benefits.html
In one of their podcasts this or last month (can’t find the link now) James Delingpole and Tim Stanley stated their firm belief that the Question Time producers scrupulously ensured proper balance when selecting the audience (Delingpole also stated his absolute trust in the process here). Stanley even pointed out that it was produced by a third party company, so it couldn’t even be construed as BBC bias anyway. I don’t accept that excuse for a minute, but that’s not my main concern.
The BBC page for the show states quite clearly that they ask questions about personal political preferences so they can assemble an audience which reflects the demographics of the host city. But it’s surely a capricious assessment, and they can decide to create whatever audience they like. And we know they occasionally reach out to actual political groups and activists if they feel not enough people on one side of an issue have applied. They also claim to seek “ethnicity balance”, but what does that mean? Do they rigorously select for the ethnic balance of known census reports for the area, or do they have some
quotatarget number based on something else? It’s probably equally whimsical.Then there’s the evidence of people who somehow get in regularly, despite the allegedly careful selection. It’s probably not rigged 100%, all the time, on purpose, because, just like the rest of the BBC’s news and current affairs programming, the bias often happens naturally because they don’t realize they’re doing it. It all seems perfectly reasonable and middle-ground to them because they’re in the bubble. Yes, even the producers who work for the third-party production company are in that bubble and don’t always realize what they do.
So the system allows for the audience to be created based on personal interpretations of all their rules. The result is something less than balance, and allows for plants and instigators, apparently fairly easily. Even if there’s no official conspiracy to rig the audience, it happens naturally anyway.
I wish I had the single mindedness and keyboard skill to post all that , in other words their bias is natural, they just can’t help it?
You must be new here.
Do you think “Institutionally Politically Biased” might catch on the way “Institutionally Racist” did?
How about the “Institutionally Leftist BBC”?
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2513388/Angola-bans-Islam-shuts-mosques.html…well done angola,if only we had the balls to do the same in england
A bloody typically pathetic BBC Six News report on the out-of-control immigration that was propelled beyond the realms of reason by those lying Marxist scum, Labour. I AM sick to death with the BBC’s brainwashing Left-wing garbage and I hope to God I see both Liebour and their vile minions at the corrupt mafia BBC brought to book within my lifetime. The English have carried the brunt of this Marxist experiment which was masterminded by sixties and seventies rich-kid graduates who never knew what it was like to earn a proper living. No, as history shows us, it is the upper classes in their idleness who dream up these little fantasies from the comfort of bohemian coffee houses, only to impose them on those without a voice: the real working class people of this country. My blood boils at the treachery of the Left.
Thou dost speaketh true, brother. Alas, wisdom to the vile seem vile and filths savor but themselves.
The people responsible for this are going to end up hanging from lamposts and they will have no to blame but themselves.
Civil war will come to our streets within two decades.
I endured a quite frankly repugnant debate on BBC News 24 at tea-time. In this foul fest of sopping wet extremist left-wing flapdoodle was three young, wooly-jumper wearing, bespectacled trendy metro-lefty geeks who seemed to be having a competition to see who could say ‘vibrant enrichment’, ‘diverse communities’ and multi-ethnic harmony’ the most. I was very close to catapulting my TV out of he window in pure, unbridled rage. There’s nothing worse than spoilt brat twenty-something urban know-it-alls whose parents are sociology or art history lecturers living in polite suburbs and who listen to jazz whilst sipping Waitrose shiraz.
Alex you are on form. well done for both recent articles.
I hates the words ‘diversity’ ‘enrichment’ ‘cultural’ ‘inclusive’ etc etc due to their ‘new’ meanings and useage.
I think it will be alot quicker than that.
The global economy is bankrupt.
When it does go bankrupt all hell will break lose.
This country is on the verge of making Enoch Powell’s infamous speech. come true.
“Civil war will come to our streets within two decades.”
one
It is publicly owned though.
Well doesn’t Channel4 also get some dosh from the ever-brainwashing EU? – Which, if so, would answer a lot about it.
Channel Four News essentially reads out The Guardian.
Nigeria.
After all these years, INBBC still obfuscating Islamic jihad.
1.)
‘Jihad Watch’:-
“Nigeria: Muslim mobs murder at least 71 Christians”
http://www.jihadwatch.org/2013/11/nigeria-muslim-mobs-murder-at-least-71-christians.html
2.)
INBBC/ Islamic Radio Hausa
(All propaganda paid by British people):-
“Nigeria’s Plateau state hit by deadly attack”
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-africa-25106729
The crap about fracking continues on North West tonight. Lots of publicity to a demo consisting of 25 people …yes 25 people looks like the usual mix of the confused and the odd member of rent a mob. Total total rubbish. Again!
After several delays and secret legal manouvres the trial of the alleged killers of Lee Rigby is due to start again on Friday. Hopefully, the BBC will be there to cover it and explain why it has been delayed. My guess is that they are trying to postpone it until the Universities break up for the Christmas holidays so that the UAF rentacrowd will be available for TV performances outside the court room protecting diversity and multicultism from the far right.
http://mancunianmatters.co.uk/content/271113601-trial-over-murder-manchesters-lee-rigby-begin-following-his-brutal-slaying-outside
Reports I have read state there’s a D notice issued, so no, albeeba wont even have to make any excuses this time.
BBC PM programme tonight, ‘investigating’ the impact tens of thousands of Romanians and Bulgarians will have on Britain by looking at what impact Eastern Europeans have had on Boston.
‘The consensus is that they’ve brought a net benefit’. Eh, that consensus thing – amazing how a handful of the right interviews can always come up with the BBC-approved answer.
Exactly, mate. When the BBC use the word ‘consensus’ they generally mean the Left. This is a great example of their subtle indoctrination, by substituting ‘left-wing group opinion’ with generic words such as ‘consensus’, ‘communities’ and ‘populace’.
Their ‘consensus’ is Ishmael the cameraman and Abdul the sound recordist
How do they square their ‘consensus’ with their own poll results?
http://isthebbcbiased.blogspot.com/2013/11/well-i-never.html
BBC’s Hugh Sykes is unhappy that the Romanian/Bulgarian immigration question is even being discussed:
Just about sums up the BBC’s self appointed patrician class attitude towards the viewing (and paying) public
Well spoken, DB. I think your reasoning is top-notch and exposes the fanaticism of these left-wing zealots… those who aggressively attempt to silence debate because it doesn’t chime with their ideology are fascists in my opinion.
Update:
And our conversation seems to be over.
It was the same tone over on Channel 4, tonight, DB, with the usual sanctimony and soppy guff from metro-trendy leftie, Jon Snow. Now, I don’t want to see violence or persecution aimed towards an entire people, but the weak and gushing sentimentality from those in media left is very telling in terms of why we find ourselves in this mess. The Left’s superficial brotherly love for humanity comes at a price, a price paid by those with the least in society: the British white working-classes, who were never consulted over mass immigration… they’ve been left to rot.
These maudlin, media fairtrade coffee-sippers will cry faux tears for an ethnic group they would pass by in the street on any given day without giving so much as a thought. And white English working class who don’t have a voice? Nah, because they belong to a perceived ‘oppressive majority’ and so any prejudice aimed towards them is fair game in the eyes of these middle-class hypocrites.
If Hugh Sykes likes the Roma so much why doesn’t he put his money where his mouth is and offer a Roma family free accommodation in his house. (He probably has quite a few houses, knowing these BBC folks).
Here’s a thought, BBC Media City would make a wonderful Roma caravan park and hostel. The Roma could also appear on Blue Peter.
First he argues it will give ‘permission for prejudice’
Then he tries the holocaust argument (and how many times do we hear that one from the Left).
Then he tries ‘simply for political gain’
Desperate, desperate lefty rearguard action from yet another impartial BBC reporter.
Indeed. It’s too bad the BBC isn’t equally shy about giving permission for prejudice against other groups: Jews, the Tea Party movement, or Mormons, for example.
This is the reflexive, inherent bias at the BBC. As Sykes proves, they don’t need an official policy or directive from on high to do this. It happens naturally because they all think the same way. Yet more evidence that only a real purge will fix anything.
‘And our conversation seems to be over’
At least not blocked.
They do seem keen on that too as part of their commitment to trust & transparency on personal level.
Corporately they have ‘expediting’.
Thanks to the unique way the BBC is funded, we fund lefty dimwit genocide supporting tw@ts like Sykes….
‘Wiser ways’.
Now why does that smack of those who know better deciding what those who don’t needing to know their place?
We seem blessed with more than a few who appear to feel they get to arbitrate and shut down what doesn’t suit based on no more than being BBC groupies.
$QW$ing hell, DB, the most obvious reductio ad absurdum is his go-to riposte? Seriously? Is that the intellectual level of high-level BBC News mavens?
Hugh Sykes sounds insanely like the ex-BBC producer who used to engage with us under the alias “John Reith”. Only that guy had some amount of integrity and less weasel in him. But this is the exact same thing – as I’ve said quite a few times – as “JR” used to tell us. “Shut up,” he explained. “We’re trying to help and you’re ruining it.”
I and others used to try to tell him that, while we agreed with the concept of everyone getting along, we felt that the BBC was doing it wrong, approaching it from the wrong side of the aisle. Sykes is clearly a fellow traveler, and it’s a damn shame that he stoops so low reflexively.
How is one supposed to have a reasonable debate with this extremist attitude?
What makes you think you’re supposed to have a debate with these people? You’re supposed to accept what they say and be grateful it only costs £145.50.
‘How is one supposed to have a reasonable debate with this’
Possibly the answer, given the BBC, staff and Flokker re/actions, is contained within the question?
Key word – ‘Socialism’
That was a particularly useful exchange DB, as it allowed Sykes to reveal his hand. Henceforth, all his reports can be ignored for the purposes of ‘news’. as, clearly, he doesn’t even understand the concept.
The media – is that you BBC? – want to report the names of the soldiers involved in the killing of an Afghan insurgent (an enemy soldier). But the objection is that naming them would put their lives at risk. You bet it will, as there are terrorists in every UK city who would accept the challenge and BBC reporters who always seem to have very cosy interviews with the them. Maybe justice ought to be open, but on the condition that our media is not actively biased in favour of the enemy.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-25129439
INBBC & Guantanamo.
Will INBBC publicise the consequences of doing what it propagandises for?:-
“Bahrain: Two former Guantanamo detainees arrested for plotting jihad terror attacks”
http://www.jihadwatch.org/2013/11/bahrain-two-former-guantanamo-detainees-arrested-for-plotting-jihad-terror-attacks.html
After battering away all day long with the Hungarian socialist’s “the nasty country”, 5 Live Drive achieved some balance by talking to Veronica. Veronica, a Lithuanian Roma who has been resident here for twenty years, volunteers at a migrant drop-in centre in Coventry where there are already a lot number of Romanians and Bulgarians. Why do they come? Their friends advise them to come “for benefits or to go to scrap metal”, according to Veronica. Veronica says they only spend a week or two looking for work and then try to claim benefits, which they know how to do. Veronica favours tougher benefit rules. Listen here at 1:07.
Veronica got cut off just as it got ‘interesting.
Romania/Bulgaria are hardly near neighbours of Britain are they? If they must move for work there are plenty of nearer countries to choose from. But as we all know,britain is the land of milk and honey for ANYONE except white British . Keep pushing liberal bbc types,your day shall come.
A few days ago, Peter Oborne in the Telegraph criticised the Pollard cover-up review for accepting Thompson’s statement that he knew nothing about shelving the Savile Newsnight exposee despite Helen Boaden’s claim that she had informed him.
Lord Patten must find out the truth about Jimmy Savile, Mark Thompson and the Pollard Review
Now he has received a message from Pollard trying to deflect his criticism, but considering the facts on the ground, shows it’s even more corrupt than might have been thought.
Why Nick Pollard’s report on Jimmy Savile just doesn’t make sense
Excerpt:
The decision to ignore this part of Helen Boaden’s testimony, which was made through a (publicly-funded) lawyer, can mean one of only two things. Either Mr Pollard thinks that Helen Boaden lied to her lawyer, or he thinks she is such an unreliable witness that her testimony carries no weight.
This state of affairs raises a further question. If Helen Boaden is indeed as untrustworthy as Mr Pollard appears to believe, surely she should have been dismissed from the BBC in the wake of the Pollard Review.
Yet she wasn’t sacked. She was given a new and very powerful job, and is now paid £354,000 a year as head of BBC radio. She also sits on the BBC Executive Board, which makes her one of the seven most senior BBC executives.
And yet Pollard felt that testimony from this senior BBC figure carried such little weight that it wasn’t even worth mentioning in his £3 million report, even though it contradicted one of his central conclusions.
It just doesn’t make sense.
This one has been a slow-burner, but looking at the comments to Oborne’s latest piece, with facts and conclusions hard to challenge, surely it has to flare up now, post PAC inquiry farrago?
Hugs is top floor market rate royalty, awash with undeserved rewards, yet again seems charmed by getting a pass via a £3m whitewa… inquiry when she’s clearly compromised.
Her ‘The Editors’ outings defined the unaccountable delusion of BBC management, backed by total control of the edit to the point of censorship.
Yet she still heads up a vast segment of education and information broadcast by the UK’s largest media monopoly.
Which goes beyond unique.
“surely it has to flare up now”
You’d have thought so, but what can one newspaper realistically do if the monopoly TV and radio news provider decides to remain schtum? It takes a concerted battle to force the Beeb to talk about something it would rather not. Think how long it took to make them discuss Climategate.
You are probably right.
But chipping away can see effects.
The deadline for ‘The Future of the BBC’ consultation (outside of BBC #foiexempted filters and control) is bearing down.
Oh, and further to my above about Ms. Boaden, originator of a now very (badly) mutated DNA strand…
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/media/the-tossers-who-could-win-for-the-tories-425799.html
‘Helen the hidden
Don’t bother emailing complaints to BBC head of news Helen Boaden. She was at the launch evening for the Reuters Institute for the Study of Journalism in Oxford last Monday night. Discussion turned to protest groups and lobbying outfits which email their views to senior editors. Boaden’s response: “Oh, I just changed my email address.” So much for the Beeb being accountable.
Blimmin’ right wi… um, papers and their… facts.
ps: That’s this Helen Boaden:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/aboutthebbc/insidethebbc/managementstructure/biographies/boaden_helen/
Spot on Guest.
This one example alone shows clear corruption and cover-up on the part of the BBC and subsequent ‘review’ by Pollard. That people can go to prison for not paying for this corruption to continue is a complete travesty of any kind of justice and morality.
I would suggest that all those who are still to file a report to the Parliament Commons Select Committee Website about The Future of the BBC make this one of the key elements of their observations of the BBC mindset. Politicians must be made aware that to attempt to excuse or permit this insidious organisation to continue makes them just as guilty and corrupt.
Submissions to be filed before the 6th December.
‘..people can go to prison for not paying for this corruption to continue is a complete travesty..
Since I first heard of the Select Committee I have kept a Word .doc open on my screen to add the more egregious recent examples to my submission.
The danger has been… is.. that the BBC keeps providing so much material.
I simply can’t see them wading through a 25MB submission, unless this is to accommodate images or video evidence too. So the danger is that it has been set up to be overwhelmed. Which is very BBC, who use the logic with CECUTT that them screwing up so much is causing delays in the the blow-off system that is chafing the box-tickers frillies, so the solution they have come up with is to reject by default and then ban any persistent enough to not take that lying down.
They are truly corrupt, and shameless with stunts like this.
I’m leaving ‘bias’ to others, and I know there will be enough of them, possibly including politicians from all sides, and that will only see a ‘balance’ fudge result at best.
I’m gunning for listed, evidenced fact.
Stuff like Pollard & this latest certainly comes under such a category.
And no amount of PR-trained waffle can get around when they are caught with their frillies around their ankles, tushies in the wind, bang to rights.
As you say, they have been proven to be as bent as they come, lying and cheating and bullying and being astoundingly uncurious and Alzheimers-grade selectively forgetful on clear and present abuses too often, for too long.
It needs to stop.
My main concern is what public sector low-level filter munchkins will be gatekeeping submissions before a decision maker or committee member gets to see anything.
‘Politicians must be made aware..
As the deadline looms, you have prompted me to revisit now in more detail the submissions pages.
http://www.parliament.uk/get-involved/have-your-say/take-part-in-committee-inquiries/commons-witness-guide/
From the ‘Guidance’ (which for anything to do with the BBC already inspires bad comparisons) one sees the limit is actually a reasonable 3,000 words/8xA4, if with a bunch of other ‘requirements’ on presentation only a bureaucrat could love but all would be foolish to ignore.
I see there is also Guidance to Witnesses, which is encouraging, at least that they are open to having them.
The BBC ‘Trust’ Star Chamber of course meets in secret, and only interviews un-named BBC-selected witnesses and/or experts behind doors closed to the public. What they see and hear is therefore anyone’s guess. This is a key part of their steamroller unaccountability (of course such as previous DG’s, Nick Pollard, etc, have discovered/claimed that they can’t be held to account because mystery underlings have kept them out of such loops… another Beware of the Leopard implausible deniability creation of theirs for just such a reason).
My focus will be from here:
http://www.parliament.uk/business/committees/committees-a-z/commons-select/culture-media-and-sport-committee/news/131022-future-of-the-bbc-tor/
There are only three points listed I have any interest in:
* What should the BBC be for and what should be the purpose of public service broadcasting?
* How well has the BBC performed in the current Charter period in achieving its mission and public purposes?
* How should the BBC be governed, regulated and held accountable beyond 2016?
Actually the first and third err on the academic once that second is properly discussed and addressed.
Even this is not really phrased the way I think it should be.
Charters and guidelines and fancy mission statements aside, simply put, I want the committee to shine a spotlight on whether the BBC has, is and can deliver a professional, accurate broadcast product based on objectivity and integrity.
And does it have regulatory mechanisms in place that are transparent, fair, responsive and effective to keep it that way?
Yes… or no?
With the legions of examples of no, all the waffle on funding or governance, remits, representations, promotions, etc become essentially moot.
If a national broadcast media monopoly can’t be accurate or trustworthy, it has no business being in business.
Especially by state-enforced funding means.
From what I can see, besides their continual bias to propagate their own agenda, in direct contravention of their remit as per the charter, there have been numerous scandals that have come to light over the past year.
Besides the scandals themselves, there are the attempts to cover them up. So they have acted like common criminals. All this while rewarding themselves far in excess, even if they were doing the job that goes with that respective position.
Because of the power of this media to affect how people think, especially with the BBC, because of the trust and respectability that the charter gives it, when used corruptly the damage is far greater than any other outlet.
We would not accept this from our Police, NHS, Social Services, or Politicians, or any body that we are supposed to be able to trust. To allow them to continue would be to further damage our society, and send the message that this kind of behaviour is okay – provided you can talk your way out of it.
Further damage when to choose not to support this corrupt and unethical organisation would lead one to be sentenced to prison. It is something fitting of an evil dictatorship – not a supposed free society.
If politicians allow this to continue they merely show themselves to be made of similar stock.
I’ll give the relevant examples that highlight the above, as well as the proven and admitted areas of bias that have come out, with the target that the BBC has shown to be incapable now of following their remit, in the same way that a proven criminal would not be put in a position of trust until they have shown complete rehabilitation.
For that reason the licence fee funding has to end, and the BBC either sold off or terminated.
An excellent article by Tim Congdon at the Commentator
Scrap the licence fee and privatise the BBC
http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/b03j9nhw
Baroness Sayeeda Warsi
The Islamic Golden Age Episode 3 of 20
Boy, 20 programs of this crap. I wonder if they’ll do a body count of this golden age?
‘….we rediscover some of the key thinkers and achievements from the Islamic Golden Age. The period ranges from 750 to 1258 CE and over twenty episodes, we’ll hear about architecture, invention, medicine, innovation and philosophy’.
Fill in the gaps.
Pure and simple
More BBC Islam Propaganda
“According to historians, the golden age of islam started from the 8th century until the late 12 century. And Islamic conquests of the barbaric turks stretched all the way to the 9th century before the Caliphate was established.
Beginning the 9th century (end of Islamic wars) onto the 10th century, there was emergence of artists, engineers, scholars, poets, philosophers, geographers etc.
At that was the time their culture, science & math allegedly flourished?
But WAIT!…From tyrannical barbarism engaged in wars to scientific scholars and artsy culture in less than 100 years?.
How can that even be possible?
Logic tells you that whatever scientists or inventions they had must have been born of the kafirs/the conquered or converted from them.
How can it be? Barbarians don’t do lab tests, they don’t do mathematical formulae’s and they certainly don’t produce scientists by the next generation when they themselves and their fellow men know nothing about it.
Victors write history – The arab muslims had victoriously written their own ‘false’ history for islam. ”
Which today continues to mislead and delude muslims, and is propagated by the BBC.
15mins – Is this the Islamic “thought for the day”?
The lands Muslims ruled were in their “golden age”?
“Now, greater civilizations of the past left us witnesses to their accomplishments. The Romans did. So did the Greeks, the Mayas and the Chinese. The great Egyptian civilization of old left us the Pyramids – one of their witnesses to their accomplishments.
Where is the evidence for the Muslims civilization?
Is it the Ummayyad Mosque in Damascus? This was no more than a Christian church that the Muslims took over and converted to a mosque, just to annoy the Christians and make their life as uncomfortable as possible.
The old civilizations had their greatest accomplishments in the proximity of their origins.
For Muslims this is the Mecca and Medina areas. But there are no accomplishments there. All there is is a pre-Islamic black stone enclosed within a mud cube. There is nothing worth mentioning in Mecca or Medina.
Even in other areas Muslims accomplished nothing. In the example of Spain, Muslims took over buildings by force from the original natives, and stayed there, unwelcome, until the natives had enough power to get rid of the Muslims”
You know, no need even to provide a link,
there is so much on the net of the the lie/the hoax of the “Golden Age” nonsense.
It is astounding the BBC, continues with this drivel.
You nasty Golden Age of Islam Denier !
The science is settled !
It’s really never a sign of a healthy culture when one’s self-esteem relies on a lost period hundreds of years ago. I can think of a few examples.
I say this series is intended to reassure a few vocal Mohammedans as much as it is to – yet again – convince the Islamophobes of the wonderful accomplishment of Mohammedans somewhere, sometime.
Similarly, Simon Schama got to do a five-part series which may as well have been titled “The Story of the Jews: 2000+ Years of Being Whiny Victims”. I bet that series didn’t convince a single person to cast aside any anti-Jewish sentiments they may have held, and indeed might have made a number of people roll their eyes and switch off at yet more generational guilt. But it certainly gave the BBC a good piece of evidence to wave in the faces of those who complain the BBC doesn’t give Jews equal special air time.
As has been said many times this is all on a false premise: it has nothing to do with Islam: it may have happened when Islam is strong or in a country with a majority having Islam as the major religion but the advances are NOTHING to do with Islam: if they calm it does then the SAME period (plus many more periods before and after) can be called the Christian Golden Age.
the OIC s Baroness Sayeeda Warsi ? …
The Islamic “Golden”? Age? …
BBC head of religious programmes? …
Aquil Ahmed? —-
give this intelligence insulting crap,
all the contempt it deserves.
“The Myth of Spain’s Islamic Golden Age”
by Emmet Scott.
http://www.newenglishreview.org/custpage.cfm/frm/140210/sec_id/140210
excellent article George.
Wow it’s difficult to believe the stupidity and complacency of leftie Dave over the influx of Romagarians in just 35 days. Realising UKIP are breathing down his neck, and frankly not wanting to be re-elected so he can begin earning some real money Cameron announces some half baked measures which won’t even be in place when the second half of the population of Romanians who aren’t here actually arrive.
At the same time he’s bemoaning all this, waving his hands in the air in a panic, he is supporting EU enlargement to the East including Turkey, and there’s a whole load more migrants just waiting to come to Western Europe.
This is a party which has clearly lost any idea of what it is doing with policies which work in opposite directions, and a prime minister who simply doesn’t care what happens so long as he’s free to get on the lecture circuit in 18 months time !
Meanwhile at the same time Boris Johnson is aligning himself for the top job when leftie Dave loses the election. I have no doubt the same feeble minded grand dames of the blue rinse brigade will support him as much as they supported Michael Portillo, IDS, Michael Howerd (Spl deliberate!) etc etc all failures but all very attractive to the 80 year old wealthy Tory Widow.
Not to mention Boris’s hopeless performance when interviewed and the fact he is a known liar, the guy is unelectable as a prime minister, but I don’t think that will prevent his election as leader.
Hey Ho, two terms of Ed Millipede, but if ever there was a man who could snatch defeat from the jaws of victory, he’s it!
And then the BBC have a discussion about why people don’t bother to vote (a la Brand) well looking at the future of politics it isn’t going to get any better, and it’s hardly possible to believe, but it could actually be worse!
The BBC ‘Gravy train’ and lack of BAFTA Awards…
Did you know that the BBC has not WON a single BAFTA award for NEWS coverage since 2006 (and why are we not that at all surprised by that)?
Even before that – it only won (two) awards in the 12 years of public broadcasting as a virtual UK broadcast monopoly, (paid exclusively by outdated license when a radio set cost more than a TV does today). Now in ‘entertainment and comedy’ the BBC fares slighly better since 2009 winning just over half the domestic BAFTA awards, but then again it has virtually ALL the license fee money to be funny with the money. BBC Gravy train: Of the lost 150 million awarded to itself (by the BBC trust) to fund mamagers ‘leaving expenses’, part of a series of pay offs which cannot be recollected in Parliament even under oath. Of those responsible for public funds (The Public Accounts Commitee) questioned both Patten (BBC Trust) and Thompson (former DG) who then both denied it was their responsibility to ‘question’ top executive payments. In fact the person responsible for making the payments was redirected to Ms Lucy Adams (HR) who later admitted that she had lied in parliament – (has since resigned). Not so Patten. And then the wisdom of buying a commercial travel book company (Lonely Planet) for £152 million (in 2007), that is inconsistant with public broadcasting license and having to sell it at less than half (£51.5 million) (by 2011) is an abuse (and loss) of license fee. The person responsible for that debacle was also awarded £800,000 by the BBC trust again. The top management of the BBC managed to loose another £98 million on developing a computer system to store video and audio on demand (DAM) which had to be scrapped (suprise?) as unfit for purpose by the people who use it (staff). So for top management awards, head towards the BBC, (no BAFTA awards), but you get a great ‘payoff ‘and you can retire to be a Labour MP come the next general election (like so many before, it’s a price worth paying as long as those muggle taxpayers don’t have a clue where the money goes).
Facts: http://www.telegraph.co.uk/culture/…/bbc/…/What-Lonely-Planet-is-the-BBC-on.html
It”s worth remembering that the BBC rubbished Classic FM when it was first launched (as it does not like competition) now it copies it. (www.dailymail.co.uk/…/Classic-FM-goes-war-BBC-Radio-3-copycats.html). We can do wthout the BBC managers and privatise what’s left (by selling the rump to Labour, who seem to own most of it anyway). After the Post Office, it has to be The BBC to be privatised (as it’s no good to anyone but the Labour party, (except nobody would buy it under Labour management either).
Could we vaccinate people against racism? Apparently we can – or should that be that they (the state) can. It’s only virtually for now, but you can bet that they are working on a real cure (see http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-23709836). Apparently there have been 106 fatal racist attacks since the killing of Stephen Lawrence in 1993. Presumably they mean “black teenager Stephen Lawrence” – slipping up there Beeb – but at least they didn’t mention, say, Kriss Donald or Charlene Downes. The figure of 106 comes from a link to a hate site called the Institute of Race Relations; following the link it reads “106 deaths with a (known or suspected) racial element” – even this is a somewhat suspect number as it uses definitions from the disgraced Macpherson report. Still, known, suspected or imagined – it’s all the same to the BBC.
Racism is an invented construct to silence and shame us in what really is just a natural human instinct to protect what is ours.
We are what politicians have made us and involantarily so…..
OCR on this list of alleged victims produces the following list:
Stephen Lawrence, Ali Ibrahim, Shamsuddin Mahmood, Mohan Singh Kullar, Simon Tang, Michael Menson, Lahkvinder ‘Ricky’ Reel, Akofa Hodasi, Surjit Singh Chhokar, Farhan Mire, Jay Abatan, Harold (aka Errol) McGowan, Ben Kamanalagi, Zahid Mubarek, Santokh ‘Peter’ Singh Sandhu, Kombra Divakaren, Jan Marthin Pasalbessi, Glynne Agard, Abdi Dorre, Tariq Javed, Khaliur Rahman, Fetah Marku, Shiblu Rahman, Sharon Bubb, Firsat Dag, Ross Parker, Peiman Bahmani, Shah Wahab, lsrar Hussain, Mohammed Isa Hasan Ali, Johnny Delaney, Awais Alam, Quadir Ahmed, Kriss Donald, Shahid Aziz, Brij Brushan Shanna, Bapishankar Kathirgamanathan, Kalan Kawa Karim, Mi Gao Huang Chen, Mugilan Sutherman, Kamal Raza Butt, Anthony Walker, Rushi Kamdar, Isiah Young-Sam, Lee Phipps, Christopher Alaneme, Mohammed Penraiz, Changez Aril, Shezan Umarii, Syed Sorafot Ali, Meshack Brown, Enayit Khalili, Tarsen Nahar, Marion Moran, Gregory Femandes, Ahmed Hassan, Nilanthan Moorthy, Mohammed ai- Majed, Syden Pearson, Papa Mbaye Mody (aka Alioune Cisse), Kunal Mohanty, Roman Romasov, Marek Muszynski, Ekram Haque, Marcin Bilaszewski, Kester David, Nachhattar Singh Bola, Simon San, lnderjit Singh, Mahesh Wickramasingha, Anuj Bidve, John Auld, Mehar Dhariwal, Dalbagh Singh Malhi and Mohammed Saleem Khan.
Pictures not available for: Saied Ahmed, Donna 0’Dwyer, Mushtaq Hussain, Daniel Blake, John Reid, James Tossell, Remi Surage, Stelios Economou, Liaquat (aka Bobby) Ali, Joseph Alcendor, Hassan Musa, Zardasht Draey, Jason McGowan, Mohammed Asghar, Sarfraz Khan, Gian Singh Nagra, Frankie Kyriacou, Derrick Shaw, Unnamed Asian man, Paul Rosenberg, Akberali Tayabali Mohamedally, Deraye Lewis, Khizar Hyat, Hamidullah I-lamidi, Wei Wang, Adam Michalski, Asaf Mahmood Ahmed, Hamida Begum, Alana Mian, Mohammed ldris Mirza, Stainton Barrett and Manzoor Ahmed.
I note that Kriss Donald, for instance, IS included but quite a few are not. PC Patrick Dunne, for instance. He was attending a minor domestic disturbance in Clapham when he heard the sound of gunfire. As he went outside to investigate he was shot once in the chest. Three black men left the scene laughing and firing shots into the air in triumph. No racist element there then.
I might spend a little time Googling some of these entries but, in the meantime, this analysis is interesting:
Civil “Rights” – Uncivil Lies
It seems that it referred originally to “157 Unnecessary Deaths” but 58 ethnic Chinese people who were found dead in the back of a lorry while trying to enter Britain illegally, identified in the website above, have since been removed. Clearly the list has been padded out as far as the compilers think they can get away with.
In the twenty years since the death of Stephen Lawrence, we (i.e. the Institute of Race Relations) can report that 106 people have lost their lives in (known or suspected racist attacks – five per year on average. So it could be less than 106 as some of the suspected attacks could have nothing to do with racism as a motive. BBC turns a qualified statement into a general statement. Hardly good journalism.
Judging by the examples given by the report: attack in a young offenders cell by his cell mate, an argument over litter, etc. the degree of suspicion is high.
Here are some more examples from the report:
06/00, JAN MARTHIN PASALBESSI, 48, NEWPORT, SOUTH WALES
An Indonesian man beaten to death outside the hospital where his 14-year-old step-daughter was being treated for injuries during a racist gang attack on her. (The same gang attacked Jan.) Judge rejected any racial motivation.
06/00, GLYNNE AGARD, 34, WESTBURY, WILTSHIRE
On a night out with his brother, Stephen and friend Gary Belgrave, were attacked by a gang of eight who kicked and punched Glynne to death. In July 2001, Wayne King was jailed for four years after pleading guilty to manslaughter. A 21-year-old was jailed for four years for ABH. The judge said the murder was not racially motivated.
The decision whether an attack is racially motivated is not the court’s but the Institute’s.
If we allow the benefit of the doubt and accept that all the fatalities came from racism that is an average 5 murders annually. If we use the figures supplied in another BBC report Crime data: Homicide at 30-year England and Wales lowand take last year’s 550 homicides as the base line then racist murders make up around 1% of murders. That drops to around 0.7% of the 700 mark made by visually analysing the graph supplied for the median.
Frankly I’m amazed that the figures for racist murder are so low. The BBC is making a big deal about nothing.
I just have to wonder how much money, and hence resources, is ‘spent’ worrying about the components of crime and not simply tacking the crime itself.
It would be interesting to learn from victims if they feel vast monies spent on quangos, charities, box-ticks and targets from the swelling outrage job creation industries simply to colour in the perps was worth it, or could have been better directed to just nabbing ’em and sticking ’em away.
Leading beyond their authority again?
The article heads up with ‘It’s an uncomfortable truth but scientists say most people have an ingrained racial bias’
Uncomfortable for who? the faithful who have accepted the received truth that ‘race is a social construct’?
Perhaps they , the liberal inquisition, might prove their case. That naturally occurring ‘racial solidarity’ is a bad thing before attempting to ‘brain wash’ it out of people . Or are they only trying to brainwash it out of some people?
And all enthusiastically promoted by the state broadcaster
This is truly sinister
I have just submitted my post to the BBC via their labyrinthine complaints procedure something I hardly ever bother to do.
, I t will do little good but as my card is doubtless marked already, I felt it important to make some kind of protest , however feeble , as I think this is truly frightening development that our national broadcaster should be challenging not encouraging
‘It will do little good’
Appreciating the reality behind your resignation, I will repeat my view that while it may not seem like any good comes of the vast effort (for little result and no reward), however small such things do have a cumulative effect.
Yes it will be first ignored.
Yes they’ll then smother it with belief in their inability to get anything other than perfect.
Then it will be rejected.
You may even get banned for having a concern.
But… it will all be on record.
And even the most unaccountable entities in history have found themselves uncomfortably being held to full account eventually.
I was on the verge of complaining about North West tonight last night. looking back I haven’t complained for a while. Hopefully they will have to slash jobs in the complaints department as I have not been sending them any work recently. As I’ve said before the programming at BBc is now so abysmal that I hardly ever watch it.
I read this article. The Beeb liked this story. Vaccinate against racism. Hmmm…Quite frightening that they, the Beeb, seem to endorse vaccination against those who commit “thought crimes”…Just like the erh…Nazis. Surely not.
Agreed. it seems incredible that the BBC seems ignorant of the fact that this is exactly the kind of pseudo scientific research that was carried out in Hitler’s Germany and Stalin’s Russia
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/entertainment-arts-25126118
Not biased as such, at least no more so than any other shameful self-promoting ‘news’ article. But the story itself just demonstrates everything that is wrong with the BBC. When someone says the BRITISH Broadcasting Corporation needs to be “less British” you know this tired out monolith needs to go bust ASAP.
Could the BBC promote itself more?! More mirthful self-delusion from the man with the sound bite: ‘The BBC needs to start treating public money as its own’
Either Tony Hall is an idiot or he is super confident of Labour victory next time around., or both.
Lord Hall is fooling people by implying that the BBC should not be so modest and promote itself more. But if he believes the BBC doesn’t already promote itself he’s delusional. He has said himself that the BBC is using its ‘soft power’ to spread its message (for message read Left-wing propaganda) around the world.
He is not delusional though, he’s spreading misinformation as usual.
The BBC must be broken up. It is partial and partisan in news and current affairs. It is profligate with our money and does not produce many good programmes, so where is the money going. It acts against the best interests of the people of the UK, and particular against England which it does not recognise as a single unified nation.
On the Twelfth Day of Christmas,
The EU sent to me
No idea how many migrants,
Who steals all the piping?
ATM Lebanese looping,
Nine ladies of the night,
Eight kids need schooling,
Seven invalids need treating,
Six-to-a-room, they still need housing,
Earnings sent back home,
Four Commie birds,
Three hit and runs,
Two taxi drivers,
All approved by the BBC!
Apologies if already posted:
Start of Boris Johnson’s Margaret Thatcher Lecture to the Centre for Policy Studies:
“The amazing thing about the funeral of Baroness Thatcher was the size of the crowds, and the next amazing thing was that they were so relatively well behaved. The BBC had done its best to foment an uprising.”
Hence the queue of cereal offenders lining up at the BBC podium today to pour scorn on Boris.
A clown maybe?…but the BBC foment shot will wound and fester, God willing.
BBC has no sense of humour does it…they tried to get Thatcher tipped out of her coffin,, but the country were everything that the BBC bedwetting claques were not.
Hope Pope Francis will make Maggie a saint, and make us all a Ralph Miliband Guy for next year in Lewes .
That would all be an “ecumenical matter”
‘cereal’ offenders, very good! Especially considering his cornflakes theme.
. . . and again the BBC enables the avoidance of an issue. On its quest to ensure the introduction of plain cigarette packs Today gave, what, 30 seconds to the head of the IEA to say why the evidence in favour of this policy is, to say the least, thin. This was followed by Public Health Minister Jane Ellison and shadow health secretary, Andy Burnham competing in a “who is the most right-on?” pissing contest. Then the proposal is headlined in the “news” which included the usual “but Labour said . . . ” comment seeking to undermine any Conservative “credit” for its change of tack despite the policy being Labour’s anyway.
IMHO, the public “debate” to be enabled by an impartial BBC should be between those who favour the plain package crapola and those who oppose it; not between those who want plain packaging either this afternoon or this evening. Yet again the BBC promotes a Labour two-prong tactic: this time of 1. demonising the Conservatives for killing children by delaying the intro of plain packaging, and 2. giving unwarranted credence to the array of fake charities (eg ASH) using taxpayers’ money to further the “something – anything – must be done, even if it’s ineffective” agenda.
Hope the “fag” companies( can we say that?) will provide free colours so we can do a Banksy or an Emin as we “puff”away( can we say that…again).
Unlock the inner artist…and hope too that convenient folds will be put in pace so we can do a bit of origami whilst we`re at it.
It`s a martial art you know-and of our five a day!
Sorry-bit hazy…these Acapulco Gold with the BBC logo on them are outtasight maan!
Question: How can you tell a droid is lying.
Answer: His/her/tranny’s lips are moving.
And so we had yesterday on Radio Dull, the droid, whose name escapes me, saying,
‘And Steve Wright’s in his studio preparing for this afternoon show’.
This at 10.30 in the morning. Yeah like it takes Steve Wright three and a half hours to prepare for his impersonation of a seven year old kid with AD/HD whose forgotten his Ritalin.
What Oi-Wie-ee was doing was recording his ‘live’ Sunday morning show. Don’t bother me but ‘for compliance purposes’ every interview that’s not live has to prefaced with a (zzz) warning to that effect. Every interview, but apparently not every show. They could always give the slot to someone who could actually be arsed getting out of their bed on a sunday morning and going to work, and who hasn’t been stinking up the schedules with drivel for thirty years now.
Anyhoo what’s another white lie/ steaming great porkie. Add it to
These polar bear cubs are in the Arctic (not Hamburg Zoo).
James Purnell is doing a fantastic job.
Tony Hall has a vision for the BBC
We got it just about right.
Impartiality is in our genes
Global warming – the science is settled
The BBC is the world’s most trusted news organisation
We all thought he was just a harmless eccentric.
Nikki ‘n’ Rache do quollybanna
Mr Wright was one BBC guy who did openly admit to be supportive of Mrs T.
Personally I can’t stand most of Radio 2’s output but on a long drive IMO Steve Wright is listenable, and one Beeboid I don’t mind, he keeps himself to himself and is not plastered all over the tabloids as is gob on a stick ginger boy Evans.
The guy does a 3 hour live show daily (interviews aside), and I guess a lot of prep is required just as one would if doing a presentation.
Agree that the Sunday show is a farce.
Agreed!
Have come to love the old rogue.
His Ask Elvis is worderful-if it`s still running.
He`s a bit of a suckup, lets the likes of Alistair Campbell get away with shite…but he`s the sunshine after the toxic smog of Jeremy Vine, so let`s treasure him for now!
A stiff`kit please Carol!
Can virtual reality be used to tackle [White] racism?
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-23709836
Actually, the BBC seems to have decided being divorced from reality can solve everything they appear to feel needs addressing.
Is it ‘Racism’ day on the BBC schedule, as my FaceBook feed has just been spammed by a series of the most bonkers ‘so-ands-so says, so it must be true’ tripe I’ve read in a long while.
Could you imagine a dark girl in a headscarf taking the test and being transformed into an English ethnic type in a miniskirt? I don’t see the BBC giving any time to a story like that.