The real ‘fake news’?  From the likes of the BBC.  How do we know?  An insider reveals all…The BBC’s Amol Rajan:

Fake news isn’t the big problem in news. The big problem in news is…the news

I’ve written several blogs here about fake news, a phenomenon whose supposed rise has coincided with my time as media editor. Correlation not causation, let me assure you.

In summary: fake news is nothing new, though technology has allowed it to be disseminated further and faster than ever; its prevalence in Britain is unclear; and many of those who bang on about it, from politicians to the mainstream media, have an incentive to inflate the threat.

It’s also a distraction from the real issues, which are the editorial selections and judgements that comprise the news. Getting news right – choosing which stories to cover, and how to cover them – is a constant challenge. No programme editor ever goes to bed thinking “We got everything right today”.

But doing the stories that really matter, and getting them right, is a much bigger challenge to the integrity of news in Britain than the alleged threat from fake news.

Yep…editorial selections and judgements…all those choices of what to include and what to omit from the news, who to interview and how to edit and choose what to report from such interviews, how to not challenge post-truth truths such as ‘institutional racism’…know what that is?  Doubt it even though the BBC has been talking about it all day and happily declaring the death of an immigrant as due to such a thing.  Did we hear any of this from the BBC?…

Some neighbours accused Mr Ebrahimi of assault, harassment, drunkenness, being verbally abusive and sometimes intimidating. He was arrested on a number of occasions but was never charged with or convicted of any offence.

He was seriously attacked on previous occasions at different addresses [and the council moved him and provided accomodation]…you have to ask why that happened?  Was it racism or his own behaviour as ‘trouble’ seemed to follow him around.

Seems the police and council reaction was not due to racism but a ‘mistaken’ view of his behaviour…

The police and Bristol City Council shared information in relation to Mr Ebrahimi and the incidents involving him on many occasions. Initially, both agencies provided a degree of support and referred him to SARI, who supported him until 2011. However, latterly, evidence provided for this review indicates that the police and Bristol City Council wrongly began to see Mr Ebrahimi as the primary problem. There were two incidents in 2009 and 2010 in which Mr Ebrahimi was wrongly judged to have provided inaccurate

representations of events and his allegations seemed thereafter to be wrongly regarded with suspicion.

They failed to react to his complaints because they didn’t believe him due to past events…not racism.  His murder due to him being labelled a paedophile and caught filming the children of the man who subsequently killed him….so…racism?

Mr Ebrahimi was killed because Lee James subjected him to a vicious attack whilst perceiving him to be a sex offender and angered that he had recorded his children on film and that he had continued to record material and be defiant to Mr James after having been confronted earlier. Lee James had not been involved in any incidents in relation to events before 11th July 2013. Lee James’ personal internal inhibitors were likely to have been adversely affected by his alcohol consumption and his understanding of a local negative perception of Mr Ebrahimi that might see support for such an attack on him. Although Mr Ebrahimi’s ethnic origin may have contributed to Lee James’ negative view of him, there is no direct evidence to establish this with any certainty.

So was it ‘institutionl racism’ or the usual institutional lack of joined up thinking and awareness and the usual bureaucratic sluggardliness?  The ‘key factor’…the ‘critical blocker’ to a proper response?…..racism or something else?…

The key factor that seems to have most adversely affected the responses to Bijan Ebrahimi by the statutory agencies is that a collective incorrect view was formed that he could be dishonest, that he was a nuisance, a time waster and difficult to deal with. Evidence available indicates that some became of the incorrect opinion that Mr Ebrahimi brought victimisation on himself because of his own behaviour. This appears to have been a significant factor in there being an absence of will to deal with the problems with which he presented, to take the side of others against him and to assess that it was his behaviour that was the problem that needed to be confronted. The lack of a professional and objective view of his situation was a critical blocker.

The claim of ‘institutional racism’ is tacked onto the end of the report with absolutely no evidence to back it up…as with the MacPherson Repoert there was no evidence of racism in individual behaviour nor  in the policies of the police or council…..

SPOTY…Sir Mohamed…institutional ‘racism’?

Paula Radcliffe insists husband Gary Lough did not call Sir Mo Farah’s SPOTY win ‘f****** joke*

Spot the BBC bias and list it here……

In these dark days, where we have to worry about “possible Russian interference in the 2016 Brexit referendum“, perhaps we should look at other votes too?

Mo Farah has won the Sports Personality award. Did Russia try to exert influence on the vote in order to subvert democracy?

Well just look at this damning evidence. Suspicious Kremlin linked Twitter bot accounts have posted many tweets about Mo Farah. Perhaps we should have a second referendum Sports Personality Vote? Also, where’s our £350m?

When does Mo Farah race? Live stream information and more from London 2017 ahead of his final race https://t.co/ey60FgvqFl #Russia

— RUSSIA NEWS SERVICE (@EINRussiaNews) August 12, 2017

#Russia Mo Farah Falls but Hardly Misses a Step in 10,000-Meter Victory: The defending Olympic champion will … https://t.co/1AcYxaAiXS

— Russia (@RssRussia) August 14, 2016

Politics Mo Farah 'really excited' for Rio – Mo Farah says he's excited for Rio but feels bad that Russia's cle… https://t.co/mmTLwHke0v

— George R (@GRCONS) July 25, 2016

#WadaLeaks: Rafael Nadal, Mo Farah among sport icons exposed in results list https://t.co/N0X6RjjAQ7 pic.twitter.com/V86a6l7URE

— RT (@RT_com) September 20, 2016

You may have noticed, as we’ve pointed out, that the BBC refuses to mention the fact that the Iranians arrested Nazanin Zaghari-Ratcliffe because of her work at the BBC’s Media Action.  The Chair of which is still the BBC’s new head of news Fran  Unsworth.

Will the BBC’s serious omission of dodging this inconvenient truth so as not to implicate the BBC in Nazanin Zaghari-Ratcliffe’s plight be corrected now that we have someone who is so closely linked to the case?  Doubt it somehow….and don’t expect the BBC’s coverage of the EU to change either….Media Action received £9 million to peddle EU propaganda.

“Its work has absolutely no bearing on the BBC’s editorial decisions. The BBC’s editorial remit is to deliver fair, balanced and impartial coverage and we are satisfied that our coverage of the European Union does just that.”

This week the Centre for Policy Studies published a report claiming to have found a left of centre bias in the BBC’s online reporting of think tanks. They also claim right of centre think tanks are more likely to receive health warnings than their left of centre counterparts.

The CPS itself is hardly impartial on the BBC – it argues for a smaller BBC and campaigns against the licence fee.

BBC News provides impartial and independent coverage to a quarter of a billion people across the world.

Fran Unsworth

A new day, a new head of news, the same old bias ala the Today show.

List it all here……

Our mission continues to be to provide information that can be trusted around the world. It’s a great liberal aim in the best sense: a public service.

Liberal?

See 35:54

Can you learn anything about someone from the people they are friends with?

New BBC Head of  News Fran Unsworth (top left) is pictured here in 1986 at the wedding of Jane Wells (bottom right), alongside Lise Mayer (bottom left).

Jane Wells is the daughter of Sidney Bernstein ‘the dominant influence on the growth and development of commercial television in Britain’ and is the founder of 3 Generations, ‘a non-profit organization that documents stories of human rights abuses through film’ and their output is just the sort of social justice propaganda you’d expect.

Lise Mayer is the co-creator and writer of BBC sitcom The Young Ones and her sister is Catherine Mayer, co-founder of the Women’s Equality Party.

Two prime examples of the liberal elite, and both life long friends of our Fran (even today they are all Facebook friends). Does it tell us anything about her? Maybe. You decide.

BBC appoints Fran Unsworth as next head of news

What do we know about about her?
Not much. She has a very small public profile and has worked at the BBC her whole career.

Here’s one interesting titbit.
Fran Unsworth – “Fortunately my parents were very non-gender specific.”

Your guess is as good as mine, but it certainly sounds a lot like the type of rhetoric we hear from certain activists. The rest of the video talks about *cough* diversity *cough*. Make your own minds up on this one. Perhaps she thinks unbiased reporting is very important despite her strong left wing views…let’s see…

Is it game over for Brexit?

The BBC’s Rachel Burden, as do most BBC presenters, tried to push the notion that more and more people are against Brexit and certainly don’t want a ‘hard Brexit’…ie Brexit.   She stated that not only Remainers were against it but that there are many Leave voters who didn’t vote for all that is happening.  Naturally she didn’t mention that many Remain voters wanted less EU but voted to remain anyway…or that such a way of looking at things is a nonsense as she, and the BBC, don’t parse the voting after a general election and say ‘Well 4 million people voted for UKIP therefore the government must do what UKIP wants’ or that ‘Not all those who voted for the Tory government voted for every policy…therefore let’s have Labour running the government’.  The BBC doesn’t say that one party only got 52% therefore the party with 48% are the real winners as they do with Brexit [although of course Corbyn thinks he won the election…presumably going on figures supplied by the D’Abbottacus].  No sign from the BBC that the vote by the British people to leave the EU is being betrayed by the people elected to supposedly do their bidding.  Perhaps we need a clean out of Parliament of those who refuse to do their job properly…never mind the expenses scandal what about the democracy scandal?…the complete betrayal and contemptuous disregard for the democratic vote….backed of course by the EU’s propaganda mouthpiece in Britain…the BBC.

A poll released today should disabuse those in the BBC such as Burden….it shows nearly everyone wants to just get on with Brexit and do not want to see it abandoned as the BBC works towards trying to facilitate….

Just 12 Per Cent of Brits Would Abandon Brexit

Just 12 per cent of British voters want the government to “abandon Brexit completely” and keep the UK locked inside the European Union (EU), a new poll has revealed.

Even among those who voted to remain in the bloc, the proportion committed to blocking Brexit were a minority, with just 29 per cent wishing to abandon the divorce, according to the survey of 1,680 adults taken on the 10^th and 11^th of this month by YouGov.

In fact, in none of the demographic or political groupings surveyed did a majority want the Brexit vote “abandoned completely”.

Former UKIP leader and Member of the European Parliament Nigel Farage ironically urged opponents of Brexit to “look away” as he shared the poll results on social media.

Other options presented to respondents included “the government should continue with Brexit on its current negotiating terms,” with 45 per cent agreeing.

Ten per cent said “the government should reconsider its aims in Brexit negotiation, and seek a ‘softer’ Brexit” and 19 per cent thought leaders “should offer a second referendum to see if Britain still wants to go ahead with Brexit.”

**your regular twitter reality check**

% who want to abandon Brexit completely:

nationally: 15%
middle/upper class: 19%
18-24 yr olds: 21%
London: 21%
Labour: 24%
Remainers: 29%
Lib Dems: 37%

YouGov, Dec 10-11

— Matthew Goodwin (@GoodwinMJ) December 12, 2017

The BBC whines constantly that the DUP are disproportionately influential due to their alliance with the Tories.  Of course this is because the DUP in the main supports Brexit.  The BBC shows no such distaste for a small group of Tory rebels who betray their country and party and ally themselves to the Marxists of Labour in order to appease their foreign masters in the EU.  The BBC was also not concerned that the LibDems had too much influence in the coalition, nor that the SNP abused their position to malignly influence events in Parliament even on purely English matters.  Only the DUP gets the BBC’s thumbs down.

BBC bias…it’s out there…list it all here…..