Hi folks. Well, last week saw the BBBC server crash (again) and we lost some posts and many comments. Here’s hoping for a smoother December! Here’s the first Open Thread of the week!
START THE WEEK OPEN THREAD
Bookmark the permalink.
Search Biased BBC
Recent Comments
- Up2snuff Dec 22, 16:25
Weekend 21st December 2024
TWoTWee Watch #2 – have you verified that BBC, and has Marianna sprung into action? or are you merely trying… - Lefty Wright Dec 22, 16:19
Weekend 21st December 2024
Pug Well if the Islamists DO manage to repeat the Bolshevik achievement then King Charles should be making plans NOW.… - moggiemoo Dec 22, 16:17
Weekend 21st December 2024
Why bother? It’ll all be forced upon us soon enough. - vlad Dec 22, 16:05
Weekend 21st December 2024
The lying BBC (tautology) are claiming that the latest muslim terrorist (tautology) was a right-wing atheist anti-muslim, and it’s all… - Lefty Wright Dec 22, 16:04
Weekend 21st December 2024
Fedup2 The BBC love to do bit of Imam bum licking. - Lefty Wright Dec 22, 15:56
Weekend 21st December 2024
Zephir Are Sir Keir’s baying mob ” women of a certain age”? - digg Dec 22, 15:53
Weekend 21st December 2024
While I don’t support some of the bad decisions made by some of the Christian Church elders in the UK,… - Up2snuff Dec 22, 15:45
Weekend 21st December 2024
TWoTWee Watch #1 – BBC bashing the the former Bishop of Chelmsford & Church of England Stephen Cottrell, is the…
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
NHS Poker on BBC today:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-30267011
Cons Opening – £2bn
Labour Raise you – £2.5bn (on top)
Unfortunately they have all swallowed the line endlessly pushed by the bBBC and the public sector unions, that the NHS needs more money. Whereas any thinking user of the NHS can see that they have far too much money, wasting much of it on hordes of admin staff in hospitals instead of using it at the front-end, GP practices where most people go.
The NHS would gobble up the entire economic output of the UK given half a chance, what it needs is 2bn less not more. On the BBC1 news they stated that extra funding was needed because of an ageing population AND an increase in patient numbers. Now I wonder were these extra patients suddenly appeared from. Any idea BBC?
Sorry the “waste on penpushers” is a mendacious lie pushed by both Lab and Con. Its a distraction, for fear of facing real issues.
Africans and East Europeans have long figured how to have an NHS baby (costs £1400 a pop to the NHS) because the Department of Health too stupid to classify Maternity Delivery as an “Elective procedure” (chargeable to non-residents) instead it’s an “emergency” (non-elective procedure) which everyone on the planet is entitled to.
It goes on endlessly, NHS resources drained away by chancers from overseas. Got AIDS? £40k a year of drugs, just enrol as a “student”, get free treatment.
The BMA say its not GP’s job to act as immigration officers, to check on eligibility for treatment.
Ask any NHS staff and they are disgusted at seeing resources drained away. Ask a politician, (or Daily Mail journalist) it’s all about too many pen-pushers.
See when you have been “had”?
Just a reminder for anybody who lost comments in the recent crash, I was able to recover most if not all of them on my site reader and they are available here on a PDF file.
Teddy – good recruiting idea – signed up – awaiting access now to your PDF file to find a previous BiasedBBC.org post
As far as I know you don’t have to be a member to access the file – but in any case you’re approved 🙂
Before I posted it on my site I also offered it here to be posted but so far I haven’t heard anything.
I see you’re right – guests can’t open attachments. In any case if I hear from All Seeing Eye I’ll be happy to send him the file for posting here.
Welcome back and thanks to David, Alan and the back room boys
The lion-killer who became an Israeli hero
http://m.bbc.co.uk/news/magazine-30248216
According to the BBC “The man who was to become a hero to the British and to the Israelis was neither British nor Jewish”
And yet as the BBC article goes on to state “he was an Irishman born in County Longford in 1867 to a Protestant father and Catholic mother. Ireland was then part of the United Kingdom”
And Wikipedia has a referenced quote “Colonel Patterson commanded the West Belfast regiment of the Ulster Volunteers during the Home Rule Crisis of 1913–14”.
So, born in Great Britain, active against Home Rule for a united Ireland, Protestant, yet the BBC is claiming this hero was not British.
I have no idea why the BBC would promote a revisionist Irish nationalist point of view.
The Israeli angle is also a bit iffy.
It was during the Middle East campaign that he found himself in command of the Zion Mule Corps, a group of Jewish volunteers eager to serve the international cause and to advance their own cause of creating a Jewish state at the same time. Patterson became a passionate supporter of Zionism and the ranks of the detachment he commanded included influential heroes of the cause, including Ze’ev Jabotinsky and Joseph Trumpeldor.
What is this international cause? This was a World War. Both Allies and Axis were multinational. The Jews wanted to join the Allies and specifically the British cause.
The Zion Mule Corps were Jewish volunteers. They wanted to liberate the land of Israel from the Ottoman Turks but the British commander General Maxwell rejected the idea, stating that he doubted that Palestine would be invaded (it was) and that foreign nationals were not allowed in the British Army (I guess he had never heard of the Gurkhas), and suggested they serve elsewhere as something other than members.
My understanding is that they were a transport unit because the British were unhappy about the idea of armed Jews. Their original official name, Assyrian Refugee Mule Corps, gives some indication of that.
The Gurkhas weren’t part of the British Army before 1947. Up until that point they were on the establishment of the Indian Army.
I think you are quibbling. The British Indian Army was the principal army of India before independence from the United Kingdom in 1947. It was responsible for the defence of both British India and the Princely states, which could also have their own armies. The Indian Army was an important part of the British Empire’s forces, both in India and abroad, particularly during the First World War and the Second World War. Maxwell would have been well aware of them.
1st King George V’s Own Gurkha Rifles (The Malaun Regiment) (raised 1815, allocated to Indian Army at independence in 1947)
2nd King Edward VII’s Own Gurkha Rifles (The Sirmoor Rifles) (raised 1815, allocated to British Army in 1948)
3rd Queen Alexandra’s Own Gurkha Rifles (raised 1815, allocated to Indian Army at independence in 1947)
4th Prince of Wales’s Own Gurkha Rifles (raised 1857, allocated to Indian Army at independence in 1947)
5th Royal Gurkha Rifles (Frontier Force) (raised 1858, allocated to Indian Army at independence in 1947)
6th Gurkha Rifles, renamed 6th Queen Elizabeth’s Own Gurkha Rifles in 1959 (raised 1817, allocated to British Army in 1948)
7th Gurkha Rifles, renamed 7th Duke of Edinburgh’s Own Gurkha Rifles in 1959 (raised 1902, allocated to British Army in 1948)
8th Gurkha Rifles (raised 1824, allocated to Indian Army at independence in 1947)
9th Gurkha Rifles (raised 1817, allocated to Indian Army at independence in 1947)
10th Princess Mary’s Own Gurkha Rifles (raised 1890, allocated to British Army in 1948)
11th Gorkha Rifles (1918–1922; raised again by India following independence in 1947)
You see, posters on this site can gives us the information that £3 billion cannot provide. Thanks Flex and Deegee.
A couple of direct answers to the BBC’s ignorant and blind attitude to the Michael Brown / Ferguson issue :
http://www.realclearpolitics.com/video/2014/11/30/lowry_on_lessons_from_ferguson_dont_rob_a_store_and_assault_a_police_officer.html
“Don’t rob a convenience store. Don’t attack a cop in his car, trying to grab his gun. If he has a drawn gun and you are charging at him, when he says stop – JUST STOP !” The face of the other panellist is a picture.
And here is Rudi Guiliani – the whole damn thing should never even have been put to a Grand Jury :
http://www.realclearpolitics.com/video/2014/11/30/giuliani_darren_wilson_case_never_should_have_gone_to_a_grand_jury.html
“Nobody wants to read the witness transcripts” Especially the bloody BBC.
More Rudi Guiliani – a man speaking from experience. It is a tragedy that he did not became President, and the US chose Obama :
http://www.realclearpolitics.com/video/2014/11/26/giuliani_prosecute_grand_jury_witnesses_for_perjury.html
The USA were never that quick in perceiving a good president – they tended, especially latterly, to go for wrong ‘uns.
Like the good citizens of the Former UK, they fall for lies and spin, and false promises of hopey changey, rather than a proven track record, then wonder why it all goes tits up.
It is just so sad that Obama and Black leaders have not lead from the front, rather than legitimise that ‘wrong is right’.
Mayor Giuliani got it straight away:
It is wrong to rob a convenience store then rush an armed cop, doing his dangerous duty in accordance with the law, shortly after.
The Ferguson jury, after hearing in detail all the evidence from both sides, has found exactly that.
Just wish the BBC would show both sides fairly so as not to legitimise the Ferguson mentality to a wider audience.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-30266172
The BBC is part of the problem …
I want to see if the bBC expose Brown’s juvenile criminal records. The reports are it exists, not clear exactly what is in them and what went on. Rumor, I repeat rumor, has it there is a second degree homicide charge.
Look, you forgot the “UNARMED” bit…
The American shopping spree custom the day after Thanks Giving has been imported into Britain, why is it called ‘Black Friday’ ? Is it because a lot of black people rush off to the shops and have a full scale riot ?
David Brims,
“Yesup just look at dem dirty nigros.”
Dez, look at the BBC clips of the mayhem; the proportion of people so desperate to buy an additional TV in the news clips shows an overwhelming majority from non white backgrounds.
I thought it was just a chavalanche!
you are not yet understanding ‘inclusiveness and cultural enrichment ‘ are you ? I’m afraid a period of self criticism will be required, please report to the nearest bbc building for retraining, thank you.
But even if that’s true, in the world of the BBC, Guardian, most of the MSM in fact, and a disturbing number of people generally, you’re not supposed to mention it whether it’s true or not.
The truth is no defence.
” In the time of universal deceit telling the truth will be seen as a revolutionary act.”
Looked a lot like my ex-clientele in the Black Friday “sales” from my days in the DHSS. Retailers obviously never learned the lesson of the great Wrexham poundshop sale “Riot”.
Dez my child, I think the word you’re looking for is negroes.
Come on, fair dos, a lot of news footage is of black people rushing from shops with tvs; this time they’re paid for.
Government plans to spend 15 billion improving roads. BBC breakfast opens with
Warning road works ahead. If Labour were to spend more on the roads it would have been hooray less traffic jams .
Labour would have spent it all on London roads which would please the BBC
Labour surely wouldn’t have improved the roads they would have jacked up petrol prices on a fuel escalator and then (not) invested the money in public transport
.
No they wouldn’t, there’s Salford .
Remember Me
In this BBC drama “Tom Parfitt (Michael Palin) sits alone in his terraced house in the otherwise entirely Asian community.” The Asian neighbours are portrayed as warm, compassionate human beings, totally integrated, lovely people. Old Tom pulls the social worker’s leg by saying ‘all these Pakis’, just to see her face. Of course he doesn’t mean it. He loves his Asian neighbours. He’s in his 80s. It’s all rather unrealistic in my opinion.
Fred
I started to watch that, couldn’t see the point of it at all, and soon gave up.
Michael Palin, who is normally a charming man, appeared to be a cross between the Ricky Gervais character, “Derek”, and an ageing Alan Bennett.
If you want realism, Dr Who is probably a better bet.
I have some direct experience of Pakistani immigration and significant integration wasn’t on the cards in the 1960s and 70s, let alone now. The more recent influence of Arabic culture has made the situation worse.
Sikhs and Hindus are a different story.
But they re not “Asian” … even the lad stated she was an Indian lady, in the picture, oh and Palin said his neighbours were “Paki”.
This showed some promise, but ran out of steam, the deliberate unreal multi kulti BBC narrative just grated, no finesse, every bloody scene “grim tup north”, must be still hurting from their move to Salford …
But at least the two burglars were Asian rather than whites, which would be the case in such a community.
Unlike ‘Fake Britain’ (love the implication in the title BTW) where they were investigating ‘fake’ cigarettes because they killed people and not, oh no not never, because they had no duty paid on them. In this programme they did their best to hide the identities of the shop keepers selling the ‘lethal’ and ‘killer’ fags but the dramatization of the burglary in a second piece the nasty type was clearly white.
It seems it is OK to associate white hands with evil doings but not others on the BBC.
Guessing Old Tom doesn’t have granddaughters living anywhere unfortunate?
Decided to give Remember Me a go as quite surprisingly another current BBC drama The Missing is good! Well I rather liked Remember Me and shall watch part 2. I didnt get the feeling that the PC clipboard monitors had to much input on this one, at least so far.
It depends if its crucial to the story that it the ‘ghost’ needs to be Asian, or as I suspect just lame tokenism again.
Like you I’ll stay with it but ultimately like 95% of bBC drama output I will probably have wasted my time.
Pope Francis: Muslim leaders should condemn terrorism (… in the name of Islam)
They already do. The problem is that that they don’t define the terrorism they support as terrorism only terrorism that is a threat to them.
The BBC could help in that effort by choosing a definition of terrorism and sticking to it. Perhaps we should be glad that the BBC didn’t claim that the Pope called for a condemnation of militantism (militancy?).
I wonder if the Pope made that brave call when airborne, safely out of Muslim hands? The BBC article is ambiguous on that point.
Will the BBC later erase ‘in the name of Islam’? Worth keeping an eye on this for stealth edits.
He made the remark on a plane, in answer to a reporter’s question. If the Jerusalem Post report is correct his rationale was to counter stereotypes.
I enjoyed the irony of the Pope calling for and end to fundamentalism. Isn’t the Pope a Catholic?!?
Ah, yes, the evil Christian fundamentalism – worse than Islamism, what? There were the Crusades. Then there were the Spanish conquistadors. Then there were……..
zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz…..
http://www.jihadwatch.org/2014/11/pope-says-it-is-wrong-to-equate-islam-with-violence
http://www.vagazette.com/news/sns-rt-us-pope-turkey-mideast-20141130,0,3886291.story
Hmm whose doing that?, and why? …
The glaringly obvious facts speak for themselves,
Islam IS, was, always has been, and … in the future will be associated with violence.
What! … was this fraterniser, colluder, collaborator even, doing?
In Turkey!, a main supporter of ISIS! who wantonly murder Christians?
Still playing lapdog, to those, who mock him, and work vociferously to eradicate Christians and Jews.
him in the same barrel as Charlie boy, and that brain cell singular Bishop and kick it over the side.
Continuing to give suchre, to a false “Abrahamic” faith, a totalitarian ideology worse than fascism, embarrasses any true Christian heart, he ought to be ashamed of himself.
I wonder what real support the Pope will give to Middle East Christians. Pope Francis visit: Turkey’s Christians face tense times According to the BBC, [Turkey is] a country whose population has fallen from 20% Christian 100 years ago to around 0.2% today.
It seems that the most popular name for newly born boys is Mohamed. What does that tell us about the demographics of 21st century Britain?
They are frightening?
Saw that on twitter.
Reported by near everyone, including the Guardian.
What was odd was Guardian twitteroids telling them off for reporting it, as it would get picked up by the Daily Mail.
Seems the degrees of (or is it in?) censorious self-delusion being preached and practiced at many universities is starting to work its way through.
On “Today” news this morning, the daily “climate” spot – they’re all off to Lima, Peru for a climate change shindig, where they hope everyone, in advance of the next shindig in Paris, will all sign up to giving our hard-earned cash away, in the forlorn belief that this will stop the climate doing what it’s always done.
In the meantime, vast amounts of alcohol will be quaffed, banquets consumed, and CO2 spewed in transporting them there, where they will tell us all that we shouldn’t be doing what they’ve just done, and that CO2 (rather than being obviously beneficial to life in general) must be banished forever, in order to make a stable (or cooling) world, er, cooler.
And no doubt the gullible fools will just sign away our economic futures in this vain-glorious attempt to fix a non-existent problem. They must have far too much money sloshing around, whilst pretending that their respective countries are broke.
Are you trying to embarrass them with their own hypocrisy? I rather think that ship has long sailed.
Reference CAS-3038629-DGHW3D
Thank you for watching BBC News Channel and for taking the time to contact us.
I understand you feel reports on the rioting in Ferguson were biased. I appreciate you believe it is unnecessary to re-state Michael Brown was unarmed and you feel the jury’s decision, and the reasoning behind the decision have not been adequately reported.
It’s in the nature of topical discussions on news programmes that subjects such as these may be discussed. It’s not our aim to take sides on any of these debates, but it does not mean that we will not discuss these issues. It is up to audience members to make their own decisions on these topics.
We know that not everyone will agree with our choices on which stories to cover, and the prominence that we give to them. These are subjective decisions made by our news editors, and we accept that not everyone will think that we are correct on each occasion.
We’re grateful to you for taking the time to raise your concerns with us and we’d like to assure you that we value your feedback highly.
Thank you again for contacting us, we value your feedback. All complaints are sent to senior management and programme makers every morning and we included your points in this overnight report. These reports are among the most widely read sources of feedback in the BBC and ensures that your complaint has been seen by the right people quickly. This helps inform their decisions about current and future programmes
“Not our aim to take sides…”.
No, it comes naturally.
“It is up to audience members to make their own decisions on these topics.”
Then surely it’s up to the BBC to provide all sides of the story to enable them to reach an informed decision. Yet another “we’re right because we say we are” reply.
“We know that not everyone will agree with our choices on which stories to cover, and the prominence that we give to them. These are subjective decisions made by our news editors, and we accept that not everyone will think that we are correct on each occasion.”
But you weren’t complaining about which story to cover, were you? Or its prominence. You were complaining about inadequate reporting of the story, a distinction they seem unable, or more likely unwilling to grasp. It’s a cut-and-paste reply.
Barely that, as you point out.
More a ‘got your message; it has been filed’, surrounded by waffle filler on what was asked and a small bit redirecting to semantic philosophy on what wasn’t.
You may get a more relevant reply to your complaint if you email again and even if not – let them work for your tax payers money and answer you properly !.
Lynette I’ve been complain about the BBc’s bias for many years now. As I and I know several others have complained about the reports relating to this issue a further complaint which I may make, I haven’t decided yet, will still at the end of the day give me the answer that I and others are wrong and the BBc is right. At least it underlines the point that we have access to other sources of information and we don’t all believe the twisted view of the world they constantly portray. I may now contact the Department
for culture, media & sport, As I have ample evidence that the BBc continues to answer complaints with the same cut and paste template replies with a few stock phrases and in my view refuses to take on board any other view than that which matches their agenda….I’m not holding my breath on any constructive response though.
‘I’m not holding my breath on any constructive response though.’
No matter what evidence, you are right the DCMS response is unlikely to be more than ‘take it to the BBC Trust’, which does quickly get into Leopard in the Basement territory.
Though Ministers can make noises (and so far those are all I have detected from Mr. Javid), the entire department gets freaked out about any hint of government meddling with BBC and especially its precious editorial independence, even if Tone, Danny, James, James, Rona, Hugs, and assorted other £300-450k talents do so daily with a quiet whisper off the books in a corridor not currently strewn with Bolly debris.
But worth the effort anyway. The machine cannot resist keeping records. And one day these will be unearthed and there will be a genuine holding of power to account ( (c) Boaden. H.)
http://tradingaswdr.blogspot.co.uk/2014/12/bilious.html?
‘…the alarming headline, “A Putinesque world of cronyism and fear”, has only one quoted, anonymous, source to back it up’
This is true, and may see it languish in the backwaters of Specciedom.
However, BBBC readers may recall the BBC seems pretty cool on such depth of throat when it suits. And that’s after their McAlpine/BIJ triumph…
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-29204170
‘…a far-right backlash in the UK, one of the Home Office’s most senior advisers on right-wing extremism has said.
The anonymous worker claims…’
At the time this was noted here as a less than convincing ‘source who says’ given they devoted the day to it as the elections were on around, by sheer coincidence, issues of immigration.
Those tinkers at the BBC trying to use the full force of their broadcast empire to swing things a bit, based on only one quoted, anonymous, source to back it up?
johnnythefish October 18, 2014 at 6:43 pm
Question Time – immigration.
Any Questions – Europe.
Audience and panel in both programmes massively in favour.
But that’s nothing new for the BBC.
How can our national broadcaster’s output be so consistently out of touch with public opinion?
Answer: because when you’re in control of 70% of the nation’s news and current affairs coverage, you can do what the hell you want – even influence public opinion over time.
50 likes
Nah, they wouldn’t. Would they?
It’s not up to the BBC to steer the viewer in the direction of thier narrative either, they are supposed to report the news…period.
I just clicked no mention of the legendary “Log”. What has happened to the log? Has the log gone? How will the BBc know how unhappy the non-sheeple are if there is no log to log the issues.
Other than the second paragraph, the rest of the reply is just a bland pre-populated catch all answer to any complaint on any subject. It’s just a copy and paste job.
Senior Management indeed. My hairy hoop.
Political ‘Left’s journalists (inc Beeboids-Guardianistas) are, globally-
1.) pro-enforced public broadcasting,
2.) anti-Murdoch.
The following ‘Guardian’ piece today could be re-titled from:
“Attacks on public broadcasting have gone global. The ABC is no exception”
http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2014/dec/01/attacks-on-public-broadcasting-have-gone-global-the-abc-is-no-exception?
-the above could, of course, be re-titled to:
‘Beeboid-Guardianista attacks on Murdoch group have gone global. Fox is no exception.’
The enforced global provision of political propaganda by publicly-financed media is a key principle of ‘leftist’ journalists.
(It even extends to Beeboid-Guardianists political support for Islamic Al Jazerera and its Islamic financier, the Emirate of Qatar.)
I do enjoy sifting through the rough CiF comments for the odd diamonds, though. Of several…
eesterbauer
01 December 2014 5:15am
Murdoch’s papers lose money because people don’t like the far right wing drivel they ditch up.
Likely a JonDon groupie? (Hold that thought*)
Andrew Gray eesterbauer
01 December 2014 5:56am
And the Guardian makes money?
The Guardian represents a ‘niche’ market at best.
But one that does see it more than ‘represented’ in, on or via the BBC.
*Speaking of our man Downunder…
BBC World News shared a link.
8 hours ago · Edited
Our #Australia correspondent Jon Donnison will be answering YOUR questions on security and terror threats down under tomorrow in a LIVE Q&A session on Twitter (0200GMT; 1300 local time).
In the meantime, you can share your questions to Jon with us in a comment below. Or email them to us at haveyoursay@bbc.co.uk
Alternatively, tweet him your questions using the hashtag #AskBBCJon
Thing is, they are a wee bit nervous about how this may go down, so we are treated to:
BBC World News Remember: Be nice! We will not hesitate to remove hateful comments and ban people. Looking forward to hearing from you guys! -admin
So it would appear that a bit of a filter is coming down to cull the hate.
And maybe any questions Jon doesn’t like the look of?
With a banning threat to keep folk aware how the BBC handles debate. Seems they are operating on broad definitions of ‘on topic’, love bombing and respect.
Umar Mohammed Dakasku western world are terrorist
Comments already going well.
Hope no one gets banned. And Jon gets to ‘answer’ using all the knowledge of Australia he has gained in… how long?
So we Kafirs don’t get the right idea, ‘The Guardian’ misleads that the most popular boy’s name in U.K is an ‘Arabic’ name, not a MUSLIM name: Muhammad.
“Britain’s most popular baby boy’s name? Muhammad.
“BabyCentre website reveals a surge in choice of Arabic names including Omar and Ali for boys and Maryam and Nur for girls.”
http://www.theguardian.com/lifeandstyle/2014/dec/01/britain-most-popular-baby-name-muhammad
None of the broadcasters points out that Muhammad/ Mohammed is the most popular name because of the lack of diversity in the ‘community’. Whereas those not in the ‘community’ choose a much more *diverse* range of names.
IIRC ‘Goodness Gracious Me’ had a recurring skit on an Asian couple who tried to integrate and called each other by English names. The message was clear. Don’t.
Assimilation has always been a dirty word for the left. After all, how can one steal from the poor if the buggers are not busy fighting each other?
Not even reporting it on BBC website
“We know that not everyone will agree with our choices on which stories to cover, and the prominence that we give to them”
“We know that not everyone will agree with our choices on which stories to cover, and the prominence that we give to them”
Worth repeating (and not just by the BBC).
Traditionally, if choices are not agreed with, the option exists to steer clear, and certainly do not involve compulsion to pay for them.
In all but one, unique case.
And while this refers to ‘news’, the £4Bpa state broadcaster seems stuck in a groove that all they get up to is justified because Dr. Who, Sherlock or Strictly.
Not sure a few days’ worth of fictional programming really compensates for 50+ weeks of the rest any more, much as Tone, Danny, James & James’ market rates and golden, can-only-go-up-as-well-as-up index-linked pensions are concerned.
Ask the tea lady, she’ll explain to you.
That’s (c), Jerry.
Good to see you’re still taking notes.
Something doesn’t quite work out here. The figures are very rough but are they wrong?
The United Kingdom Census 2011 gave the UK Muslim population in 2011 as 2,786,635, 4.4% of the total population. Even if we allow for one in ten births to be Muslim about 50% will be female, therefore not named Mohammed. A 2011 study by the Pew Research Center found that Muslims in the UK had on average 3 children in 2005-10.
It is very common to name a boy in the family Mohammed but not compulsory and quite rare for two boys in the same family to be named Mohammed. So let’s assume, for arguments sake, that one in three Muslim births (ie one per average family) is named Mohammed. That that would mean by generous estimate that only 3% of births are named Mohammed.
So what percentage of male births are named Mohammed in this survey? What percentage of are named the number #2 Oliver and #3 Jack? Are we getting upset by stats that fall well within the margin of error?
The survey quoted in The Guardian was restricted to members of a specific website.
For 2013 the ONS recorded 340,856 births in England, 7,356 of which were variations on Mo, or just over 2%.
No other names in the top 100 stand out as being obviously ‘Asian’/Islamic. Elijah makes it into the top 100 (at 70) but I doubt if all of those were born to Jews, which shows that one shouldn’t read into data-sets what isn’t there.
Assuming three children in a family and only one boy called Mo then ‘full’ families would be BoyBoyBoy, BoyBoyGirl, BoyGirlGirl or GirlGirlGirl. For that set of equally likely families, (assuming equal likelihood of B/G), then there would be three Mo’s for ever six boys born or 1:2, (MoBoyBoy, MoBoyGirl, MoGirlGirl, GirlGirlGirl).
If 2% of boys are called Mo then 4% of boys born are Mo or Mo’s brother.
When is the bbc going to wake up and realize, that the little muslim bear cub that they continuously hug, and pander to is going to grow up into a monster that will rip them up and devour them. And that also includes anyone who’s envolved with causes that the beeb vigorously endorse.
It would seem that Gordon Brown is likely to announce that he will not be standing at the next election. The BBC are giving him the big heave in a kind of obituary today (others may be more of the view that he should be behind bars for what he did to this country).
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-30277709
Meanwhile, Fraser Nelson provides a somewhat different slant:
http://blogs.spectator.co.uk/coffeehouse/2014/11/gordon-brown-bottles-out-of-an-election-again/
bBBC: Gordon Brown: Giant of his age or failed prime minister?
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-30275321
History will record him as a man who
restoreddestroyed Labour’s economic credibility, who kept Britain out of the euro, who helpedlead the global response tocause the financial crisis in 2008.The books will also note the national minimum wage, the tax credits and the long period of economic growth that allowed him to
pumpwaste billions into public services.And Guido’s Brown’s Greatest Hits is well worth a look. Would be funny if it weren’t so tragic for the country.
http://order-order.com/2014/12/01/goodbye-gordon-never-forget-the-prime-mentalists-greatest-hits/
Blimey, despite the either/or headline (I’d err on Giant Failure), that is quite the euology from James.
Seems smitten.
Given Gordo’s record thus far, if I’d been the BBC I’d have stayed a wee bit more circumspect for now.
He’s going to rake in millions on the back of being what such as the BBC wanted in place. This may have served them well. Less sure about the country.
Any mention of the words ‘divisive’ or ‘hated’?
Surely not …
BBC political correspondent Ben Wright (possibly another Red Prince, as son of Labour big beast Tony Wright) must feel he is not given sufficient airtime. Last night he felt the need to shoehorn a cynical party political message into a less than 30 second report on the impending road spending announcement. He told radio listeners that the schemes would no doubt include a number situated in marginal constituencies.
that last point is just blatant bias but at this point I don’t care as the Conservatives deserve it as they haven’t touched the BBC when they should have so shooting themselves in the foot as always
Indeed, failure to even acknowledge BBC bias should be quite high up the charge sheet when Cameron is defenestrated.
‘An oil price fall represents a transfer of cash into the pockets of consumers, via lower prices for petrol.’
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-30273896
I don’t know where Robert Peston fills up, but I haven’t noticed a big drop in prices at my local petrol station (or even a small one!).
The BBC should be asking why that is. Maybe the reason they aren’t doing so is because they don’t want the public to become too excited about lower prices at the pump. That would make it harder for politicians to plug the gap with increased fuel duty.
Jeff
Bet the SNP are secretly thinking they had a lucky escape with oil prices sinking to today’s levels!
It sends their Independent budget forecasts, (based on oil maintaining min $110 a barrel), straight down the Khyber Pass.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-scotland-politics-29140970
It would only have an impact if this were the price in March 2016 – the assumed date of Independence had there been a Yes vote.
Volatility in price is exactly why the SNP, unlike all other parties, have long advocated an oil stabilisation fund.
No they haven’t Albaman. They factored the oil revenue into their expenditure plans. You cannot spend money and also save it in a fund at one and the same time, ye big eejit.
And that was assuming a minimum of 100 dollars a barrel.
He’s also on his second exceptional comment of the day.
Stand by for more.
Correct. You save when the price is high and use the savings when the price falls. That is what is meant by a stabilisation fund “ye eejit”.
No saving when the price is high, Albaman. All money needed for the socialist republic of Scotland’s Disneyland spending plans from a very small taX BASE.
Anyway this is now academic since you lost the referendum. Beaten by those pesky erm.. fellow Scots.
And watch the costs rise in Scotland now Jeanette Krankie reneges on the ‘once in a generation’ referendum and wants one every three of four years until they get the result they want. Meantime all the uncertainty caused by these Socialist idiots erodes the Scottish economy and places us firmly in the ‘basket case’ category.
What’s all this about?
I thought that the majority of the people of Scotland recently voted to stay within the United Kingdom of Great Britain, or have I missed something?
It’s that damn nesting again!
The horrible little gremlin that replaced the big fat gremlin at Scottish Nazi Party now believes that as the referendum was so close that it needs to be revisited ‘within 10 years’ and not to be the ‘once in a generation’ choice is was professed to be.
I saw £1.18 a litre just round the corner from Hampton Court yesterday…. that is the cheapest I have seen in a while.
The one piece missing from his article that I could see was the bit that referenced the cost of getting the stuff out of the ground, and the point at which this becomes uneconomic. Of course, this will vary, but it is this important piece of data that will determine whether production continues at current levels.
It’s down to $2.39 per gallon here in Texas. That works out to 40p per liter.
Now, stop that teasing, at once.
Amazing how you guys manage to have such cheap fuel when you have such difficulty in spelling a simple word like ‘litre’ 🙂
They actually spell it ‘gallon’, not being so in thrall to the French as our masters.
This 2011 article from the BBC website gives a more or less impartial take on the makeup of petrol prices at the pump. As you can see the cost of the raw material constitutes about 1/3 of the total price: most of the rest is domestic fuel duty and VAT (plus, of course, tax payable to the governments of the places where the oil is produced which constitutes a large part of the cost of the raw material itself).
Accordingly, I would urge commenters not to join in the usual rants – encouraged by the government, the opposition and anti-capitalists everywhere – about wicked oil companies. The outfit mainly responsible for us not seeing significant reductions in pump prices in the UK whenever the general cost of oil falls is none other than our government and, indeed, all UK governments of every political stripe since time immemorial (well, since WW2 anyway).
I’ve never seen a report on the BBC that mentioned the implication of oil being priced in US dollars. If the pound falls against the dollar petrol becomes more expensive. But as Umbongo points out, that wouldn’t fit with the anti-oil company agenda.
What a transfer of cash the abolition of the TV tax would bring to us all.
I doubt the BBC would like that sort of transfer.
It seems that the Daily Telegraph blogs are going…
http://www.breitbart.com/Breitbart-London/2014/12/01/So-farewell-then-Telegraph-Blogs
“It seems that the Daily Telegraph blogs are going..” along with the Telegraph‘s status as a quality newspaper of the right. As I’ve commented before, the Telegraph has fooled itself into believing – along with Cameron’s “Conservatives” – that people of a conservative disposition have nothing else to read and no-one else to vote for so they will keep buying the Telegraph and voting Conservative. How wrong they are!
Given Mr. D’s rather sharp skewering of who remained after the last purges, no real surprise, but sad still.
It did at least represent one of few forums for free comment that could attract informed posters. Though its modding was starting to rival CiF. I went for the comments mainly. No more. One less set of eyeballs for the media sales guys to count on.
Actually CiF is fast becoming the last ‘free’ (if heavily modded) open forum on the MSM, as brietbart and The Commentator have yet to reach even the Graun’s less than stellar ABC heights. Certainly the BBC has purged massively since those heady days of Newsnight blogs, The Editors, etc.
The paid national broadcaster seems now invested in piggy-backing a free foreign social media platform, so most threads are lonely hearts, toyota sales or death wishes. And threats to ban folk who don’t measure up.
One can only wish Tom Chivers, Dan Hodges, Mary Riddell, etc well in whatever ‘la-la-la-can’t-hear-you-any-more’ broadcast-only bunker gets located next door to the BBC’s.
Complaint to BBC – the reply I’m looking forward to:
“Undeliverable: addressee unknown.”
I have just read Ambassador Ron Prosor’s tour de force address to the United Nations a couple of days ago. It is one of the most exemplary speeches I have ever read. It not only eruditely reiterates the Jewish case but forthrightly exposes the cynicism and double standards of the international community in relation to Israel. It is a speech that is unlikely to persuade our shameless adversaries to change their policies, , but it should give great pride to every Jew.
http://tinyurl.com/ogonlwq
To the BBC that continues to broadcast prejudice to prevail over truth, I say “J’accuse.”
I accuse you of hypocrisy. I accuse you of duplicity.
I accuse you of lending legitimacy to those who seek to destroy our State.
I accuse you of speaking about Israel’s right of self-defense in theory, but denying it in practice.
Most of what he says is true. However regarding 1973 and the refuelling of US transport aircraft on their way to Israel, the Azores is Portugese and Portugal deserves credit for that.
Good, powerful speech though.
Did anyone hear the piece on Eddie Mair’s PM show about the plethora of new political parties popping up around the country?
The beeboid reporter – Eleanor Garnier I think – went off down a typical pub to speak to one person who was in the planning stages of setting up a party.
Anyone like to guess the demographic and political stance of this one random exemplar? A big gold star if you guessed it would be a middle class female who believes the big problem in the country is ‘inequality’ and all her friends agree with her.
The hive talking to itself again, what a surprise.
‘a middle class female’
Q: ‘What party did your friends and colleagues used to support?’
A: ‘The Libdems and Labour’
You could have knocked me down with a feather.
“typical pub” I bet a £million that it was some fancy gastro non-pub if she was a classic middle class leftie. Those types wouldn’t go into a real pub as they are too busy looking down upon the people they claim to represent
I heard that, and somehow knew in advance what sort of person they would just happen to find who was creating their own party. “All her friends agree with her.” I wonder how many of these friends work for the BBC.
So who did they go to to discuss the difficulties of doing so? Yup, the guy resurrecting the Whig Party, who got a nice piece of publicity on the Today programme not so long ago. Must be the circles they move in.
6 Months to go before the Election, just see how many beeboids will be wearing Red, I think Jo Coburn has already started.
Don’t complain to the BBC
Complaining to the organisation that your complaint is about is a total waste of time. They will either ignore you or bullshit you. They certainly won’t mend their ways. This is especially true of the BBC. If you are unhappy about BBC bias complain to your MP, or write to the papers, or tell your friends. If you are on a radio phone-in suddenly slip in a mention of BBC bias. Just spread the word!
Fred
Absolutely right. The BBC cannot admit fault. It is perfect in it’s own eyes . Spread the word . You will find a receptive audience now.
The popularity of boys names was queried above.
http://www.theguardian.com/news/datablog/2014/aug/15/the-top-100-baby-names-in-england-and-wales-2013
As of 2013 : source ONS
The Guardian spun us the yarn that “Oliver” was number one with 6949 instances.
Meanwhile in at no.15 with a bullet but apparently missing the top ten was Muhammad scoring 3499, at no.23 we have Mohammed with 2887 and bringing up the rear at 57 was Mohammad with 1059.
Total = 7445
The latest report joined all those variations into one.
Winter evening fare on Demand 5 or 4oD being hit or miss affairs, I decide to risk hignfy on iPlayer.
Oh dear.
The decline is terminal.
Paul Merton has ceased to even phone it in, guest Germaine Greer was actually funnier than comedian Josh Widdicombe, and as for Ian Hislop and host Alexander Armstrong….
The show has already reduced lazy stereotypes to a dire art form, but these two really pushed the boat out… and scuttled it.
Seems British independent schools are an affont to civilized society and now solely exist to nurture Russian oligarch spawn and Chinese commie cadres on a gap decade.
Now I can’t speak for the educational establishments Ian and Alex dodged the soap at, but my lot seem to be getting a nicely rounded education in the company of fellow pupils seeking to better themselves and secure good university places and productive careers.
Friends include the children of a doctor, an Army officer, a Tesco logistics supervisor, a database marketing executive and a writer. Not a billionaire or red prince amongst them.
Lucky Polly Toynbee wasn’t warming Germaine’s seat this episode, as they could have asked from where she propelled one A level into an Oxbridge place.
And for a Cohen token female, that may have been awkward.
I wonder where £350k beeboid progeny go? Hope they don’t bump into any Labour minister kids there.
satardays clash on stephen nolans show on the press review betreen david vance and david banks ex of daily mirror and labour party supporing fame was a classic,david banks got to say the least a good thrashing,what gets about david banks is how ignorant he is,this man loves mass immigration so much he chose to live in the most whitest, most english village in northumberland where no immigrants live,see how leftists like david banks and others on the left never practice what they preach when it comes to diversity etc,as for terrorism and jihadism david vance was right to point out the link to islam that drives all this extremism and the jihadism but david banks could not understand that because like most on the left they are in constant denial about this link betreen islam and terrorism and in fact just appease radical islam,if you get a chance to listen to vance v banks one sided boxing match on satarday night on nolans show i would recommend it,david banks truly got brought down a few pegs which was a pleasure to listen to.
Stuart – went and had a listen – thanks for tip – David Vance should be on the box more often!
He really came over very well and put that other guy David Banks right about almost every thing he spouted, which almost every time he opened his mouth contained fundamental flaws!
Link below – from 3,hours in – brilliant listen:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/b04pvl7h
stuart
Thanks for the tip. After I hunted the prog down on iplayer I enjoyed it enormously – and posted later on in the thread.
Turner Prize goes to African Art together with Karl Marx dancing. Right up the BBC’s street.
Something to make people think deeply I suppose.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/entertainment-arts-30281175
For a long time I have been forming the impression that our political leaders have been in the pay of the incredibly wealthy Saudis with the aim of the promotion of Wahabist Islamic values.
It’s possibly filtered down the BBC as well given their recent output.
Take a look at how the West looks to take the side of that which Saudi Arabia supports, and opposes those which Saudi opposes.
So despite the whole word telling Camoron that ISIS were bad news, he wanted to send the UK forces to support them.
What is the Saudi position? They support ISIS and Oppose Assad who they regard as a heretic because of his Alawite faith. Despite what has happened Saudi has continued to support the ISIS forces, and Cameron has tried his level best to support this.
Saudi opposes Iran – We oppose Iran Saudi supports the Emirates, we support the emirates.
Saudi opposed Saddam, we oppose Saddam.
In fact it seems that what ever position Saudi takes we automatically follow, and the BBC tag along like a faithful hound.
We know as fact that at least one Tory Minister has taken a lot of money out of Saudi, and we also know Tony B Liar was paid £42K per month to act as a ‘salesman’ for Saudi oil. We know of the Bush families close links with the Bin Laden family. Money from Saudi to senior people in power is not uncommon, and even Yasmine Alibhai Brown is talking about it.
If it’s been happening in the past then why would it not be going on now? And if it is why would the largest media outlet not be a part of it?
The second largest shareholder in News Corp (Rupert Murdoch) is Saudi Prince Al-Waleed bin Talal with 7%. That gives him plenty of clout. He also has a more than 3% share in Twitter.
Rotana is the Arab World’s largest entertainment company. Al-Waleed bin Talal owns most of it with an 18.97% share held by News Corp.
BTW What the Media Gets Wrong About Israel is a must read. Although it concerns Associated Press and not the BBC much of what is written applies equally to both.
Leo McKinstry is rarely on BBC, compared to Yasmin Alibhia-Brown.
I wonder why:-
“This country is still losing out on immigration.
THE betrayal of the British people by the political establishment continues to deepen.”
By Leo McKinstry.
http://www.express.co.uk/comment/columnists/leo-mckinstry/542121/From-crime-to-wasted-benefits-Britain-is-still-losing-out-on-immigration
Sometimes things have to get worse before change can happen. The liberal elite in it’s stupidity does not understand this. Cameron has no credibility. Milleband and Clegg likewise. They have failed the nation by any measure you care to use.
I get around a lot and I can sense the rising anger. It is something quite new in this country in our lifetimes. All it takes is that crtitical 5 to 10% who are the natural leaders to finally have had enough and then the liberal elite is finished.
This elite mistakenly believes that as long as the majority remain supine it has nothing to worry about.
Quite wrong. Cromwell said ” Give me a few good men:” and all the demagogues of the last 200 years knew this truth.
So take heart. We are going to win and end the reign of the fantasists and those who have no love for their country.
An ancient people like the English do not just roll over and give in.
Sun Headlines this morning:
‘BBC Pay 91 Execs More Than Cameron’
http://news.sky.com/story/1384044/tuesdays-national-newspaper-front-pages
Excellent!
Can I join in recommending people to listen to the LAST HOUR of the Nolan Show on 5Live last Saturday evening (start at 3.00 in to get the opening context) – David Vance was really on a roll, touched all the bases, pouring buckets of common-sense over a stupid senior leftie journalist., Best entertainment this week !!!
Good sense spoken by David Vance. The leftie came out with some rubbish.
John – just commented above about same programme – great listen – highly recommended:
went and had a listen – thanks for tip – David Vance should be on the box more often!
He really came over very well and put that other guy David Banks right about almost every thing he spouted, which almost every time he opened his mouth contained fundamental flaws!
Link below – from 3,hours in – brilliant listen:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/b04pvl7h
What surprised me was that Fatty Nolan (whom I would normally avoid like the plague) just lets the fun carry on, never really interrupts Vance to save the leftie idiot. Sweet, sweet, sweet. I have never heard anything like it on BBC radio.
If Nolan’s producers have any sense they would be looking for a re-match. It ticked the 3 big Reithian objectives – inform, educate, entertain.
Now – what do we do about James O’Brien ?
Yes, O’Brien is a leftist stooge. His politics are those of the emotional lower sixth and he has developed an annoying habit of browbeating inarticulate callers on his show.
He likes to show off his GCSE ‘Philisophy’ knowledge and ,when confronted with incontrovertible facts, switches the argument to his feelings and emotions, which are , of course, more valid than anybody else’s.
He is yet another example of a champagne socialist , professing sympathy with ordinary PAYE-callers ,when he is plainly yet another public-school-educated ,highly-remunerated journo. Many of these class-warriors operate behind a limited company front to save tax (think Ferrari,and a whole host of al-BBC class warriors), all left-liberal fellow travellers and ‘Useful Idiots’ to the real communists waiting in the shadows to jump in when the time is right
This makes for some interesting reading:
http://www.theatlantic.com/international/archive/2014/11/how-the-media-makes-the-israel-story/383262/?single_page=true
BBC up to its old tricks… Suspected al-Shabab Islamists have murdered around 36 Christian quarry workers in Kenya, having first separated them out from the Muslim workers. The BBC does state this in the body of the report, but uses the misleading headline of ‘Gunmen kill Kenya quarry workers’. The implication of this headline is that the people were killed because they were quarry workers, whereas a more accurate headline would be ‘Gunmen kill Christian quarry workers’ or even ‘Suspected Islamists kill Christian quarry workers’. Compare this with the Ferguson case where we were constantly told that ‘White police officer kills unarmed black teenager’. The BBC only use informative headlines when it suits them.
See http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-africa-30288137
The BBC have now refined their headline somewhat. They’re not quite Christians yet but the victms have at least become ‘non-Muslims’
‘Al-Shabab massacres non-Muslims at Kenya quarry’
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-africa-30288137
If over the past decade there had been a single incident of Christians in Africa killing Muslims in a manner like this attack, or one of the dozens like it, the BBC would still be reporting it and would be citing it as an example of how the Christians were equally to blame for any killings by Muslims.
OK, I’m confused. I’ve no doubt the BBC, along with our stellar politicians, would claim that this, along with countless other recent atrocities of a similar nature, is Nothing To Do With Islam™. Yet the likes of al Shabab seem clearly to be religiously influenced.
So, if not Islam, which religion are they influenced by? Do we need to recognise a new one?
Radio 4 Today 7:37 and there’s a piece on migration. There’s no need to tell of the position taken, but there was an astounding jaw dropping statement about the effects of the cuts to benefits to foreign workers.
Apparently the withdrawal of housing benefit has meant that councils (Labour) are ‘having’ to make up that loss and all this at a time of government (Tory) cutbacks.
There’s the usual lies that the immigrants are all – 100% in work and that they are ‘contributing’ to the UK.
What isn’t said is the effect on local people displaced from the workforce, and the costs of their unemployment benefit.
There’s absolutely no voice from the alternative side for balance, it’s just the unremitting ‘immigration is good’ message.
Immigration is good for us and false rape allegations should not be a criminal offence. Two reasons to turn my radio off this morning.
If they’re all contributing to the UK why would the UK need to stump up Housing Benefit for them?
Abnd if they are all contributing where are the extra hospitals, schools, roads and public transport they’ve paid for – you know, all the things we keep hearing are overstretched?
Misleading BBC headlines
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-30287880
headline is ‘Probation changes linked to murders’
but the body says ‘Changes to the way offenders are supervised in England and Wales may have contributed to two murders, says the probation officers’ union.’
So that’s a may then.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-wales-30215109
headline: ‘Concern raised over changes to probation service’
body: ‘Planned changes to the probation service are “dangerous” and “needless”, an MP has said.’
So that’s the claim of a single MP then.
It’s very common for the BBC radio news and website to make headline claims that are more convincing and definite than the story. The excuse is that the headline has to be short.
The BBC may be encouraging child sexual abuse by playing down the ethnicity of the perpetrators.
“BBC linked to child sex abuse”
There. We can all play that game.
It is odd when the BBC throws all guns behind, and mounts a full defence of single anonymous sources, and when suddenly the demands of watertight descend.
It would be interesting who or what are targets of the their BIJ-best standards and who enjoy considerable memory hole protections.
‘The BBC may be encouraging child sexual abuse by playing down the ethnicity of the perpetrators.’
You speak I think slightly in jest but I agree with the sentiment of your first statement.
For Droid News to hide the ethnicity of the rapist gangs is actually criminal.
Is there not one of the 22,000 droid journalists with even an ounce of shame. Though I don’t suppose any of them has a thirteen year old daughter who can’t make the association between her older Pakistani friends and rapist ‘men’ in the north of England.
BBC News – disgusting, criminal and corrupt.
North of England?
North, south, west and east of England.
BBC : No names, no pack drill
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-30278680
‘Isabel Hardman on hoaxed web images of MPs in Commons’
Well, in fact not so much a ‘hoax’ as political propaganda based on faked information – in other words a big fat lie told to further a political cause.
Who could have done that I wonder?
I watched the BBC Daily Politics show and read the BBC online report but I’m none the wiser. Perhaps Isabel ought to have been more specific? Or – just possibly – the BBC preferred not to ‘go there’
Let’s check the original Spectator report to see if it names names.
http://blogs.spectator.co.uk/isabel-hardman/2014/11/the-menace-of-memes-how-pictures-can-paint-a-thousand-lies/
‘Here’s another image, from something called the ‘Coalition of Resistance: Can’t Pay, Won’t Pay’, which a very intelligent friend of mine shared on Facebook this morning’
Coalition of Resistance: Can’t Pay, Won’t Pay
mmmm… sounds rather…. left wing
Here they are fessing up…
https://www.facebook.com/pages/Coalition-of-Resistance-Cant-Pay-Wont-Pay/137748819598933?fref=photo
‘I mistakenly shared an image that contains 9 perfectly accurate images, and two inaccurate ones beneath them.’
A bit grudging – but caught with their pants down. There would have been no legal problems for the BBC to have named them.
So who are this group?
Labour Briefing has this to say
http://www.labourbriefing.org.uk/
‘…groups like Coalition of Resistance can play a positive role in terms of general propaganda work…’
So what do the left say when they are caught out in a lie?
‘I believe that the two images you say are “inaccurate” actually represent what the British public now feel’
So there you have it. All about feelings, not facts.
BBC-5 dead, giving Christianity a battering again – yawn.
Following on from reports in the dailies, and a disgraceful propaganda edition BBC flagship religious Sunday Morning Live.
This morning BBC goes all out to “nail” if you excuse the pun, the tradition of nativity …. wintferfest, winterplay everything fairies, santa, beckham, and the erm tradtitional … “portions of the play”?
that the BBC tells us are, 3 wise men, Joseph, and some shepherds…
“play”?
Notice anything missing? …
A phone in carries on this PC fiasco on BBC 5Live, again the same omission, it has been running for nearly half an hour, someone just
mentioned baby Jesus, and is side-tracked, “its not exclusively Christian you know”, and is followed by an offended Islamic caller, and his elongated propaganda piece.
… disgraceful, SCRAP THE BBC!
… no link yet
Anna King: Nativity plays are changing
thanks to, the always ejector seat, netmums, mumsnet etc.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/p02cb2gq
Push aside nativity plays
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/education-30277344
“its not exclusively Christian you know”
That will be why it’s a concatenation of “Christ’s Mass”, then?
Even from a fairly agnostic position, this seems either incredibly ignorant or wilfully manipulative.
It is sadly the latter
What I didn t put in my post is that I called the BBC this morning … as I could guess the narrative, I outlined exactly the point about the Christ … mas
… about their omission, of the baby Jesus,
How it is important for the majority in this country
to have this tradition, and it is unnecessary to omit
its most important facet for any reason, it is after all the
reason for the name.
It took about half hour,( I think) for the Christ-child even to get a mention, I called before the phone in even started
… so … there is your answer
Revealed: The 91 BBC executives who are paid MORE than the Prime Minister and 11 bosses get more than DOUBLE
Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2856908/The-91-BBC-executives-paid-Prime-Minister-Eleven-including-Director-General-BBC-One-controller-head-radio-earn-100-000-Cameron.html#ixzz3KjS1xNa3
Worth every penny, I’m sure…
‘Last year Yentob justified his own pay by saying he was ‘valuable’ to the BBC because of his ‘relationship with talent’ and ‘understanding of the networks and the schedules’.
And the BBC, clearly, was won over by this stunning pitch.
That’s why they aaaaall get the big bucks. Or hand it to each other.
On Today this morning the much-missed (as PM) Gordon Brown’s decision to leave the Commons at the end of this parliament was “assessed” by . . . . Naughtie and Alistair Campbell (a former director of the Labour leader’s Communications and Strategy team). In other words two Labour supporting journalists reviewed the leader of the party they both support and a PM who, when in office, could – in their eyes – effectively do no wrong. The “assessment” coming out of this friendly discussion concluded that Brown, despite a few minor character flaws exacerbated by (as Campbell’s mother asserted) being PM a generation too late, made Jesus look like Denis MacShane. Campbell (without demur from Naughtie) also sought to resurrect the lies about Brown coolly “saving the world” and “saving the Union”.
I’m all in favour, on the demise of some celebrity (political or otherwise) of observing for a few days the principle of de mortuis nihil nisi bonum (basically “speak no ill of the dead”). However, Brown isn’t dead, He is only drawing a line under an undistinguished political career marked by the UK’s social and economic ruin for which he is largely responsible. The BBC in “assessing” Brown has ignored his baleful and damaging presence on the UK political scene. I notice the word “controversial” – the current BBC marker used in respect of anything of which the BBC might disapprove eg fracking or UKIP – has been absent AFAIAA from any assessment of Brown. Hardly a surprise since Brown is the very epitome of a BBC love object: lefty, statist, paranoid.
Umbongo
Excellent post.
I don’t blame Brown for the US-led dodgy-,ortgage-derivatives crisis of 2008 wjich wass rooted in Clinton and Dem policies and fiercely defended especially by Obama later on. That I still see as the root cause of the financial crisis.
But I do blame Brown for messing up the UK regulatory system, dividing responsibilty for bank supervision.
And I do see Brown as responsible for the long-run build-up of Britain’s debt mountain – private as well as public and inc;luding PFI. And his philosophy of calling any social spending “investment”.
Yes, Brown was a great man. A great con-artist, a great self-deceiver, a great bloody humbug.
Interesting that without exception, ALL the comments I’ve read on the electronic media vis-a-vis Brown’s overdue departure from politics indicate that the one-eyed Scottish bogey-muncher couldn’t go soon enough, and suggestions as to his fate range from imprisonment to hanging for treason.
I fear he has not departed from politics. He will continue to infest the scene for those of us north of the border.
He wades into the independence referendum, somehow manages to get the credit for a result that would have happened anyway but manages to poison further the relationship between Scotland and England by turning my “no” vote into a vote for more powers, without consulting me.
If a UK Labour government is propped up only by Scottish MPs, particularly SNP ones, this will be intolerable to English voters when the Scottish MPs have very little say on what goes on in the UK. The SNP know this and will make maximum mischief, and the sainted Gordon Brown, with his apparently huge brain, appears too dim to recognise it.
Mad Gordon McRuin ‘keen to remain in public service’.
I suppose this is the ‘public service’ that comes with a grand title, an office, plenty of staff, six-figure salary, five figure expense account, and of course myriad opportunities to grandstand on the global stage and buff up his CV for the … yer know… lucrative consultancy work .
Of course he could shock me and see out hisdays behind the counter of an Oxfam shop in Fife somewhere.
The Case of the Missing ‘Scare Quotes’ or continuing a vaguely Sherlockian meme The Crowd That Didn’t Roar During the Match? – Because it wasn’t there.
Confused?
Over to BBC Sport for : Fifa goal of year [No scare quotes required]
http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/football/30284030
Clue : Cherchez la femme
“The goal, watched by an estimated 95 spectators, would have remained only a talked about phenomenon but for the fact the Wexford Youths team manager had arranged to have the game videoed. ”
Get recording your matches at the park guys, you might be in with a shout of FIFA goal of the year.
*mouth drops open*
If you want to give a woman Goal of the Year award for political reasons, at least scour women’s football to find a genuinely spellbinding goal!
BTW, I love this goal from last season:
http://www.businessinsider.com/video-stoke-city-goalie-asmir-begovic-scored-a-goal-just-13-seconds-into-a-match-2013-11#ixzz3KmuvRJ7G
It was a fluke, but how often do you see a goal like that?
Jeff
I made a prediction a while ago after the death of Mrs Thatcher. The Comedian Reginald D Hunter openly admired her. My prediction was that he would never appear on the BBC again.
Has anyone seen or heard of him on the BBC in the last two years? Genuinely interested to know if he has ever had another BBC gig.
Not knowing that Reginald D Hunter was a Thatcher fan, my interest was stirred enough to google him. One of the first things I found was this facebook page:
“In regards to my colleague Andrew Lawrence, for years I have been unsure but now I am certain I ABSOLUTELY FUCKING adore him!!!!!
A deeply considered view that is objective, certain, contrary, flawed and possibly subversive as well as at times, threatening to be funny. Rightly or wrongly, agree or disagree, this is what comedians are supposed to do. That is our JOB.
What makes me spike in admiration for him is that he loves comedy enough to spank comedians, because you don’t earn the right to spank segments of society until you show you are willing and able to spank your own. It’s the precise thing that police, bankers, politicians (unless it’s election time), feminists and clergymen won’t do. The consequence of not calling out your own is the beginning of corruption.
Keep your big nuts boy!
Compliments,
Dr. Heathcunt Bitchspank III Esq.”
(Apologies for the language – his, not mine).
People may remember that Andrew Lawrence was the comedian who complained about all the lazy anti-UKIP “humour” that appears to be de rigeur these days. Glad to know that Reginald D Hunter supports him. Still, not sure that won’t spell the end of Reginals’s TV career. Hope not.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2856908/The-91-BBC-executives-paid-Prime-Minister-Eleven-including-Director-General-BBC-One-controller-head-radio-earn-100-000-Cameron.html
Change BBC boilerplate on Gaza casualties to reflect disputed figures.
The petition to push the BBC to fulfil their journalistic and legal duty to neutrality has stopped moving. Nevertheless 680 signatures is quite respectable and it will be submitted this week.
There is still time for a final push. Have you signed, yet? Have you encouraged your friends?
http://www.ipetitions.com/petition/change-bbc-boilerplate-on-gaza-casualties-to
Also on Today this morning, the BBC invited Martin Jacques (unrepentant marxist and BBC-speed dial invitee – not a sheer coincidence BTW) to big up his idols in Beijing by dismissing any idea that we might have some interest in – let alone treaty-based responsibility in respect of – the goings-on in Hong Kong. Jacques is another prime example of what the BBC admires in its commentators and was, not uncoincidentally, an apologist for the regime (of happy BBC memory) which ruled Soviet Russia.
‘ his idols in Beijing’
These being the fellows who, according to Ian Hislop, exclusively populate English public schools with their spawn. Allegedly (only Mr. Hislop neglected that bit in his satirical broad brush).
It’s good to see that the BBC Trust is looking after editorial standards.
http://www.itv.com/news/2014-12-02/listener-complains-that-imaginary-radio-4-character-is-treated-as-a-sexual-object/
The BBC has launched an investigation following a complaint that an imaginary speaker on a Radio 4 comedy show was being treated as “a sexual object”.
The long-running show I’m Sorry I Haven’t a Clue, which has run for more than 40 years, features comics including Jack Dee and Barry Cryer who regularly refer to the fictional character as ” lovely Samantha”.
A female listener complained about two episodes in July 2013 which she claimed included “highly sexist, offensive and harmful” references to Samantha.
The character was described in one episode as “a lovely lady who’s scored on more desks than she can remember”.
In another scene, listeners were told that Samantha was going to the cinema with two men who were fans of horror films because “she enjoys nothing better than sitting in the back row and being given the willies for 90 minutes”.
She believed the male panellists used “schoolboy sexist so-called humour”, which she said was both “puerile and unfunny”.
The show’s producer defended its content, saying the innuendos were “part of the programme’s tradition of wordplay and punning”.
The humour was appreciated by “the vast majority of listeners”, he added.
The listener contacted the BBC Trust with her complaint, and quoted a United Nations Special Rapporteur on Violence Against Women who said the UK had a “boys’ club sexist culture”.
She also got in touch with producer who pledged to book more female panellists and feature the “male equivalent of Samantha” – Sven – more often.
The show would also make clear that Samantha was “often the initiator in these relationships to avoid the suggestion that she was being taken advantage of”.
The Trust’s Editorial Standards Committee said it “could understand why some listeners believed that this type of humour was outdated”.
Poor old Humph, spinning in his grave.
I would dearly love to shove a FemiNazi over a cliff.
I have 4 daughters. One of them saw the prog some years ago at Wimbledon Theatre Loved it, absolutely loved it. And she is well able to understand all the innuendos.
It’s a bit like pantomime. It operates on 2 levels – the innocent, and the innuendo. I have had kmy kids crying with laughter at Dames by Ken Dodd, Les Dawson, last time was Barry Humphrys (Dame Edna) which the grandkids saw. Half the time the kids are laughing at the parents laughing. There is a deep British tradition about all this stuff, it is part of our heritage. If a listener does not like it – try the OFF switch. There is no BBC Charter responsibility to be PC. And sod anything the UN or the EU says.
…………………
Or maybe the complainer is actually trying a bit of irony ? No, I thought not. Come the revolution, we will string these idiots up from the lamposts !
Bit of fun really, if rushed out to show what the poor old complaints guys have to handle all the time.
Oddly complaints on more basic matters of accuracy, objectivity or integrity stay hidden behind the ‘our little secret’ screen the BBc usually mounts. How did something this trivial get the full PR treatment, he asks, rhetorically.
Yet there it is, in full glare of ‘we must be doing something about right’ glory.
I don’t know if the complaint came via the Lenny Henry Hotline to the Gods (as opposed the Hugs Boaden’s email to nowhere), but they certainly jumped to it, eh?
Now, let’s see how tangible, factual complaints about blatant guideline or Charter breaches fare…. and see what the Trust’s understanding about these may be, published for all to assess.
Or maybe that’s yer lot this year.
ps:
Just had a snoop at what really is troubling folk, at least as far as the BBC is prepared to admit:
20 NOVEMBER 2014
Nick Conrad, BBC Radio Norfolk, 17 November 2014
We received some complaints unhappy with comments made by presenter Nick Conrad.
12 NOVEMBER 2014
Rugby Union, BBC Two, 8 November 2014
We received complaints from some viewers unhappy that the England v New Zealand result was read out during the Scotland v Argentina match.
4 November 2014: BBC’s response to complaints – Strictly Come Dancing, BBC One (broadcast 1 November 2014)
We received complaints from some viewers concerned about the welfare of the Dalmatians featured in the programme.
Certainly had these pages humming.
Clearly nothing else to trouble the 110% tractor stats sent up to Tone & Rona.
Steph McGovern and the BBC were clearly trying to deceive us and pull the wool over our eyes on the finance news this morning.
Steph those shaded side panels in your lycra dress are fooling nobody. It may give the illusion of an hour glass figure, but in the same way we know the man in an ill-fitting wig is bald, we too know you are chunky. Stop it.
http://www.pressgazette.co.uk/jimmy-carrs-father-wins-seventh-newspaper-defamation-pay-out-over-vanessa-feltz-column-express
I wonder who else Internet trollesque Ms.Feltz is given employment by?
At least she doesn’t stoop to grubby commercial endorsement.
Does she?