Compare and contrast

Two stories from the US as covered by the BBC.

Note also that the second headline puts ‘voter fraud’ in inverted commas. For those who haven’t seen O’Keefe’s video it can be viewed here.

UPDATE. And don’t think for a moment that BBC reporters aren’t aware of what they’re doing and why. Here’s Philippa Thomas quoted in a recent article about coverage of the US election by the foreign press (emphasis mine):

Thomas, a 2011 Nieman Fellow in the throes of covering her fourth U.S. presidential campaign for the BBC, is used to pleading her case with campaigns. “The BBC News website has massive American readership and a lot of what it publishes is shared on Facebook and Twitter,” Thomas wrote. “A lot of the politicians know it: I reckon my challenge covering current U.S. campaigns is to persuade the gatekeepers that the BBC is seen, heard and read by enough key voters to get us on their lists.”

“A paedophile ring operating where? At the BBC?” “Yes”

I’ve rattled off a quick transcript from a key part of the Jimmy Savile/Neswnight Panorama. It really doesn’t get much more serious than this.

A: There are now allegations that Top of the Pops was a centre for abuse and that as well as Jimmy Savile others were involved.

B: A group of three have been described, men in their thirties, who would collect girls from the Top of the Pops audience and take them to other parties off the premises of the BBC. And inappropriate things have been described as happening then. Some quite serious.

A: And is it your understanding that these people worked for the BBC?

B: Yes, yes, so you know we’ve had one particular call that has names of people who can be traced on that and that will be passed on to the police.

A: Not all the victims were young girls. Lawyers are now hearing allegations that boys were targeted too.

C: There are some quite serious allegations that there was a paedophile ring operating. These are quite serious allegations.

A: A paedophile ring operating where? At the BBC?

C: Yes.

A: Involving other members of staff?

C: Yes

UPDATE. The Sun – making the most of it:

JEREMY VINE SEEKS SOLACE IN ROMNEY DEBATE CONSPIRACY

It seems that the BBC’s Jeremy Vine can’t accept the fact that Obama got his butt kicked fair and square by Romney in the first debate. In a desperate attempt to rationalise the beloved Obama’s defeat he is peddling a ridiculous conspiracy theory from lefty website Democratic Underground:

I won’t bother posting the video or waste time detailing why the claim is so idiotic. Suffice to say the “sleight of hand” Vine has told his 140,000 Twitter followers to look out for is in reality Romney openly taking a handkerchief out of his pocket. Go to Buzzfeed to see Romney using it to mop his upper lip during the debate.

If Obama-loving BBC types like Vine are so upset by a debate defeat that they’ll grasp at nonsense like this, imagine what they’ll be like if Romney actually wins the election.

UPDATE. This piss-take highlights the stupidity of desperate idiots such as Vine:

BBC’S PREDICTABLE RESPONSE TO ROMNEY’S TAX RETURN

Mitt Romney released his 2011 tax returns today. Included in the details was the fact that he paid $4m to charity – 30% of his income.

Follow Newssniffer to see the partisan priorities BBC journalists are placing on this story. As I write there have been two versions of the article so far and still no mention of charitable donations.

UPDATE Just a reminder – still nothing on the BBC website about the unravelling of the Obama administration’s Benghazi narrative. Even David Frum – a favourite of BBC tweeters when he attacks the GOP – says the White House is lying. No BBC journalists are linking to that article though. Funny, that.

OMG! OBAMA IS, LIKE, THE COOLEST EVA!! HOPE HE WINS LOL :)

Believe it or not the following tweets are not by a 14-year-old schoolboy with a vague interest in US politics but an adult male BBC journalist:

BBC ARTICLE IMPLIES GOP GOVERNORS JINDAL & HALEY MAY HAVE CONVERTED TO CHRISTIANITY FOR POLITICAL REASONS, OFFERS NO PROOF

BBC News online has published an article today by “Washington-based journalist Seema Sirohi” asking why Indian-Americans prefer the Democratic Party. This being the BBC the journalist is of course strongly pro-Democrat (see example tweets below) and the article is basically an excuse for her to rail against the Republicans in the most obvious and partisan way. Sirohi even uses the awful device of making up a quote to prove a point about frustrated Republican opinion:

Interestingly, the support for the Democrats is stronger among the younger generation, a group where one might expect the mantras of the Republican Party – about success, getting ahead, Wall Street is Main Street and deregulation – might work the most.

Instead the young seem more enamoured of the fairness doctrine and an activist government.

This is much to the chagrin of the Republican Party whose Indian-American supporters – fewer in number – are puzzled, frustrated and even irked by the fierce loyalty to their opposite number.

“Why doesn’t the community just follow them into the ‘large’ [but mainly white] tent of the Republican Party?” they ask plaintively.

Fairly loaded writing there, but she really hammers home the point with “[but mainly white]” and “they ask plaintively”, doesn’t she?

That, however, is nothing compared to her description of Republican governors Bobby Jindal and Nikki Haley:

The Republican Party fielded two Indian-American governors – Bobby Jindal of Louisiana and Nikki Haley of South Carolina – at the convention. Mr Jindal could not make it because of hurricane Isaac which hit his state hard.
Both Mr Jindal and Ms Haley are stars in their own right, but both have shied away from their ethnic roots to gain acceptance.
They converted to Christianity from Hinduism and Sikhism, a move that many in the older generation frowned upon. Whether they did it for personal or political reasons is unclear.
The decision on conversion did not endear them to the community, which is largely Hindu, but only reinforced the feeling that the “family values” of the Republican Party are essentially Christian values.

In a piece which tries to paint the Republicans as intolerant that last paragraph is rich in unintended irony. However it’s the implication that Jindal and Haley may have converted to Christianity for political reasons that is truly outrageous, and she offers no evidence to support it. There’s a reason for that.

Jindal converted to Christianity in high school:

When he was 4, he decided to call himself Bobby — after the youngest son on the “Brady Bunch” television show. In high school, he gave up Hinduism and became a Christian; and during his first year at Brown University, he was baptized as a Roman Catholic. His wife, Supriya, is also a Catholic convert.

Haley first ran for political office in 2004. She married a Methodist in 1996:

Haley was born and raised as a Sikh. On September 6, 1996, she married Michael Haley in both a Methodist church ceremony and a Sikh gurdwara. Haley identifies herself today as a Christian, but attends both Sikh and Methodist services out of respect for her parents’ culture. She sits on the board for Mt. Horeb United Methodist Church.

A Q&A on her website offers this:

Is Nikki a Christian?

Truth: In Nikki’s words: “My faith in Christ has a profound impact on my daily life and I look to Him for guidance with every decision I make. God has blessed my family in so many ways and my faith in the Lord gives me great strength on a daily basis. Being a Christian is not about words, but about living for Christ every day.”

But clearly Sirohi knows better. Where does the BBC find them?

As promised – some of her tweets. Here she is responding to a friend’s comment about Bill Clinton:

Another on Clinton:

And here she is gushing over Fauxcahontas Elizabeth Warren:

In her BBC article Sirohi talks of tokenism in the Republican Party but calls Warren (who claimed minority status as a Cherokee on the most ludicrous of evidence) a star. You couldn’t make it up.

Check out more for yourself.