There is a view within Labour that their party should not have to compromise it’s ideals for the sake of winning a General Election. In other words, if the Labour Party becomes only a pressure group, then so be it.
The same can be said of the BBC. They exist within their own left-wing political utopia and don’t represent the views of the British population. Integrity therefore does not matter to them.
Alan, I’m sorry but you are wrong; the BBC spokesperson wasn’t lying.
“No EU money was used in the making of the programme being aired on the BBC” is factually correct. The EU grant was for translating the finished English language film (as shown by the BBC) into other languages.
Thus, whilst the foreign language versions received EU funding, the English version did not. This is old news. The TPA are desperately flogging a dead horse.
That is desperate misdirection. EU money went to the people who made that film. The money was allocated for that film. The BBC showed that film, therefore EU money was used for the making of the programme being aired on the BBC. Translating the film is a subset of the activities required in producing or “making” that film.
I have created many websites over the last 20 years. If I receive money purely to fund the cost of translating one of those websites, then that money comes under the allocation of cost of producing that website. Translation is NOT a separate activity from production of the finished product, but is a sub-set of production activity.
All programs are made with an eye on foreign sales. Certainly a program from an Independent producer is more likely to be made if the production company can demonstrate it can be part funded by overseas money. Hence why there are so many overseas companies credited at the end of BBC productions – also why so many productions are insipid and asinine, but that’s another story.
Why does the BBC accept any funding from the EU as it clearly compromises the BBC’s supposed impartiality ? Wherever the money is spent it releases an equivalent amount to fund EU propaganda.
This is the big argument over switching the Licence Fee into some sort of overall taxation (notwithstanding that some may not wish to access television AT ALL but will still end up paying) because the BBC will always be dependent on the Party in government to maintain the payment, increase the payment or make changes including terminating the arrangement. The provider > consumer relationship changes.
That apart, just taking money (especially when you do not really have need of it with £3.6bn guaranteed income) must compromise the BBC however ‘arms length’ the transaction may be.
“Left Hand, let me introduce you to Right Hand. You don’t seem to have met, much less know what you are each doing!”
Its desperate stuff, and symptomatic of a large organisation with multiple viewpoints.
Its just a shame that in this instance, the organisation in question is the country’s largest communication/ broadcasting company, and that we have become used to this kind of behaviour.
It should be: “left hand, let me introduce to even lefter hand”.
10 likes
Search Biased BBC
Recent Comments
MarkyMarkApr 8, 13:55 Midweek 8th April 2026 “Deputy Prime Minister of the United Kingdom. Lord Chancellor and Secretary of State for Justice. MP for Tottenham.” ……… “Last…
MarkyMarkApr 8, 13:48 Midweek 8th April 2026 “Rupert Lowe MP I read how an Afghan man who attacked a 14-year-old girl with a wine bottle has been…
MarkyMarkApr 8, 13:44 Midweek 8th April 2026 UK Gov cannot protect children – we have to pray to the wind Gods for energy and protection in 2026!…
taffmanApr 8, 13:37 Midweek 8th April 2026 Anything on Al Beeb about The English Channel (French: la Manche) Invasion, now that the weather is fine? Do they…
tomoApr 8, 12:56 Midweek 8th April 2026 I know about OPSEC requirement but PR matters too…. better rename it HMS Tardis? “where’s wally” seems appropriate?
MarkyMarkApr 8, 12:37 Midweek 8th April 2026 Tehran clock counting down the destruction of Israel – protected by UNESCO? HA AH AHHA HA If you let your…
diggApr 8, 12:19 Midweek 8th April 2026 Iran…. How can anyone “negotiate” with a Nation that is so backward and barbaric it forces its female population to…
MarkyMarkApr 8, 12:14 Midweek 8th April 2026 “Is this the end of liberal democracy as we know it? Can the US republic survive in a recognizable form?…
MarkyMarkApr 8, 12:03 Midweek 8th April 2026 EU Change tariffs from 10% to 0% but US charge 15% for EU car imports. EU Commission Live Press Briefing…
diggApr 8, 12:00 Midweek 8th April 2026 BBC other cheek, The Guardian painting nutcase Muslim murdering terrorists as freedom fighters as usual? https://www.theguardian.com/guardian-live-events/2026/mar/12/the-assault-on-freedom-with-mehdi-hasan-and-arwa-mahdawi?utm_medium=ACQUISITIONS_HOUSE_ADS&utm_campaign=MehdiHasan&utm_content=LiveTicketing&utm_term=GLive&utm_source=GUARDIAN_WEB It’s a pattern!
But at least they did with the by now renowned BBC integrity. Apparently. A BBC spokesperson has said…
There is a view within Labour that their party should not have to compromise it’s ideals for the sake of winning a General Election. In other words, if the Labour Party becomes only a pressure group, then so be it.
The same can be said of the BBC. They exist within their own left-wing political utopia and don’t represent the views of the British population. Integrity therefore does not matter to them.
The fact that the BBC lied (what’s new) is supported here.
“The BBC denied ‘The Great European Disaster Movie’ was EU-funded: that was untrue”
http://www.conservativehome.com/leftwatch/2015/08/the-bbc-denied-the-great-european-disaster-movie-was-eu-funded-that-was-untrue.html
Alan, I’m sorry but you are wrong; the BBC spokesperson wasn’t lying.
“No EU money was used in the making of the programme being aired on the BBC” is factually correct. The EU grant was for translating the finished English language film (as shown by the BBC) into other languages.
Thus, whilst the foreign language versions received EU funding, the English version did not. This is old news. The TPA are desperately flogging a dead horse.
http://wp.me/p5QbXs-aM
That is desperate misdirection. EU money went to the people who made that film. The money was allocated for that film. The BBC showed that film, therefore EU money was used for the making of the programme being aired on the BBC. Translating the film is a subset of the activities required in producing or “making” that film.
I have created many websites over the last 20 years. If I receive money purely to fund the cost of translating one of those websites, then that money comes under the allocation of cost of producing that website. Translation is NOT a separate activity from production of the finished product, but is a sub-set of production activity.
The BBC lied. The TPA are telling the truth.
Not quite Jason.
All programs are made with an eye on foreign sales. Certainly a program from an Independent producer is more likely to be made if the production company can demonstrate it can be part funded by overseas money. Hence why there are so many overseas companies credited at the end of BBC productions – also why so many productions are insipid and asinine, but that’s another story.
This horse still requires a little more flogging.
Why does the BBC accept any funding from the EU as it clearly compromises the BBC’s supposed impartiality ? Wherever the money is spent it releases an equivalent amount to fund EU propaganda.
Exactly Grant.
The EU is a political organisation campaigning for its survival and ought not be funding programs fluffing its worth.
Scribbling, yes the EU and the BBC have a lot in common !
This is the big argument over switching the Licence Fee into some sort of overall taxation (notwithstanding that some may not wish to access television AT ALL but will still end up paying) because the BBC will always be dependent on the Party in government to maintain the payment, increase the payment or make changes including terminating the arrangement. The provider > consumer relationship changes.
That apart, just taking money (especially when you do not really have need of it with £3.6bn guaranteed income) must compromise the BBC however ‘arms length’ the transaction may be.
“Left Hand, let me introduce you to Right Hand. You don’t seem to have met, much less know what you are each doing!”
Its desperate stuff, and symptomatic of a large organisation with multiple viewpoints.
Its just a shame that in this instance, the organisation in question is the country’s largest communication/ broadcasting company, and that we have become used to this kind of behaviour.
It should be: “left hand, let me introduce to even lefter hand”.