Author Archives: Andrew

Mourning the loss of impartiality on the BBC

Like John Simpson, who this week leapt to the defence of BBC “impartiality”, I began my near 40-year broadcast career in BBC TV news. It was impartial then; it certainly isn’t now. I have seen my own visual material presented in an entirely different timeline, totally distorting the actual event that I witnessed, and at no time did the intellectually lazy journalists ask me what I witnessed. I also have seen raw camera material destined for both BBC and ITN come out in completely different forms on air. The bias in both cases was pro-establishment during the Thatcher years.

As we expect politicians to declare an interest, should we not expect ourselves to do the same when asked to comment on a system that has provided succour to ourselves and our families as it has in John’s case?

I believe that few employed by the BBC can have a truly objective view of the BBC’s political and social bias.

We on the outside do not like the PC Stalinism, urban bias, sloppy technical, artistic and journalistic standards that BBC News now represents, and if you really want examples, I can point to a Newsnight interview with the PM on a train. Neither the cameraman, reporter, editor, sub or indeed tea lady noticed that between cutaways and the body of the interview the train direction reversed. It is called crossing the line, it is as basic in TV news as learning your alphabet. That the BBC sought to defend its gross incompetence is again a glaring example of how those within have lost all objectivity about the system that they are in. Precision with words and pictures is vital in a political world that seeks to distort both.

Chris Harnett, Southampton

via Drinking from Home.

included an appeal for help with the so-called ‘honour’ killing of Naziat Khan by her husband, Zafar Iqbal, who is thought to be on the run in Pakistan.

Part of the appeal included a background piece about the nature of so-called ‘honour’ crimes in Britain’s minority communities, explaining that such backward attitudes pervade all ages, which was demonstrated with several vox pop clips of younger Asian British males expressing their views on family honour.

One of the men shown was particularly forthright in the lengths he would go to in this regard, and said, I recall, words to the effect that ‘and you can quote me’ on that. Strangely, in his case, the Beeboids blurred out his face, so he managed to spread his evil views without of course being able to be held responsible for what he said, either by his family, community or the local constabulary.

included this one liner:

“Two Palestinian women are killed in an Israeli siege at a mosque in Gaza”

…which is a stunningly one-sided abridgement of the story. Turning to the World page on BBC Views Online for instance, we see a more accurate summary of events:

Gaza women end mosque stand-off

A siege at a Gaza mosque ends after the gunmen inside escape by mingling in a human shield of women.

When BBC News Twenty-Bore finally got round to their full report of the story it was introduced with:

“Two Palestinian women are reportedly killed…”

…just another word omitted from the headline version, natch.

Please use this thread for off-topic, but preferably BBC related, comments. Please keep comments on other threads to the topic at hand. N.B. this is not an invitation for general off-topic comments – our aim is to maintain order and clarity on the topic-specific threads. This post will remain at or near the top of the blog. Please scroll down to find new topic-specific posts.

. In typical Neverdock style he writes:

BBC ignoring huge US political scandal, because it involves a Democrat

MSM and the US blogsphere are on fire with Democrat John Kerry’s attack on our troops. The BBC, who report with out fail on any misstep by Bush, are silent on Kerry’s attack. The only mention I could find about the scandal engulfing the Democrats, wasn’t on the front page but, buried on the world page on the editors blog. Even then, the BBC tries to downplay the scandal.

As the president was telling the good people of Texas that the Democrats did not want to win in Iraq, his former rival was in California insulting the troops.

Or so Mr Bush and his spokesman would have us believe.

Well, moron, let’s let Flipper speak for himself.

There’s not much to add to that, other than to note that the Beeboid, Richard Greene, does go on to add:

And when you review Mr Kerry’s comment, it’s hard to argue.

So, Beeboids one and all, just why isn’t this huge Kerry gaffe being covered in your reports of the US mid-term election campaign?

Please use this thread for off-topic, but preferably BBC related, comments. Please keep comments on other threads to the topic at hand. N.B. this is not an invitation for general off-topic comments – our aim is to maintain order and clarity on the topic-specific threads. This post will remain at or near the top of the blog. Please scroll down to find new topic-specific posts.

compare and contrast these two news reports of the same court case:

Using your skill and judgement, determine which of these reports was from BBC Views Online and which was from that well known right-wing reactionary (shurely shome mishtake?) newspaper, The Daily Mirror.

Got it? Yes, the BBC Views Online report is the one that downplays the alleged racism of Dr. Arnaot, who, according her web site, The Ocean Park Private Clinic, was born in Baghdad in 1955, and who, according to this directory of expert witnesses, appears to be doing rather well in this apparently racist country where she has chosen to live. Even the BBC’s headline is ambiguous about whether or not the pregnant woman is the victim or the attacker.

The trial, at London’s Blackfriars Crown Court, continues.

N.B. The BBC report is quoted in full. The Daily Mirror Report has been abridged for ease of comparison. ‘Reasons of space’ is not an excuse for the BBC’s omissions.

there was a great example of the BBC’s bias towards itself. Around 11.15am, they showed a lengthy filmed package about the BBC’s new production of Robin Hood, which will “fill the coveted Dr. Who slot on Saturday evenings”. This went on for a good many minutes, with excerpts from the production, interviews with the actors and production team and so on. It was nothing but an advert, an infomercial, masquerading as news, with their special correspondent, Ms. Philippa Space.

They wouldn’t have spent this much time, or indeed any time at all, if this production was for ITV, and they shouldn’t do it for themselves. To add insult to injury, the Robin Hood infomercial was followed by two more lengthy BBC adverts (thankfully not masquerading as news this time), one for Jane Eyre, another for Wide Sargasso Sea.

Still, I suppose it could have been worse. They could have been giving us their usual version of the real news instead 🙂

Please use this thread for off-topic, but preferably BBC related, comments. Please keep comments on other threads to the topic at hand. N.B. this is not an invitation for general off-topic comments – our aim is to maintain order and clarity on the topic-specific threads. This post will remain at or near the top of the blog. Please scroll down to find new topic-specific posts.

informed us that John Prescott said “sorry” for letting people down. They must have been watching a different John Prescott speech than the one he made at the Labour Party Conference in Manchester – because that John Prescott only apologised to the Labour Party, not the electorate at large.

Later in the bulletin, they reported on the move of Top Gear presenter Richard Hammond from a hospital in Leeds to a hospital in Bristol. The BBC’s reporter, “Going Live” from outside the hospital, waxed on about the superb facilities of the hospital, which we could see over her shoulder is a BUPA hospital. Usually the BBC house style demands that such establishments are prefixed with the pejorative term (to the BBC at least), ‘private’, but not on this occasion it seems. I wonder if the BBC are picking up the bill for Mr. Hammond’s stay.