Reading about the demonstrations in Egypt reminded me of BBC Middle East editor Jeremy Bowen’s attempts to sell the Muslim Brotherhood as a moderate organisation prior to the overthrow of Mubarak.
Here was his original take in January 2011:
This was the first update:
And what you’ll see now:
Journalism is sometimes called the first rough draft of history. More like the first attempt at spin, with later updates where required.
Better late than never, a new open thread.
After the fanfare given to the start of the George Zimmerman trial the BBC has gone a bit quiet on the topic. And I don’t just mean a lack of updated reports, I mean no tweets from its journalists or anything. The testimony of the prosecution’s surprise “star witness” Rachel Jeantel has been very poor to say the least. She told the court Trayvon Martin had referred to Zimmerman as a “creepy-ass cracker” and “nigger”, she used the word “retarded” (another big no-no in PC America), admitted she didn’t know who threw the first punch, and was unable to read a letter she had supposedly written to Martin’s mother. One black blogger said Jeantel’s performance was “cringe-inducing, embarrassing, and mortifying to watch.” The testimony, especially the “cracker” comment, has been so damaging, it seems, that the Martin family attorney suddenly declared last night that the trial was not about race after all, even though that is the line the prosecution has been pushing.
No doubt the BBC will pick up the tale again when things start going better for the prosecution.
In a similar vein, here are a couple of other stories about violent attacks with a strong racial element that have been in the news in the US this past week. Neither has been covered by the BBC.
Ex-Camp Pendleton Marines who killed husband-wife should get death penalty, jury finds
Two ex-Camp Pendleton Marines should be executed for the brutal torture-slaying of Brooklyn-raised Marine Sgt. Jan Pietrzak and his young bride, a California jury has decided.
Convicted shooter Emrys John, 23, and fellow ex-Marine Tyrone Miller, 25, were part of a robbery gang that stormed the victims’ southern California house in October 2008, beat and hog-tied Pietrzak and forced him to watch as Quiana Jenkins-Pietrzak was sexually assaulted with a pink vibrator and then shot the newlyweds in their heads, using couch cushions as silencers.
A third ex-Marine, Kevin Cox, 25, should get life in prison without parole for his role in the shocking crime… A fourth man charged with the murders, Kesaun Sykes, is being tried separately…
Riverside County Deputy District Attorney Daniel DeLimon apologized to jurors for showing the graphic crime scene photos during his opening statement in April.
“I did it because you need to know,” he said, describing the double slaying as a “sadistic” game played by four cold-blooded killers.
Some photos showed racial slurs spray-painted inside the mixed race couple’s house.
It has all the elements of a perfect BBC US story, but it wasn’t covered. Why? Perhaps the pictures of the victims and the convicted thugs hold the answer:
And here’s video of a young mother being savagely attacked in her home by an intruder as her young child watched on. Again, I can’t help thinking that if the colours of the attacker and victims were reversed we’d have seen an edited version of this video on the BBC website by now (I say edited because the attack is so brutal – not an easy watch):
Some stories fit the preferred narrative. Others do not.
Over the past 24 hours the BBC has, quite rightly, made a big deal about the intimidation of its journalists in Turkey.
Bear that in mind.
Also in the past 24 hours – an unassuming little animated film promoting opposition to the TV license (the source of the BBC’s wealth) was posted on YouTube. It mocked the current TV Licensing “Excuses” campaign [See original TV Licensing ad here – comments disabled, you’ll notice]. I watched it on YouTube myself this morning. It’s not there any more. Here’s what you’ll find in its place:
The video is now available on LiveLeak, although for how long is anybody’s guess. This is what TV Licensing doesn’t want YouTube to show, claiming copyright infringement:
Does anybody really think that a “copyright claim” was the real reason they wanted that video pulled from YouTube? Nasty authoritarian bastards.
Don’t pay the license fee. (H/t http://tv-licensing.blogspot.co.uk/)
Former BBC presenter Robin Page has uncovered a blatant piece of agenda-driven editing in a recent edition of the BBC’s Countryfile:
The woman talking about hedgehogs to John Craven was the excellent Rebecca Willers from the Shepreth Wildlife Park – she too was featured in my last Diary. On the programme she attributed hedgehog decline to road kills and loss of hedgerows, and then it was clear to me that she had been edited. I know that Rebecca believes badgers are serious predators of hedgehogs as she would not let the CRT put hedgehogs on Lark Rise Farm because of the local badgers.
I telephoned her. “Yes,” Rebecca said: “I mentioned that predation by badgers was an important factor in hedgehog decline several times and it was edited out.” So there we have it – Countryfile changing the story to avoid the facts, or so it seems.
Is it just coincidence that this editorial decision by Countryfile was helpful to those activists opposed to badger culls? I doubt it.
(h/t the BBC’s David Gregory-Kumar)
A report by Rajini Vaidyanathan about the forthcoming trial of George Zimmerman for the shooting of Trayvon Martin takes a clip of Zimmerman’s phone call to the police completely out of context to give the impression his actions were racially motivated.
Here’s the relevant segment:
Vaidyanathan: He was unarmed, carrying a bag of sweets and iced tea. He’d been spotted by George Zimmerman, a neighbourhood watch volunteer. Believing the teenager was acting suspiciously, he called the police.
Clip from Zimmerman phone call: He’s got his hand in his waistband… and he’s a black male.”
Now here’s the context of that clip taken from the full transcript of the phone call:
Dispatcher: OK, and this guy is he white, black, or Hispanic?
Zimmerman: He looks black.
Dispatcher: Did you see what he was wearing?
Zimmerman: Yeah. A dark hoodie, like a grey hoodie, and either jeans or sweatpants and white tennis shoes. He’s here now, he was just staring.
Dispatcher: OK, he’s just walking around the area…
Zimmerman: Looking at all the houses.
Dispatcher: OK…
Zimmerman: Now he’s just staring at me.
Dispatcher: OK-you said it’s 1111 Retreat View? Or 111?
Zimmerman: That’s the clubhouse…
Dispatcher: That’s the clubhouse, do you know what the-he’s near the clubhouse right now?
Zimmerman: Yeah, now he’s coming towards me.
Dispatcher: OK.
Zimmerman: He’s got his hand in his waistband. And he’s a black male.
“And he’s a black male” is obviously confirmation of his earlier response to the dispatcher. “He looks black” was Zimmerman’s first answer. A short time later he gets a better view so he confirms the fact. The BBC’s report takes this clip out of context to make it seem as if Zimmerman’s reference to Martin’s skin colour was unsolicited, an off the cuff remark rather than a fact that had been requested of him. That is to say, the BBC is trying to imply a racial motive.
This is utterly disgraceful, especially given the fact that last year NBC was forced to fire a journalist for broadcasting an edited version of the above Zimmerman phone call that also made him seem racist. I don’t think the BBC’s out of context cherry-picking is any better.
I’ve already mentioned in the Open Thread that Mark Mardell has written an article about racial tensions ahead of Zimmerman’s trial in which the BBC’s North America editor contrives to ignore the fact that Zimmerman is Hispanic. To do so would muddy Mardell’s narrative, which is literally black and white. Rather than go over all that again (and the BBC’s selective use of photos for this story) here’s the link to my earlier comments.
It seems that the BBC has decided on the story it wants to tell about the Zimmerman case, and it’s going to tell it regardless.
In February BBC Brazil’s US-based GOP/Tea Party-hating columnist Lucas Mendes wrote an article attacking Texan conservative politicians, the latest in a long line of partisan hit pieces from this lefty journalist (representing the supposedly impartial BBC). His dislike of conservative America is so all-consuming that he based much of this recent column on fake facts from a satirical article in the New Yorker which he believed was genuine. He has since been forced to apologise, but is still employed by the BBC to give his opinion on US affairs. BBC Brazil does not have a right-of-centre columnist to balance Mendes’ views.
Here’s a link to the Google Translate version of the Mendes article. At the top is this editor’s note:
Editor’s Note: This column was written based on a satire published in “The New Yorker”. The information below about Senator Lamar Smith are false. Lucas Mendes acknowledged the error in a posterior column, published on April 18 .
“Posterior column” As in talking out of his arse. How apt.
Read it all. Impartial BBC, eh?
(Some previous Biased BBC posts about Lucas Mendes can be seen here.)
Here’s the BBC’s North America editor Mark Mardell on today’s From Our Own Correspondent explaining why Benghazi hasn’t been a big deal for journalists such as himself:
Conservatives have long suggested a cover-up, that the authorities removed words the State Department objected to, particularly the word “terrorism”. Conservatives contend that what they call the Mainstream Media, and sometimes label the Lamestream Media, have ignored this and other stories. And that is largely the case. The trouble is from the very get-go the President’s critics eagerly build on uncertain evidential sands a tottering tower of such baroque design that anyone simply looking for the facts is a bit put off. The websites making much of Benghazi usually stress the president’s middle name – Barack HUSSEIN Obama – and hint he is a secret member of the Muslim Brotherhood.
“usually stress the president’s middle name… hint he is a secret member of the Muslim Brotherhood”? I’ve been following the story since the attacks happened and none of the websites I’ve been reading make such claims. Mardell is spewing nonsense, although in his defence he does admit facts are hard and he is easily “put off”. It’s difficult work, proper journalism.
Talking of which – on MSNBC yesterday Bob Woodward, a reporter not unfamiliar with the occasional cover-up, compared Benghazi with Watergate (via Weekly Standard)
“And I have to go back 40 years to Watergate when Nixon put out his edited transcripts to the conversations, and he personally went through them and said, ‘Oh, let’s not tell this, let’s not show this.’ I would not dismiss Benghazi. It’s a very serious issue.”
Mardell didn’t think it necessary to include the views of an actual Watergate journalist in today’s report, even though he mentioned Watergate in his link:
Conspiracy in DC – Watergate, Black Helicopters and the White House – listen to my from our own correspondent bbc.co.uk/programmes/b01…
— Mark Mardell (@BBCMarkMardell) May 18, 2013
I guess Woodward must be one of those nutters who thinks Obama is a secret member of the Muslim Brotherhood.
Whatever Woodward’s reasons for his interest in Benghazi, at least he isn’t the sort of journalist who is “a bit put off” when the facts are a little complicated. If Mardell had got the tip-off about Watergate all those years ago Nixon would have seen out his term of office without a problem.
Have at it.
This wonderful video from Sunny Lohmann of House Of Sunny titled “American Journalist” applies equally to the BBC version of the species. (H/t Jim Treacher):
