Well, the weekend approaches and so time for a new one of these to see us off into the wild blue yonder! Detail the bias here please.
WEEKEND OPEN THREAD…
Bookmark the permalink.
Search Biased BBC
Recent Comments
- MarkyMark Nov 15, 11:50
Midweek 13th November 2024
THE END …. IS SOON …. “Iran’s morality police, also known as the Guidance Patrol or Gasht-e Ershad, is a… - MarkyMark Nov 15, 11:48
Midweek 13th November 2024
Modern Britain … Shopkeepers say Edinburgh’s Royal Mile has become “lawless” with smash-and-grab thieves stealing thousands of pounds’ worth of… - popeye Nov 15, 11:47
Midweek 13th November 2024
Not just a Muslim editor. 20 years ago one Sunday morning on my way to golf I had on the… - NW Ninepence Nov 15, 11:47
Midweek 13th November 2024
Various news sites today have reported this, it’s just getting totally absurd. “Child, 9, among kids investigated by cops for… - MarkyMark Nov 15, 11:30
Midweek 13th November 2024
Unfortunately, Sukur is one of several imams to be convicted of child abuse offences in the UK, in recent months:… - MarkyMark Nov 15, 11:29
Midweek 13th November 2024
1400 raped kids – net zero interest – net zero arrests. - Zephir Nov 15, 11:26
Midweek 13th November 2024
“Fury of Rotheram grooming victim as rapist gets parental access to her child. A WOMAN made pregnant at 14 by… - Fedup2 Nov 15, 11:10
Midweek 13th November 2024
Similarly to all those mosques the paki racist paedo rape gangs have to go to and pay into . We… - Zephir Nov 15, 11:07
Midweek 13th November 2024
Regarding the MUSLIM in charge of religion at the disgusting, racist bbc and his prediliction for sexual abuse stories regarding… - atlas_shrugged Nov 15, 10:56
Midweek 13th November 2024
> 650 MPs to implement assisted killing (dying) by being trail blazers I wonder if they do requests?
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
Al Beeb reporting earlier…………. ‘migrants try to storm Channel Tunnel’.
Anyone get the idea that the French, and indeed the British governments are not taking border control seriously?
The whole thing is farcical, the ‘illegals’ are trying to break in to our country. They are bringing our trade to a standstill. No one knows how many terrorists, murders, criminals and rapists are among them. This would not have happened before we joined the EU. What is our PM doing about this – its getting worse since he was re-elected. Immigration/migration figures are up!
PS.
It gets even more farcical………………
“Calais’s deputy mayor wants the UK to introduced ID cards and employment controls”?
On our side of the English Channel, Keith Vaz said “the EU must tackle the problems of people arriving in the EU itself”?
Is this man real? Is he getting paid for his words of wisdom? Where the hell has he been for the last ten years?
Merched Becca
“The whole thing is farcical, ..//.. This would not have happened before we joined the EU.”
Er, there was no Channel Tunnel before we joined the EU. Neither was there a culture of exploiting poor and/or well-educated & trained nationals of other countries for our own commercial or economic or political ends.
The Thatcher Government was warned about this, IIRC, and were told that if building a rail only tunnel, it should be built between Margate & Ostende. Why, oh why they did not listen to good advice that there should be a road tunnel as well as a rail tunnel, I do not know, except there are now numerous examples over my adult lifetime where our Government has not listened to good advice. Or, for that matter, to what people want.
Most people of Britain are anti-immigration.
Since when were illegal migrants, ‘well educated and trained nationals’?
Listening to a lorry driver on Al Beeb Wales this morning they are now carrying knives and threaten drivers.
Roll back the clock to pre EU times and you would not see any British Government, left, right or centre putting up with the invaders that we are putting up with now.
Its nothing to do with the Channel Tunnel – its all about border control and security. First failure is France. Many of the migrants could be terrorists.
Just watched some piece of crap from BBC Scotland about “The Fall of Labour”.
No mention of Mick McGahey, Jimmy Reid, Falkirk, Eric Joyce, Michael Martin, Dennis Canavan, Tommy Sheridan or George Foulkes.
This random lot of scum and scandal show what Labour represents-but not a mention of any of this lot.
I therefore predict that Labour will be gone within five years up there-if BBC Scotland can`t even begin to mention what Scottish Labour is at source, then how the heck can they repair the damage?
Suits me that they don`t though…the BBC and Labour are now a suicide pact.
Don’t forget. it’s a four-way with Erith & Dagenham. 😉
(With apologies to, and fond remembrances of, the late Linda Smith.)
My patience has finally snapped at the BBC’s biased reporting of the women’s England football team at the expense of the men’s team.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/football/33085963
My complaint has gone in –
QUOTE : “The performance was the second best by an England team following the 1966 win by the men’s side and eclipsed the 1990 men’s team, who finished fourth in Italy. “
To state what should be obvious, this comparison is ludicrous. The women’s game is played by comparatively fewer countries around the world than the men’s game, and comparatively fewer still play it to a high standard. The current state of the women’s game means that England can have reasonable expectations of reaching the latter stages of any competition while for the men it is a lot tougher to do so and was a lot tougher to do so in 1990. For seven years in the 70s I was world champion at football in my back garden. OK, my only competitor was my brother but by BBC logic I have eclipsed England’s 1990 men’s team. Your journalist, Alistair Magowan has been guilty of these ridiculous biased comparisons in a number of his online articles, but he’s not the only one. I’ve noticed the same propaganda repeated across all of your media outlets. I can assure you that this type of reporting is actually deterring men from getting behind women’s football which is most unfair on England’s women and they deserve to be judged on their own merits.
“Eclipsed the men of 1990?”.
By coming THIRD in a dead rubber of irrelevance, as opposed to fourth?
Reckon the BBCs craven coverage has cost womens football dearly…the game could prosper but with all those lefty piccolos being stuck into it by the liberal ponces and ponchos at the BBC-it`ll die on its arse, as the true English smell the Goody, and steer well clear.
I wanted them to lose, one the BBC told me that they were the real pride of Britain, not those bloody blokes-footy stars, brain surgeons like Henry Marsh,Rigbys and Rathbands etc.
Fuckoffbbc.con!
I think the girls did really well and should be proud of themselves, but claiming to eclipse any of England’s mens sides is frankly ridiculous to the point of being sexist. When the England Women’s team can beat regularly a men’s team even as low as the Conference then we might be able to think of them in an almost similar way. Until then they did well at the women’s level but no more.
That would be true equality wouldn’t it? We already see this sort of real equality in some other sports, like motorsport, where women compete on the same terms as men. Danica Patrick has won Indy races and it should not be too long before a woman earns an F1 drive on merit.
I’m sure it’s already been mentioned but I just caught the end of ‘The Falkland’s Play’@ R4e. If you get a chance to hear it, I’d recommend it. It sounded like a homage to Mrs Thatcher. Let’s give credit when and where it’s due even though, I believe, it was shelved for 16 years. One thing’s for certain, it would never be commissioned by the pathetic shower responsible for running (into the ground) the Beeb nowadays.
Ah, I feared the worst and switched off before it started.
The Lord
“…I just caught the end of ‘The Falkland’s Play’@ R4e… One thing’s for certain, it would never be commissioned by the pathetic shower responsible for running (into the ground) the Beeb nowadays”
So you “just heard” something on the BBC that would never be on the BBC “nowadays”.
Erm, yeah, okay…
Break the habit of a lifetime and stop being a twat Dez. The word was “commissioned”, not ” broadcast”.
You knew that of course, but tried -and failed- to be clever.
Dez , save yourself some time and money by voting here ……………
https://you.38degrees.org.uk/petitions/end-the-bbc-licence-fee
It really was a fine play. As far as I know it gave an accurate account of what was happening – including varying views of Ministers.
But the BBC blocked it for years and years. Because it gave a balanced picture of Thatcher, resolute but still worried all the time about the human effects, the loss of life.
And in particular it explained exactly why the Belgrano had to be sunk. For years the BBC tried to “haunt” Thatcher with the Belgrano decision, “it was sailing away”seldom putting the evidence that it was a clear threat to the British Fleet, could have turned round quickly to join a pincer movement against our ships, and would then be sailing over shallower waters that would mean the British submarine could not follow her.
I say v”our ships”. But of course the BBC did not use the word “our” to describe any of our brave men.
I had heard it previously and indeed seemed to cover events well. If you have not heard it I feel the effort would be worthwhile if it is available on catch up, or whatever it is called nowadays
That MT was not gung ho with the lives of our troops and wrote individual letters to the next of kin are something that the BBC might normally be expected to overlook.
So it can be done.
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/media/tv-radio/bbc-told-new-political-editor-must-be-impartial-with-nick-robinson-reportedly-stepping-down-10366431.html
Like Laura ‘Ed walked through that door like an Adonis’ K?
Got it. #grabspopcorn
Labour wish to have an impartial political editor at the BBC! What a joke. What they mean of course is that they want someone who will resolutely follow the Labour line. The last thing they want would be for the BBC to employ more truly impartial folk like Andrew Neil, who is almost unique amongst BBC presenters and ‘journalists’ in that you actually can’t tell which party, if any, he supports. Of course that will never happen unless the BBC is a subscription service and realises that very few people are actually willing to pay for their leftist propaganda.
Sorry, I cannot see Neil as an independent thinker and I doubt whether he thinks at all beyond those scraps of paper he clutches when he reads the question he is going to repeatedly ask no matter how many times it is answered. eg. Tell me Mr Tommy Robinson why do you have another name, another name….’ Or ‘Tell me why you insist that UKIP are not racist when one of your members said foreigners should be deported, tell me tell me, answer the question’. The man is biased, boring and repetitive.
Perhaps the BBC need to do the same with Politics as their unbiased religious reporting in our 2 thousand years Christian Heritage Nation:
They appointed Muslim Aaqil Ahmed, BBC Commissioning Editor Religion and Head of Religion & Ethics.
There, that will ensure the worlds current largest atrocities will be reported on fairly in our traditional Christian Country at least. Hopefully these Muslim perpetrators will not be disguised as ‘Men’ or South Asian descent or whatever.
Wonder if the Vatican needs a new Child protection Minister? Pity our BBC Jimmy is not still with us as he proved quite a good BBC bred ambassador in some of our hospitals.
Thank heavens for the change that is hopefully soon coming to the Licence that will dismantle a lot of this diatribe stuff.
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/media/tv-radio/bbc-told-new-political-editor-must-be-impartial-with-nick-robinson-reportedly-stepping-down-10366431.html
Last night far left elitist Clive Anderson did not present ‘Loose Ends’ it was instead presented by Far leftist Nikki Bedi, but should have been titled ‘Loose Tongues’.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/b060q9tm
Listen to it there, the egregious part is in the interview with Nick Robinson who has a new bool out and is promoting it, Bedi’s hatred of the Conservatives and of Britain is not even attempted to be hidden.
It begins at 15:40, at 17:48 she complains that Robinson should use his connections to lobby government ministers to stop ‘cuts to the BBC’, she is told by Robinson and even Arthur Smith that this would break impartiality rules, and be an abuse of position. She then goes on to question about a statement by Cameron that he will ‘close the BBC down.
At 19:50 she suggests that Robinson is condoning British military involvement in Afghanistan with his use of the phrase ‘our boys are coming home’.
At 21:18 she brings up Robinsons Tory past at university.
At 22:45 During a conversation about the party leaders she eulogises ‘Ed’ Milliband while referring to ‘Cameron’ without the use of a first name. When Robinson says Cameron swears a lot when relaxed Bedi responds “what? does he use the ‘C’ word as in Conservative”?
At all times Robinson remains professional, although it is clear he is uncomfortable with the clear far left leaning of the hate filled Bedi, whose behaviour was wholly inappropriate. When Arthur Smith needs to correct someone of political bias, you know something has gone too far !
And her right-wing equivalent on the BBC would be….? (over to you, Scott n’ dez)
I must have switched on Loose Ends at 22.45, just in time to hear the terribly funny joke about the ‘c’ word being a swear word as in ‘Conservative’. How can the BBC claim to be impartial with this sort of joke. Could Dez or Scott give examples of a similar joke against Labour?
Deborah,
“Could Dez or Scott give examples of a similar joke against Labour?”
“Gordon Brown: This isn’t my sporran, it’s Hazel Blears asking for a promotion”
“Gordon Brown: You thought Tony Blair was a cunt? Watch this…”
When and in what context were those two “jokes” made ?
That is indeed the question.
Were they uttered by “talent” in answering a question on the News Quiz for example, or a pre-scripted and approved at high level New Quiz joke such as “It’s the Tories that put the “n” in cuts”?
So to find jokes against Labour you had to trawl the BBC archives (or one of your BBC colleagues did) all the way back to the beginning of the Brown dictatorship. Deborah’s point proved.
dez’s researchers are nororiously unreliable and I’d guess a tad biased to boot.
Ready with that apology yet, dez?
Changing the subject -I’m not sure if the decision by opera William Tell directors to modify the graphic soldiers rape scene due to the audience hissing and booing during it, was mentioned on the BBC. It was reported on Sky News yesterday and they definitely disapproved of the freedom of the arts bowing down to the pressure of the audience and they had a journalist from the Telegraph to condemn the Opera company.
Well done to that opera audience and it just shows what a group of people with financial clout can accomplish if they work together when they decide enough is enough .
BBC SMLive, Extremism, what to do? yep! ( Islam?)
Intro, has a lengthy skit with a all in black beardy, telling us we have to be careful, identifying an extremist view, from someone just developing themselves.
I would ascertain, a bit rich … who has less chance to develop their minds freely themselves, than a Muslim child? especially today? especially if female?.
Add to that … and once again it comes down to the root problem,
What if the children have drilled into them, text, teachings, prayers
that are supremacist, texts that foster hate and disgust, 5 times a day?.
A community that clearly imparts a “victim narrative” and blame culture for its obvious flaws on a daily basis.
What then eh, pulling reasons out of the air, pussyfooting around the issue, deliberately ignoring the obvious.
I would conclude … not an option.
Softly-spoken nice guy Gavin Esler presents a BBC News Channel paper review tour de farce this morning.
Our Gavin is joined by a female journo from the rather pro-EU Economist who is also, by the way, a Cathy Newman look-a-like and guest number two is a chic geek guy from the left-leaning Huff Post. His designer glasses alone must have cost the living wage.
According to our Gavin there are stories all over the place but not enough about the Bubbles – he bemoans the lack of words about Greece.
Hmmmm. We’ve had plenty about Greece and there will be plenty more to come, Gav.
Let me guess, going by the example of our very own Scots voters and their attitude to short cake – I woulod stick my neck out and assume the Greeks want to have their coucous and eat it.
The BBC naturally studiously completely ignore the front page of the Mail – except to give us a quick flash which they have to anyway.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3149629/Laugh-loud-UK-schoolgirl-jihadi-s-sick-reaction-Tunisian-massacre-series-extraordinary-online-messages-undercover-MOS-reporter.html
‘UK schoolgirl jihadi’s sick reaction to the Tunisian beach massacre in a series of extraordinary messages’
BBC Newspaper Review LOL!
Happily for the BBC our pal from the Huff Post does draw together all the stories they do allow themselves to cover and concludes they add up to…. wait for it…. A Cost Of Living Crisis
It’s like deja vu all over again – some geeky lefty on the BBC giving us a lecture on communism and ingoring the elephant in the newsroom.
Farce.
A pleasure to hear the voice of Labour-one Lady Helena Kennedy doncha know?-given a public airing on BH this morning.
The paper review, so t`was!
Boy-if she`s not Dame Maggie Melba who doubles as Kirsty Warks prim and proper aunt, I don`t know who is!
Anyhoo-she likes the welfare state-as long as SHE is able to get a free TV license and can slum it in Bob Crows old council house as she sees fit.
She also likes the arts paid for by the little people with their smelly socks and flat caps-as long as shortbread gets offered with the high tea.
Need I suggest that I bet she rather likes the EU and its client lawyers like herself-the Hummus Rights Act has been very good for the Drunchapel Dame.
Thank goodness for the Hartley Brewer woman-doublke barrelled name, but no House of Lords sinecure for her…and from lower stairs managed to hole the good ship Lefty Lady Privileges!
Aren`t those Labour grandees supposed to check their privileges at the BBC reception?…nah, course not!
Anyway-reminding myself of great Scots who are the REAL voice of that great country…ladies and gentlemen…Mr Richard Jobson, the Duke of Dunfermline.
Adamson was also a good guy who met a sad end.
Was listening to Fields Of Fire yesterday cracking song which prompted me to seek out Working For the Yankie Dollar, singing guitar work on both tracks second to none.
Good Old George has plans for the BBC which are looking increasingly sensible. As mentioned in a post above the BBC is going to have to fund over 75s LF, costing £500m pa, unless the corporation wants to incur the wrath of OAPs by stopping the subsidy. Not a very liberal move to say the least.
Secondly , he seems to be thinking that the web site is way too big and shouldn’t be allowed to compete with other news outlets. And thirdly , the BBC can charge I player users, it would become a subscription service I suppose.This may well be their main source of income in the not too distant future.
Finally , the government may decriminalise none payment of the LF. Overall these measures would considerably reduce the proportion of money the corporation got from the LF and increase the amount it got from commercial activity. Indeed, if new ways of consuming content keeps on growing at the expense of live TV watching, then coupled with the other changes, the LF income may fall by perhaps 30 or 50% in the next 5 years and the BBC will become a subscription service.
Is this light at the end of tunnel?
I’m not a great fan of fizzy wines but Champagne granted world heritage status by Unesco shouldn’t pass without comment. Isn’t this just another way to protect the brand?
It is illegal to call any sparkling wine Champagne, even if made using exactly the same grapes and traditional methods, if not produced in the Champagne region of France. Ironically there are moves to expand the area of the appellation.
Can there be any other reason for UNESCO world heritage classification other than French wine interests? Will we see a slew of additional UNESCO wine sites in the future? Will the ‘communities’ object to this honouring of alcohol? What quid pro quo did the French give?
Will the BBC examine any of these questions? NON! Définitivement pas!
Screen grab from the BBC homepage. It links to a literary article about London: London: Literature’s labyrinth of ‘lost souls’
With the possible exception of Tel Aviv could anyone imagine the BBC leading the reader with such a disrespectful link for any other city? Salford?
I am dreading the 7/7 anniversary. You just know that the BBC will mark it with sombre pieces about the hell that is being a muslim in the UK rather than the hell that is being the victim of one of those bastards, or the family of a victim, just as they did at the time. I am so sure that they’re going to do it that I have already written the complaint. Just wait for Tuesday and hit SEND I guess.
I guess you weren’t aware of the drama to be shown tonight (9pm on BBC1) called A Song for Jenny, telling the true story of one woman’s response to her daughter being killed in the 7/7 bombings, when you wrote your complaint.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/b061c786
One swallow doth not a summer make.
This programme is the BBC’s exception on 7/7, not its rule.
A 1hr 20min drama at prime time on a Sunday evening on BBC1 is an ‘exception’, is it?
In any case, should we not watch the programme on BBC1 on Tuesday morning (7/7: The London Bombings Remembered) as well as listen to the radio broadcasts of the service of commemoration before judging the BBC’s coverage, as Anders and others here seem to have done?
http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/b061vc8z
The clue is in your ‘A’. Singular. And looking backwards, not forwards.
It’s a fair point you make Chris but given past form it’s a fair assumption on my part that the BBC are getting the victms out of the way early so that they can sympathise with the perpatrators AGAIN. Why not show the drama on the day? My money is on the treachery starting during Breakfast tomorrow.
Perhaps because more people watch TV on a Sunday night than on a Tuesday night?
Again, I would suggest it’s better to wait, and watch or listen to the BBC broadcasts on Tuesday before coming to judgement on it.
If this site aims to hold the BBC to rigorous, objective account surely it’s good practice to approach every programme/article with an open mind? Going in with the assumption that it’ll be biased makes you prone to confirmation bias, don’t you think?
Perhaps, perhaps, perhaps.
Lucky that confirmation bias within a £4Bpa public force funded organisation does not give us Newsnight/BIJ/McAlpine, Norm’s analysis, Andrew’s research-questions, or Jasmine, Jon, Mark and Steph’s twitter feeds.
So I’m inclined to cut a fellow poster some slack on what is still a spoken in advance cautionary preparation in anticipation, vs. what the BBC actually does all the time but sees you nowhere to be found.
The Guardian’s review is instructive.
McGuinness would rather not talk about Nicholson’s husband, now ex-husband, saying only: “We preferred not to make that a foregrounded part of the film.” In a way, the omission adds to the sense of tragic absence. Nicholson’s losses continued to amount long after the final page of the book, the closing scenes of this drama. Failing to find a way to forgive Mohammad Sidique Khan, the Edgware Road bomber, she gave up her priesthood: she could not preach what she did not herself believe. And, of course, her marriage ended. These endings exceed the ending of the film, which chooses, instead, the simple avoidance of finality.
Or as Pounce would say, when he was still a regular contributor, The BBC and half the story
BBC News 10.20 yesterday evening had a report about a man who helped in the 7/7 atrocity closely followed by the most nauseating pro Palestinian propaganda piece about ‘traumatised’ children. Vomit inducing voice from some foreigner (Canadian?). Made me want to kick in the screen. Bastards.
Diane Coyle on the news. By the way I love what she has done with her hair. telling us that the fee payers don’t want BBc funds being used for welfare payments. In contraction with “free” over 75 licenses. Services might have to be cut. I so don’t care the BBc is crap.
You’d need a heart of stone not to laugh.
The BBC conceded the principle that those over 75 shouldn’t have to pay for a TV licence – for whatever reason you think appropriate. This was easy because it was a cost free concession for the BBC, because the government would pay them £650 million as compensation for the lost income. The government now looks likely to cancel the compensation payment, but the BBC is trapped by its earlier agreement that it would be unfair for the over 75s to have to pay.
Or will the BBC renege on this part of its “fairness agenda” now that it will cost them money?
What extra cost is incurred by the BBC if a seventy five year old or over does watch television ?
“,,,,,,,,,includes 4.328 million licences for the over 75s which were paid for by the UK government.”
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Television_licensing_in_the_United_Kingdom
‘it was a cost free concession for the BBC’
And right there you have in a nutshell the attraction of socialism. The BBC swear blind that Nicola Sturgeon is Britain’s greatest politician – in fact she has Britain’s easiest job : promise her electorate the moon on a stick and tell them they don’t have to pay for any of it. You see it was poor old Ed Miliband who had the difficult job.
BBC:
Has is stopped reporting the ‘migrant-refugee’ crisis in the mediterranean?
It’s still happening as reported here:
http://www.ibtimes.com/mediterranean-migrant-crisis-refugees-record-level-137000-first-6-months-2015-un-1991262
Record levels apparently.
This used to be reported hourly by the BBC whilst showing great consternation.
Airbrush anyone?
..
BBC:
“Rail traveller ‘humiliated’ over Reading station police questioning”
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-berkshire-33394057
It could have been reported as:
“Public fears of terrorist explosions caused a ‘man’ to be interviewed twice by police officers doing their job”
But it wouldn’t have had the same anti-police political impact would it?
And wouldn’t have portrayed the ‘man’ Jaz Oberi as a victim?
..
Why do you keep putting the word “man” in quotation marks? He was an ordinary member of the public travelling on a train. It’s almost as if you think he’s some kind of criminal, in which case I’d love to see your evidence.
And when you say the police officers were doing their job – do you really think it was necessary to question him twice after it had very quickly been established that the wires were headphone leads? Or do you think that all people of Asian appearance are automatically more suspect?
“Or do you think that all people of Asian appearance are automatically more suspect?”
You’re using bBC terminology there ‘Asian’ is a broad church, no we should not be suspicious of all Asian’s, just (in the present climate) ‘certain’ Asians and this guy falls into that category..
“He looks like he might be a Muslim, so the police were right to interrogate him a second time even though it was clear after the first questioning that he was in no way suspicious.”
Is that what you’re saying?
In the present climate (forgotten Tunisia already?) an emphatic yes.
OK.
I course I haven’t forgotten Tunisia. What a bizarre thing to say.
I sense we’ll never agree on this so I’ll leave this particular debate there.
Bizzare is the pro bBC Liberal crap that you been espousing for he last hour.
You are missing the point ChrisL.
The BBC often use the word ‘man’ when the issue is an incident specifically relating to Muslims e.g. paedophile gangs in Rotherham.
As regards the train, the police were contacted by members of the public expressing concern. Should they have ignored that?
Perhaps you would have been the first to criticise the police had they not acted upon information received and a bomb had been detonated?
Hindsight is a wonderful gift 😉
..
“As regards the train, the police were contacted by members of the public expressing concern. Should they have ignored that?”
You’ve missed the point there. Of course I agree the police should have acted after someone had expressed concern. And of course if they hadn’t acted I would have criticised them if a bomb had detonated. What they surely didn’t need to do was question him a second time after having established that the wires were headphone leads.
And don’t forget, the police were acting with great courage. Had the bomb suspicion been real, he would likely have detonated it on the approach of police officers.
But, of course there’s no credit given either by ChrisL or the BBC.
Strange that Sky have chosen not to cover this non-story.
You still haven’t answered the main point – why did they have to question him TWICE after the first questioning had completely resolved the issue?
I don’t doubt or deny for a single second the courage of policemen dealing with potential bomb threats.
Unless your a Liberal twerp, no one cares, again in the present climate we cannot afford to take risks.
There was no risk.
If you’re happy with the police questioning people whose innocence has already been established then fair enough.
Better safe than sorry, remember in many ways we are at war.
Why TWICE? Without speaking to the officers I will hazard a guess. Something about the first interview gave rise to suspicion. The officers left the scene, discussed the event and one said something to the effect, “Did you notice …? We should go back and ask him about that”.
The simplest answer is usually the correct one.
1. ‘Man’ is cunningly used by the BBC instead of giving real details about the alleged perpetrators.
2. Can you specify what you mean by ‘Asian’? Japanese? Chinese?
3. No, you mean Pakistani, or more precisely (although you don’t realise it) a muslim. And yes, they are automatically more suspect, given their proven track record of terrorist related offences. After all, it wasn’t (say) White crucifix-wearing ‘men’ that carried out 7/7, 9/11, the execution of Lee Rigby, mass child rape in several towns cities across the UK, the attack on Charlie Hebdo, the beheading in Lyon, the attack in the Sydney cafe, the attack on the Paris kosher supermarket, the Tunisian beach massacre…..
etc.
Wake up, will you.
His surname, Oberoi, suggests that he isn’t in fact a Muslim, though he may be of course.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oberoi
I will specify what I meant by Asian in this context: from the India/Pakistan/Bangladesh region, large and varied though it of course is.
Are you happy with the police continuing to question a man whose innocence has already been established?
Why do you care so much, when your country is at threat? (assuming you are British)
Far greater things to worry about.
I do care if innocent people are being questioned by the police, because it makes Britain feel like a police state. I don’t want our country to turn into that.
I agree that there are bigger things to worry about, but that doesn’t mean we shouldn’t worry about these things too.
The sequence of events probably went like this:-
1. A passenger reported suspicions to the police.
2. The police responded and dealt with the matter.
3. Further up the line, a new passenger reported suspicions to the police.
4. The police again responded. They were not to know it was the same guy.
The ‘fuss’ is in the BBC exploiting the story to meet their narrative re Muslims and the police.
..
A ‘fuss’ which people like ChrisL here swallow hook line and sinker.
So what if he has been questioned twice by the dibble?
DILLIGAF, in the context of all that is cracking off at the minute.
‘Many people’ would say we should be on a war footing. But critics say we don’t want to be doing that in case we live in a police state.
WAKE UP.
“‘Many people’ would say we should be on a war footing. But critics say we don’t want to be doing that in case we live in a police state.”
Avoiding a police state actually is something worth pursuing.
However refusing to follow up legitimate lines of inquiry in case the suspects find being investigated “offensive” is utter deriliction of duty.
Except that it quite clearly says in the article that he was questioned twice at Reading station. No new passenger, no new report.
If the BBC were exploiting the story as you say, surely they would have highlighted that he is a Muslim? If indeed he actually is one, which seems less likely given his name.
I expect everyone here would be perfectly happy to be questioned by the police a second time even if your innocence had already been established. I understand that the police have a very difficult job in times like these of increased terrorist threat, but I don’t think it was necessary to question this man twice and I think the BBC was right to highlight it in this one article, which as far as I know was only available on the regional section of the BBC news site, though maybe it made local TV and radio news too. One article doesn’t really count as a “fuss” as far as I’m concerned.
I don’t think it’s right to view all Muslims, or people who look like they might be a Muslim, as suspicious. Though I know that this is where I disagree with a lot of people here.
I presume you watch many of the BBC’s finest crime dramas, like Inspector George PC or Old Pharts, etc?
In any of these, have you seen the heroes ask protagonists, often innocent ones, questions? And then come back to ask them some more as events change or unfold?
Yes? Or no?
What you choose to dig in on is truly remarkable. And what you think, expect or spin likelihood from as necessary is fine to hold and share, but repeating ad nauseam hardly makes it any more valid or close to reality.
‘Police ask bloke questions’ is not A. Story. Ask A. Newsroom tealady.
You’re missing the point again. There was no change in events to merit questioning him again. Why do you think it was necessary to do so?
And it’s a bit rich for you to accuse me of spinning when Dover Sentry has decided to make up what he thinks happened despite his version being contradicted by the reported facts. And to assume that Jaz Oberoi is a Muslim just because he looks like he comes from that part of the world.
As are you.
Rather gathering your actual point is to spin this out as long as an idle afternoon will permit.
I’m not responsible for other people, BTW. So if that’s the route you are off on, good luck. The basement is yours.
You still don’t answer my question, I see.
But you’re right, this is spinning out and is in danger of getting repetitive.
You’re pretty boring.
What we don’t and will never know is how many times terrorist atrocity’s have been averted by interviewing a suspect, one, twice, thrice or more.
Imagine if he had of gone BOOM! the police would have been in big shit then. I’ll repeat for the last time, the police CANNOT afford to take chances in the present climate.
//end
I’m intrigued how innocence gets established without some form of questioning, perhaps repeated. And what is being talked about here is just… asking questions. Hardly outrageous.
Of course in the world of the BBC, there are those who get to ask questions, and those immune from ever being asked.
Innocent people are questioned daily by police. It is one of the ways they establish the person is, in fact, innocent.
No what happened is they questioned the guy and then went away and one policeman said I’m bored I’ve got nothing to do and another policeman said I know let’s ask that fellow some questions again that’ll kill time and anther policeman said he looks foreign and we get extra money for harassing them so they went back and asked the Johnny Foreigner to prove he wasn’t something that should be locked up .
Or they had supplementary questions to put to him .
Asian guy presenting Pick of the Week tonight – first 2 items are about Muslims and ISIS, including that awful play about a Glasgow girl being radicalised. Pure bloody propaganda.
Don’t know if this has been commented on by others.
Climategeddon Enviro-Bias, BBC style.
Roger Harrabin is at it again. In reporting on a side effect of industrialisation and the improvement in humankind’s prosperity through the use of gas, oil and coal, namely the increase in the concentration of CO2 in the atmosphere to 400 parts per million (i.e. still a trace gas way below the optimum level for plant growth), Roger utilises his background in hyperbole, obfuscation and pseudo-religious fanaticism to get the words ‘Threaten’ and ‘Crisis’ into a headline.
In the piece that follows, Roger comments uncritically on (yet another) article formulated by co-religionists in an attempt to hold onto the hope that the scam of climate change alarmism can be extended and saved. Whilst the increase in CO2 concentrations is indeed a side effect of the use of hydrocarbons, thousands of careers in academia, the media and government depend upon the continuing propaganda spewed out by ignoramuses such as Harrabin who have access to so many people through that scourge on human decency, the BBC.
Of course the BBC has clear policies where it comes to the reporting of science: Ensure that the reporters who are selected are not scientifically qualified; Ensure they have a natural egotism whereby they know that they are intellectually superior to others; ensure that these reporters are converts to the armageddonistas of the Warmist’s reality denying cult.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-33369024
“CO2 Emissions Threaten Ocean Crisis”. Good one Roger. This could have been a good and partial report headline, if it had any association with partiality, or conveyance of truth or facts. The fundamental misunderstanding of the science, coupled with the ever increasing emotionally charged and extremist content of Harrabin’s articles, continue to highlight the desperately skewed and biased reporting of all matters relating to the natural world by the BBC. Carry on Roger, your work exposes the disservice being perpetrated on the people of the UK by the disgraceful, immoral BBC.
The BBC is in its death throws. Put it down Whittingdale et al. Grow a pair. Scrap the telly tax.
Isotopic analysis of the 400 ppm implies that only a maximum of 16 ppm could be man-made, and the mass of the Atmosphere is around 270 times smaller than the Oceans, and therefore most man-made carbon dioxide would be absorbed by the seas. You also have a rise in Atmospheric CO2 of 100 ppm in the last 100 years to explain, which is not covered by the 16 ppm man-made rise. Therefore this proves the correlations in CO2 still follow an 800 year deep Ocean thermal lag which correlates and coincides with the fact that the medieval warm period peaked 800 years ago. So as we see with using the CO2 Atmosphere of Venus to imply that any warming would not be detectable, most of this ridiculously small warming would also be mainly a natural increase in CO2 of 84 ppm, and that assumes that the Earths Atmosphere is increasing in mass, the evidence is that the Earth has lost 50 percent of its Atmosphere in the last 50 million years, a loss of 2 ppm per 100 years, so an estimated increase of 0.001 Kelvin for the man-made part, and 0.006 Kelvin caused by the Medieval Warm period. Both not seen in any correlations in observations due to warming being undetectable. So I think that explains what Piers Corbyn means when he says they are Charlatans.
Not only that, the BBC have the cheek to tell us to get out of our cars & walk, cycle & bus everywhere as well as think seriously before we allow ourselves a holiday involving air travel (if we can afford it) but they are quite happy to fly Mark Mardell out to Greece where he presents an embarrassingly poor report on the Referendum. No doubt the Greek speaking BBC correspondent was acting as his guide and standing lamely by while Mark struggled with Oxi and Neh.
Does anybody know why the bBC hasn’t mentioned this story:
Man walks past British Houses of Parliament wearing an ISIS flag and the police let him go, because they felt he broke no laws.
But the bBC does give me this:
Islamic State conflict: Luton family in Syria urged to ‘come home’
Another marker on the road to cultural destruction and death.
In another time we had a police force that would have acted differently.
The BBC should scrap their news chopper, if they are so concerned about Global Warming, & close down all their transmitters, between midnight & 6 am.
The ‘solution’ define ISIS paraphenalia as hate speech.
Imagine if he had worn a swastika?
Very odd: Originally I heard that the NO campaign had 60 percent, and then they said that polling the people of Greece was not now allowed, but that the Yes camp was in the lead with 47 percent, but that it was too close to call. Now we find that the result is the 60 percent originally predicted. So the BBC has been telling us the too close to call lie, and the Establishment has failed to have any influence what so ever in its attempt to manipulate the result.
Tonight on Countryfile we have an item on African farmers coming here with with charity aid to learn our farming techniques.
This is great, at least they’ll go home and try to make a go of it back in their own countries, that’s if they don’t get lost on the way back to Heathrow….
Remember when Countryfile used to be about British farming, and not full of multicult greenie eco tosh?
If they’re coming here to learn our farming techniques surely that makes it not just about British farming but pro-British farming too? An example of how British techniques can improve the world?
Why is it our job to improve the world, as well as accepting half of it?
You miss the bias, a whole host of famers from other countries also visit for the same reason, why focus on these?
I’m not saying it is, though I always thought that one of the strongest arguments in support of the British Empire was that it brought an improvement to the lives of those who lived in it (medical care, education, railways etc). But that’s another issue.
Where in this Countryfile was it said that we should accept half of it? If they’re going back to Africa, why is it a problem?
You said Countryfile should be about British farming, and I was pointing out that this segment clearly was, and moreover that it was very positive about British farming. I struggle to see how you could object to that.
Yes but this is the bBC we’re talking about, it was just another opportunity to squeeze in another bit of multicult crap, see it for what it is and don’t be fooled. I’ll ask again why not focus on those from other countries?
Maybe because these African farmers happened to be visiting Cornwall when they were filming there? That’s a possible reason. Perhaps also because it is African farming that has the most to learn from our methods.
What has this got to do with multiculti though? Some African farmers have visited to learn about our farming techniques, and have returned to try and implement them.
”Maybe because these African farmers happened to be visiting Cornwall when they were filming there?” Gosh !! What a coincidence !!
So the argument seems to be; “programme still at least notionally about farming features story from part of country they are focused on this week” versus “Don’t do this, it has uppity effniks in it” ?
Connections between farmers here and their colleagues in Africa are very strong. http://www.nfuonline.com/about-us/farm-africa/ Which must be really distressing to a flat out racist like you David. What if an “effnik” touched your white bread? Best not to eat anything just to be sure.
So, folk come over here and learn the trades of farming that we have taken many hundreds of years to hone. They then go back to their own country with that knowledge, produce product which can be made cheaper than here, sell it to us at nock down prices (because fixed costs are so much cheaper) and put all our farmers out of business. How can anyone struggle to object to that ChrisL?
So you’re in favour of keeping the people of Africa down by using outdated farming methods, even though better, more modern ones are available? Think it through for a minute – if conditions there remain as poor as they are they would have more incentive to come over here as immigrants, which I imagine you would object to.
Do you really think helping improve African farming methods will put all our farmers out of business? You don’t think that’s a little exaggerated? And more to the point, do you really imagine that was the BBC’s aim when they produced this episode of Countryfile?
So owning I Phones, paying massive amounts to traffickers and dressed in designer clothes makes them poor?
Don’t be fooled…
You think the vast majority of people in Africa own iPhones?
I don’t care, but the supposed ‘poor’ ones on the move north seem to be equipped with them.
well yes they do dont they? when i see them getting off the banana boat in italy, they all seem to be wearing nike airmax trainers which cost over a 100 squid a pair and giorgio armani jeans and t shirts
No, ChrisL, just the vast majority of them who are trying to get into Britain.
A curious fact, evident from many pictures of Calais, etc., not even touched upon by the BBC as they swallow the refugee/poverty sob story hook line and sinker.
Well all three of you have successfully managed to change the subject.
I’m not necessarily going to disagree with you about the Calais migrants, partly because I haven’t watched all that much of the coverage of it. But that’s a different debate.
Does that mean you agree with me about the Countryfile segment?
No, but you’ve bored us rigid your Liberal pro bBC protestations.
Shame, I was enjoying this debate. I don’t find people challenging my opinions boring.
Was Rhodesia not ‘the breadbasket of Africa’ ?
Suggests to me they knew something about farming.
I won’t be able to determine the brand but mobile phones are the way to go in Africa. The cost of cell infrastructure is far less than copper wiring.
What really keeps African farmers down is the high tariff wall run by the EU. Another good reason for Britain to leave – we could then source food at proper prices from those farmers.
There used to be British farmers farming very successfully in many parts of Africa not long ago. Most bent over backwards to assist Black farmers improve their methods.
Their reward was to be attacked, killed and their farms confiscated and sent packing.
This is an irony free zone. Its a hell of lot easier to sit in the sun each day and watch the World go by and make babies whilst the USA feeds you through UNESCO
In Zimbabwe, the Africans where only interested in burgling the Farms, not planning to produce a profit in the future. The cycle of Winter and Summer in Northern Latitudes has produced the evolution of “planning for the future” genes in humans for farming, which even in Europe came with the farmers replacing the previous Human stock. It looks like Africans need to be under a great deal of disciplined pressure from Western Civilisation, to follow the rules of the Liberal Fascist White European Multicultural BBC type. The Chinese have given up, and just ship out Chinese farm workers, instead.
Africans are herdsmen not farmers
Some extremely disappointing comments on this topic.
If you want fewer people leaving Africa to try to settle here this is exactly what we should be doing, helping them to help themselves.
Indeed it would be a far better use of our international aid expenditure to ensure it gets spent at the coal face rather than pass through foreign government hands.
In Zimbabwe the farm workers have been just as affected by the take over of farms by Mugabe and his crooked cronies, losing their homes and jobs.
IIRC not too long ago the export of surplus Italian tomatoes at hugely subsidised prices virtually wiped out tomato growing in parts of W. Africa.
The best way to help nations develop is not to build factories but to firstly help it to feed itself and move on from subsistence to selling your surplus, which means you can buy other goods and services, becoming a virtuous circle.
Earth shattering!
Breaking news from the BBC. “Polls close in Greek bailout referendum – first results expected in the coming hours.”
I do hope non-one at the BBC was paid Licence Fee-payers’ money to write, check, approve and put that up on the web-site. It just is not worth anything, telling us news we already knew. I would not be surprised if at least four staff were involved in that.
It’s time for substantial cuts to the Licence Fee, it can take it without any alteration to, or diminution of, its services.
Well, once again the bbbc has had it’s true colours brazenly exposed in the way it has been reporting the Greece crisis. Yet again, we were given a daily dose of how the Greek people were totally divided in their views towards the EU and the austerity imposed by Herr Merkel et al. Repeatedly we were told that it was just ‘too close to call’ and we had to listen to very well paid bbbc reporters who had been flown over to Greece to ‘get to the truth’ by ‘speaking to the people’ and they still got it wrong. Clearly, they didn’t get to the truth or speak to the people but trotted out the usual bbbc pro EU, pro Euro currency mantra as dictated by head office.
Then when the result is becoming obvious, what do they do? Well, they wheeled out Peston – the bbbc self appointed euro and economic guru who always talks total bollocks. He was clueless as to what to say or do as they are all reeling in shock after having (again) a taste of democratic reality.
I wonder what policy line the bbbc will develop next……It is almost amusing to watch.
Perhaps, the Greeks might start printing their own euros. Perhaps they could call it the Greek euro. Perhaps they could even rename it errr something like err now let me think …Yes, I’ve got it…They could call it the Drachma and then perhaps they could use that as currency and get on with sorting out their own affairs and worry less about interference from the very undemocratic and unelected officials currently running the EU.
(Mind you, Sky news weren’t much different).
BBC Suppresses Director General’s Wining and Dining Expenses:
http://tv-licensing.blogspot.co.uk/2015/07/bbc-suppresses-director-generals-wining.html
4 hours ago the BBC were telling us that the Greek “No” vote had a very slight lead over the “Yes” vote. 1 Hour ago, the Guardian (of all papers) were saying the “No” vote was a landslide.
To put it bluntly, the BBC are pretty much crap at everything they do these days aren’t they?
BBC Headline re Greek Vote:
‘Greece debt crisis: Greek voters reject bailout offer’
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-33403665
Sky Headline re Greek Vote:
‘Greece ‘No’ Campaigners Celebrate Victory’
http://news.sky.com/story/1513740/greece-no-campaigners-celebrate-victory
Notice the difference? BBC claims polls have failed.
However the liberal elites spin it this is the beginning of the end for the euro.Maybe the Greeks should not ever have been in the euro or borrowed so much money but the whole euro project depended on these unreal parameters.
Not good news for Cameron and his chums desperate to keep us in the EU.
Perhaps the rest of the Euro zone will give in and keep Greece afloat. Who really cares. Like the rest of the unreal liberal elite’s projects and fantasies it is all unravelling now.
Next up ending free movement and reimposing strict border controls. Then ending the culture of phoney human rights as against the rule of law.
Then reasserting the values and traditions of the old Europe and kicking the 68ers and their body snatched followers out of power for good.
Not much room in that coming Europe for the BBC and it’s acolytes
I was amused to hear Roger Bolton smugly announce at the end of Feedback that there had been an instance of a BBC producer apologising on his programme, could this be a start of a trend?
Actually there was nothing at all unusual at the apology, the BBC does that sort of thing all the time. These apologies are always for issues when a minority is involved, in this case some daft bat who thinks that playing Tom Jones’ Delilah as the second record after the news of a particular incidence of violence to women was crass.
However any issue that affects a majority, well Auntie knows best, so get get lost!
Lengthy, utterly one sided BBC TV news report about how many children in Gaza need counselling after last summer’s war.
No mention of the Israeli kids who need counselling after enduring months of rocket attacks, sirens and running to shelters in terror.
A quick look on Wikipedia will tell you “At least 75 percent of children aged 4-18 in Sderot suffer from post-traumatic stress, including sleeping disorders and severe anxiety.”
But that didn’t get a mention. Astonishing.
https://twitter.com/TomOdell/status/617806354531520512
The difference between TIME and the BBC is the lack of climate control agenda for the Americans.
Let’s all go to bed with a laugh with a tweet from bBC man Christian Fraser..
https://twitter.com/ChristianFraser/status/617819687620091904
Four years ago, BiasedBBC posted this report on the disappearance/murder of Blackpool teenager Paige Chivers. With the clear implication that the BBC were keeping quiet because “The Muslims™” were involved:
“You will be wearily unsurprised that the BBC report mentions nothing about Paige Chivers…
“…I would suggest that all the BBC report was interested in was whitewashing how Lancashire Police had been whipped into submission by 25 odd years of BBC thought policing and the disaster that their ‘nationcidal’ promotion of multiculturalism has wrought upon us.
Several commentators shared their support for EDL/BNP anti-muslim protests about Paige Chivers:
“That they continue to keep this story fresh in the media by their protests and campaigns shames both the BBC, the MSM and indeed those who deride them from their own narrow prejudices”
“The BBC’s neutering of reports on the Muslim sexual grooming racket isn’t isolated to this case…
“If people like you had bothered to listen to the BNP years ago instead of closing your very tiny minds, it’s no stretch to imagine that a young girl may still be alive today”
“I’m very very surprised that the matter hasn’t been dealt with vigilante stryle, by a member of the local community”
Meanwhile…
FOUR YEARS LATER…
BIasedBBC seem to have lost interest in Paige Chivers. I wonder why?
“Paige Chivers murder trial”
http://bbc.in/1CeX8pg
“Robert Ewing, 60, denies killing her and perverting the course of justice”
“Co-defendant Gareth Dewhurst, 46, denies helping dispose of her body and a serious sexual offence”
“Mr Ewing met his co-accused when he applied to join the British National Party in Blackpool and they became close friends”
“The jury also heard he was once a member of the National Front and was interested in right-wing politics.”
Instead of digging up a story from four years ago (is that really the best you can manage?) how about addressing one of the numerous incidents of BBC bias reported here each and every week?
It doesn’t have to be one of those where you are personally asked for a response – though that would be quite amusing.
Clearly, you cannot, so have to resort to gimmicks instead.
Impressive. I come to this site regularly but I couldn’t tell you what was posted 4 years ago. You must have a photographic memory. Or access to the BBC’s monitoring records, perhaps. Anyway this obviously negates all the other times young girls have been targeted by certain sections of the community and the BBC has glossed over it.
BIasedBBC seem to have lost interest in Paige Chivers. I wonder why?
BiasedBBC seemed to lose interest in Paige Chivers over four years ago. You imply that this is because of the arrest and trial of two men years afterwards. Good one.
Dez:
You may remember that a Muslim kebab shop owner was arrested for her murder. He is said to have joked that he put her body in kebabs. A funny guy. Even so, it appears that Paige was not murdered by a Muslim. You must be so happy at this that it has made you forget the epidemic of Muslim gang rape of white children that has spread across the country. I wonder how many of these children will kill themselves in years to come? Never mind eh Dez, so long as we can build a multicultural society, surely a few sacrifices have to be made?
Damn those Greeks, damn those Labour voters they should listen to the BBC for their lead.
With luck with the weekend passing we will see a reduction in cherry vulture activity. Until then, on the topic of the BBC and one of its most crucial failings:
http://bbcwatch.org/2015/07/06/baroness-deech-on-the-bbc-complaints-system-and-ofcom/
Thanks for the link GW. From her CV, she was a Governor of the BBC between 2002-06 and knows what she’s talking about.
From The BBC Annual Report: 192,459 complaints received and 52 upheld by the Trust’s Editorial Standards Committee. 0.03%?
The latest update I have is this: In 2013/14 the BBC received 192,459 complaints, the complaints were sent to a first-tear team of about 400 people in Belfast, of which 485 complaints went on to a second-tear team of about 30 people in the BBC’s Editorial Complaints Unit in London, only 12 of these complaints were upheld, but then 277 of the remaining 473 complainants appealed to the Trust for a third-tier review. Only 52 of these complaints were upheld by the Trust’s Editorial Standards Committee. Ofcom dealt with 12,774 complaints about the BBC, 1,012 complaints raised substantial issues that warranted further investigation.
I understand that a lot of influential people including many scientists are angry with the “poetry idiot” Fraser Steel, the BBC‘s Editorial Complaints Unit Head, over the loony “evidence from Computer Models” excuse for upholding a complaint from an environmental activist. The minority of one excuse, Einstein was subject to such a type of dismissal from the signatures of a hundred scientists, when Einstein pointed out that it would only take the minority of one single scientist to prove Relativity wrong.
I have been given the names of 13 of the 30 staff of his Unit in London which seems to comprise of at least three rooms. Colin Tregear, the BBC’s Editorial Complaints Unit Director has an interesting history when it comes to his roll in dealing with complaints about Climate science, there is also Alison Wilson, the Units, Complaints Manager. While other staff include Lucia Fortucci, Andrew Hannah, Paul Hunter, Claire Jordan, Mark Madden, Gemma McAleer, Stuart Webb, Michelle Wiggins, David Woods and Philip Young.
I presume that the BBC has already been advised to do something about Fraser Steel, if only to placate revenge, because I already think that they have his home address.
Did the BBC call another poll wrong?
Seems to me BBC were saying the Greek vote was on a knife edge – pumping out a 50:50 message when the outcome was pretty decisive.
Shy Greek No voters, anyone?
From the News homepage.
Choice of headline. Quoting Alexis Tsipras, hence the ‘scare quotes’ if you read past it but doesn’t it come across as an endorsement?
Will the letter limit excuse for a dubious headline be dragged out let again?
‘doesn’t it come across as an endorsement?’
deegee,
actually no, it comes across as an implied criticism of Greek voter choice.
The tone sounds like Sergeant Wilson in Dad’ Army welcoming a decision by Captain Mainwaring
Not to me it doesn’t. I don’t see any implied criticism there.
The fact that deegee interpreted it as endorsement and you see it as criticism suggests to me that the headline was written that way simply because it was quoting Tspiras. It also reveals how bias is often perceived in the mind of the reader rather than actually being there.
Why is John Humphries in Athens? Where is the added value? Think of the carbon footprint and why is he talking with such a hushed voice? Did someone or something die?
Don’t worry: the BBC have been ceaselessly hammering home the message that even though the Greeks voted an overwhelming ‘NO’ last night, they are ALL actually determined to stay in the Eurozone, no matter what!
Phew! Everything’s okay, folks, nothing to see here, move along, etc.
‘I’m amazed people still don’t get the message’
To be fair I’m taking this Bill Turnbull statement from this morning out of context – but it does tend to epitomise the BBC cri de couer in the face of mass rejection of left-liberal wishful thinking.
The issue that elicited Billy’s exasperation was a typical one for BBC Breakfast – and the detail is pretty irrelevant. There’s some social media sensation and the BBC is anxious to bring it to our attention. My argument is that anyone interested is already up to speed and anyone not interested in the latest social media sensation won’t give a damn.
Doesn’t ‘brave choice’ equate to ‘political suicide’? At least that’s what it meant in ‘Yes Minister/ prime Minister’.
Last week we were talking about the film ‘The Village Of The Dammed’
Wasn’t this the ‘look?’
So the children grew up
Yes. Ever upward and outward. Especially the latter.
http://bbcwatch.org/2015/07/06/bbc-censors-jewish-from-is-affiliates-claim-of-missile-attacks/
ChrisL – BBC censorship of this nature? What are you thoughts?
I agree that the BBC shouldn’t have left out the word “Jewish”.
Thank you for that.
Will you be tasking them on this through the full CECUTT system over the next few month?
If so, do share.
If not, why?
If someone has already done it, and explained it better than I could (I don’t really know enough about the whole Israel/Palestine situation to confidently make judgements on it), why should I?
Are you going to make a complaint as well?
Now that the Greek people have given a two fingered salute to the EU moneymen by voting an emphatic NO I think they should have another referendum, and keep having them until they vote YES.
Surely, this policy would fit in seamlessly with the EU politicos