Is it BBC Apology Day ? The BBC being exposed for variety of bias recorded on this site day after day is now become a very official and very public issue – just in the run up to the apparent renewal of the Charter . Many here argue that the BBC cannot be changed in its current – anti British Anti Judeo pro Muslim pro green Marxist form . But with a Marxist government – it’s safe – but thankfully it is already down one DG and News Director … And the cover up of BBC Bias continues …..
Start the Week 10th November 2025 The Davie and Furness Show
Bookmark the permalink.
Kudos to the daily telegraph for doing some good journalism lately!
“The row over BBC bias deepened tonight after two of its leading presenters claimed that airing concerns about its coverage was part of a political campaign to ‘destroy’ the Corporation.”
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-15272719/Boris-blast-Nick-Robinson-bias-row-anti-BBC-plot-MPs-Trump-report-doctored-Today-host-political-campaign-destroy-organisation.html
Its nothing to do with bias its all political. They can’t even admit their idiotic bias. I wonder why? Maybe because no one else would hire them
The Farce is still strong…literally just turned on R4 to hear the presenter ask if this woman left for America because she suffered racism in Britain…
‘Yvonne Brewster, the Jamaican-born director and actor who founded the Black British Theatre Company Talawa.’
Britain and every white person are irredeemably racist and no Black person can ever achieve anything because of it.
“Mr Shah praised Mr Davie as “an outstanding director-general” who had “propelled the BBC forward with determination, single-mindedness and foresight” in a statement shared after the news broke. “He has had the full support of me and the board throughout,” he added.”
https://www.express.co.uk/news/uk/2131763/bbc-chairman-samir-shah-breaks-silence-tim-davie
Then he and the whole board should resign too
The darts on Sky—it’s fine for us to hear the crowd sing “Let’s go fucking mental,” but “Keir Starmer’s a wanker” gets blurred out, lol.
Elsewhere – is it true that the King in waiting didn’t bother with the cenotaph …. .? Presumably he cause something doing green crap in Brazil…. Or maybe he’s still counting the number of trees killed building a road to the crap green bash …
I am quickly becoming a republican.
Tim Davie gone, please don’t expect anything to change. The resignations will simply function to deflect criticism, the BBC can count on Labour and public sector support.
I keep hearing lefties bemoaning the resignations and supporting the BBC. I wonder why?
Just wait to see the DEI hire who replaces him. Organisations who live and breathe wokeism never learn. Look at the new Tories
Flotsam – agreed that we won’t see any changes in the output of the BBC – the bias – the corruption is too deep .
But anything that undermines it – anything that damages morale or public trust – nationally or internationally – is to be welcomed …
We have a long fight …
Not the bBC, but on day like today this happens in Hull, Diane Johnston MP, post’s on Facebook some guff about thanking all the servicemen that left through Paragon Station. Right next door to the station is a hotel used to house illegals. The comments were a joy, if you don’t lean to the left.
I got a train there a few weeks ago and I literally could have been a foreigner in a train station somewhere in Africa.
As I waited I wondered what on Earth has happened to our country when I feel like the odd one out in my home Town.
Tim Stanley in the Telegraph – enjoy
STARTS It always hurts when a Tim gets disgraced, but if the scalp fits the hat, wear it. Tim Davie had to resign as Director General of the BBC, as did CEO of News Deborah Turness, because the litany of errors on their watch was so great as to indicate a cultural rot from the head down. That rot has put the very future of the corporation in doubt. The BBC’s whole business model was to stake its survival on being a paragon of honesty. If it is caught lying – this brazenly, this often – consumers will revolt.
The Corporation was already in the soup for protecting vast egos accused of very different things – Gregg Wallace, Gary Lineker, Huw Edwards – and for offering a platform for anti-Semitism, but the dossier of biases that recently fell into the Telegraph’s lap took things up a notch.
These weren’t little porkies of the “there’ll be no hurricane tomorrow” variety but have touched upon, and reinforced, major political controversies. They are sins of consequence.
They suggested that senior figures ignored entirely valid complaints about editorial policy, eschewing the very balance the BBC claims to embody. The BBC is accused of downplaying criticism of trans rights, at a time when government policy is being rewritten. Of amplifying accusations against Israel while that country is at war.
The smokiest of guns was Panorama’s re-editing of a speech Donald Trump gave on January 6, 2021, in order to suggest that he advised demonstrators to march violently on Congress. Journalistically, I just can’t see how this could’ve been done without deliberate intent: stitching together remarks almost an hour apart, editing it to suggest it was seamless, accompanying it with misleading footage of far-Right thugs apparently answering the Fuhrer’s call.
The kindest interpretation is that production staff presented it as shorthand for something they assumed that we all assume that Trump did.
And that’s just the point: the popular assumption of Trump’s responsibility for Jan 6 is an interpretation of events, hotly contested by Trump and responsible for all-out legal and political war in the United States. It’s been the basis for the Democrats’ claim that Trump tried to steal an election – a claim that may or may not be true, but is now weakened by the Panorama scandal. Why? Because the White House can, and will, point to Panorama’s selective editing as proof that the President has been the victim of a wider smear campaign by liberal-Left journalists. By stacking its coverage against the President, Panorama ended up doing the man it presumably hated an almighty favour.
Moreover, BBC staff have destroyed their own trump card in future negotiations over the licence fee.
The problem is this: in the modern, post-TV world, the licence fee is entirely unjustifiable. The BBC has to explain why, when there’s so much else available, it should be allowed to compel us to pay for it – just when tastes are diverging, national identity is fractured and the quality of the BBC’s output is in doubt (every time Stephen Fry appears, which is often, I want to do an Elvis to the television screen).
It gambled everything on the proposal that, for all its faults, the BBC remains as honest and impartial as it seemed in the 1950s. Hence the investment in BBC Verify; hence those irritating adverts with Clive Myrie talking about exposing fake news as if he’s Roger Cook battering on the door of a fly-tipper in Cheadle.
BBC Verify’s official mission is to “fact-check information, verify video, counter disinformation, and analyse data to separate fact from fake” in order “to bring clarity on complex issues.” The hidden implication was always that commercial media platforms have surrendered to subjectivity – that, okay, you might be free to consume facts from, say, Fox or MSNBC, but you can’t really trust them. That’s the difference Auntie makes; the license fee purchases independence.
But now, of course, we know that one of the BBC’s flagship programmes outright lied. That it did not “clarify” the Trump controversy but added to the swamp of assumption, myth and conspiracy-thinking – in which case, why would we trust its Verify service? After all, no one buys their wedding rings from Ratners any more.
If the BBC difference is its impartiality, then that difference is suddenly contested. This not only makes it harder even for left-wing politicians to justify the licence fee: if they cut the cord and let the BBC move to a subscription model, who would now purchase it? The tragedy of the BBC is that many years ago, it enjoyed high ratings, a strong reputation and, believe it or not, was ahead in the technological field: it could’ve easily moved to subscription via the iPlayer and taken a vast share of the British audience to it.
By clinging to the licence fee model, however, it has whittled away that faith while delaying the inevitable, allowing competitors to outstrip it. It is the classic example of a state-supported company that, protected from genuine competition, rides out change while its market share dwindles.
All this could be sad had BBC executives not been so arrogant about their product, functioning as a welfare programme for middle-class graduates in an organisation that outwardly promotes diversity yet inwardly resembles a feudal hierarchy of luvvies. Good, hardworking journalists at the BBC there are plenty, and it’s always an honour to work with them, but they’ve been let down by a bureaucracy that suffocates creativity in a mass of red-tape and an incomprehensible pyramid of editors that seems to grant even the Archbishop of Canterbury a say in how to broadcast the snooker.
To commit so many errors while running something as superior-sounding as BBC Verify, is to invite catastrophe in the manner of a Greek hero – though this story tips into comedy. The Panorama-caught-lying scandal is as embarrassing, and enjoyable, as the discovery that a puritanical pastor is an alcoholic gambler with a Catholic mistress.ENDS
Danny Cohen in the DT
STARTS The resignations of Director General Tim Davie and CEO of BBC News Deborah Turness became inevitable from the moment The Telegraph published Michael Prescott’s leaked report into journalistic standards at the BBC.
The Prescott report revealed not only that the BBC’s flagship programme Panorama had faked a video of President Trump, but that both Mr Davie and Ms Turness had known about it for six months and did nothing about it. This amounted to a cover-up of the most serious of editorial failings.
But this crisis is not just about the faking of the Trump video. The Prescott Report reveals systemic bias across a range of the BBC’s output and the failure of senior management to address it. It is an extraordinary and detailed indictment of a leadership and a culture in which standards of impartiality have taken a dramatic fall.
Chief amongst this, the Prescott Report has exposed systemic anti-Israel bias and antisemitism at BBC Arabic and problems of impartiality with the BBC’s wider coverage of the Israel-Hamas war.
For this, the BBC’s Chairman Samir Shah owes the Jewish community an apology. The Prescott Report provides prima facie evidence that the BBC has been gaslighting its Jewish audience. It reveals that Mr Shah, Mr Davie and Ms Turness received an internal report detailing evidence of systemic and widespread anti-Israel bias and antisemitism at BBC Arabic.
Yet BBC executives in public, in parliament and in private dialogue with British Jews have repeatedly said that there was no systemic problem with the service and that BBC Arabic was “an exceptional source of journalism” and its reporters were an “unrivalled source of knowledge and editorial content for the wider BBC”.
This is the definition of gaslighting: presenting a reality which you know not to be true. In this case BBC executives knew it was not true because they had themselves been presented with detailed evidence by a report prepared by their own organisation. Yet BBC executives continued to present the Jewish community with a very different story.
BBC executives did this to a small minority community facing a huge and frightening rise in racist attacks. It is utterly shameful.
So what should happen now?
The BBC has a choice to make. It can continue in a defensive posture, denying the problems it faces and attacking its critics, rather than focusing on the substance of what they have to say. Or it can see this moment as a critical opportunity to ask itself the hard questions on impartiality, bias and senior management failure that are long overdue.
I sincerely hope that those who lead the BBC going forwards can throw off the shackles of defensiveness and engage with what needs to change at the corporation. The BBC is staffed by a great many hard-working and committed people. Individually they aim to live by the BBC’s values and deliver high-quality work. Yet when you stand back what becomes clear is that collectively the BBC has fallen into a consistent pattern of liberal groupthink which has caused great damage to its reputation.
The BBC must look forwards now. It must understand it needs to change. The choices the BBC makes now about its journalism will define whether it can survive for the long term.ENDS
Every member of the bBC should be required to wear a kippa for the next 3 months and have to walk outside a mosque every Friday wearing their kippa.
Huge photos of President Trump should be hung in every bBC room.
Some forthcoming programmes for Christmas on the BBC
“Although rumour and speculation have long surrounded Donald Trump and his alleged friendship with Adolf Hitler, journalists have to date struggled in vain for incontrovertible proof of this widely held, but little talked about aspect of political intrigue.
That silence will be shattered once and for all by a two-part investigation that has not only unearthed new and verifiable evidence, but additionally has made allegations of a second, and for some, even more damaging relationship”
https://www.conservativewoman.co.uk/trump-hitler-and-herod-the-truth-according-to-the-bbc/
The first 13 minutes of the BBC 1 news at 10pm was about the BBC …maybe the staff shouid update their CVs ….
At the risk of getting a slap from the missus here is my new favorite girl: