Category Archives: BBC bias

A wee slice O’ history from the Highlands as we delve into the archives of Clan Donald and put before you never before heard scenes from The Donald’s early years that built his character…his mother’s voice…

Donald…Donald!  Where’s yer troosers lad…dinnay be so rood..an dinnay wear yer coat in the hoos, yehl ne’er feel the benefit when ya go ootside…an dinnay bully the wee foreign lad next door…ya ken he disnay like pencils shoved up his hooter nor ya punching the livin’ daylights oot o’him everytime he knocks on oor door to come in…an stop looking up the lassies’ skirts and pulling their pigtails…an dinnay grab their haggis lad with yer filthy wee mitts, someone’s gotta eat that….an dinnay let me catch you peeing in the loch again…we’ve gotta drink oot of that…an yeh’ll have to apologise yeh ken to Mr McHarrabin for putting a brick through his solar panel, oh and stop yer fraternising with the Sassenach Campbells…ya ken full well we’re not on speaking terms with them lad…no more being friendly to the ol’enemy laddie!

Ah yes, character forming good old days.  I’m sure ‘My Maggie’ will transform the Trumpster as she ticks him off on his approach to women, climate change, enhanced interrogation techniques, NATO and Putin.

Others aren’t so sure…..

Kathy Gyngell: Finger-wagging will get Theresa nowhere with Trump

Theresa May tame Trump? Much has been made of this tremendous task she has ahead of her ever since we heard she was about to cross the pond to meet the White House’s new maverick.

The idea that we could be about to witness an ideological David and Goliath contest frankly made the mind boggle. Some of our illustrious commentators who have been adjuring her to tackle Trump, I fear, must have had a sense of humour bypass or are suffering from serious lack of imagination syndrome.

The Brits (or some of them) can be terribly sanctimonious snobs. 

Is Mr Trump, an international businessman and millionaire, who just rolled through apparently unwinnable Democratic states and prepared to break every rule in the political book, the sort of man to be put in his place by a purse-lipped, disapproving secondary school headmistress? – which is rather what Mrs May looked like in conversation with Mr Marr. In the BBC’s dreams, I’d say.

Mrs May has made  a good start with her defence of liberty and freedom speech to the Republicans. But the British media, led by the high and mighty BBC, is not going to like her ‘tacking’ right. Nor will they let up on the ‘values’ she should be projecting. How will the vicar’s daughter deal with torture as well as the reality TV star, the BBC will continue to keep needling her.

For Mr Trump like Mr Undershaft for all his vulgarity will do more to help society by giving men jobs and a steady income than Mrs May’s government will by passing ever more equalities legislation. For that, as I am sure Trump understands, only makes ever more people ever more dependent on State charity. Once Theresa gets that she won’t need to navigate the BBC’s modern morality tightrope. She can chuck it down the gorge.

So people are sceptical about climate change…what to do?  How about cooking the books, sensationalising the figures, moving the goalposts and lying.

The gap between what the climate lobby has marked as the start of global warming and temperatures now is too small and insignificant?  Then move the start point to where the temperature was much colder….voila…a much higher apparent increase in temperature and hence more alarm, more urgency…more money for the scientists who conform.

Do like the use of the word ‘true’…in what is a highly political and subjective decision…

Defining a true ‘pre-industrial’ climate period

Scientists are seeking to define a new baseline from which to measure global temperatures – a time when fossil-fuel burning had yet to change the climate.

At the moment, researchers tend to use the period 1850-1900, and this will often be described as “pre-industrial”.

But the reality is that this date range came after industry really got going.

A new paper published in the Bulletin of the American Meteorological Society (BAMS), they suggest 1720-1800 might serve as a better “starting line”.

The most recent UK Met Office analysis indicates 2016 was “around 1.1C” above this 1850-1900 baseline.

But if this reference is wrongly set, and possibly now adjusted, it potentially changes how we view the policy targets.

Re-draw the baseline to a warmer or cooler starting point and it will take us either further away or closer to those targets.

Dr Hawkins’ group used these, together with their understanding of how factors such as greenhouse gases influence the climate, and some modelling, to try to gauge what global temperatures were doing during 1720-1800 – to in essence see if conditions were warmer or cooler than for 1850-1900.

And in their assessment, they were likely cooler.

Why not just move it back to the ice age?  Hmm…oh, that wouldn’t work because it is pre the industrial revolution and we can’t blame climate change on the West man!

Getting quite a collection of BBC invective that is used to describe President Trump.

We’ve had the racist, bigot, misogynist, Islamophobe and now he’s in office we get a whole new tranche of inventive invective…..

…He’s Goebbels spreading lies and discontent

…He’s a climate change denier [who wants to ‘open a war on knowledge’…so again so very Nazi…ala book burning]

….He’s malevolent

….He’s deranged

….He’s is of course a liar

….He’s a war monger…who wants to make peace with the evil Putin.

….He’s an isolationist [and a war monger]…who wants to open trade deals with every individual country.

….He’s a torturer who defies humanity and the rule of law…except he’s not going to introduce torture nor do anything that goes against the law.

….He’s……well I’m guessing we should leave this open….pretty sure there’ll be lots, lots more from the good ole BBC to come.

Theresa May is stepping into a hornet’s nest today, a White House at the heart of rows about policy, truth, falsehood and the aggressive vituperative style of so much American political debate. Today’s Justin Webb reports.

Terrible, just terrible.  We’re in the Era of Trump and we have a growing mentality that is isolationist, hostile to ‘The Other’, intent on putting up walls to protect your own and willing to use falsehoods and vitriolic ranting to appeal to a debased base….No not Trump but the BBC’s boys in the liberal Bunker….I use the word ‘liberal’ advisedly.

I tuned in to the Today show this morning [07:40] and thought perhaps it had, as it often does, allowed in a guest editor, perhaps Hillary Clinton on crack, judging by the relentless outpouring of anti-Trump invective that oozed out of my radio.  But no, just another day with Justin Webb and Nick Robinson who seem to be taking bets on who can be the most outrageously venomous towards Trump.

Webb, with no sense of irony or self-awareness, complained that ‘in the era of Trump’ politics has become more ‘vituperative’.  This from a man who works for a ‘news’ organisation that has spent the last year spewing poison about Trump, ignoring his actual policies, instead preferring to just shout ‘racist, bigot, misogynist and Islamophobe’ at him.  Of course this shows the effect of the BBC bubble, the groupthink where they dare not step out of line for fear of being labeled a heretic…..because Webb, when in the Mail, had actually dared to suggest Trump may have a point on many things.

Who did Webb have on as a guest?  Right-wing shock-jock Glenn Beck…..seemingly now a very welcome voice on the BBC as he is prepared to attack Trump…before he was absolutely toxic to the good folk in the Bubble.  Interesting how Beck came about his damascene conversion…not actually an intellectual transformation but one forced upon him in effect by left-wing thugs.  His wife and children were attacked in a park by a group of people, shouted at and had things thrown at them…because of what Beck said on his radio show.  These were left-wing types, as is usual their response to other ideas is violence and abuse…but Webb showed not the slightest interest in this, no comment or questions whatsoever about the who and why.  Imagine if it were a left-wing commentator, say Webb’s family being attacked in the same way….guarantee it’d be big news.

What did concern Webb?  He thought that Trump was ‘deranged’….again no irony that he had just complained about the ‘vituperative’ language being used in politics.

Another irony?  Webb went on to claim Trump was an anglophile being part British having a Scottish mother.  Hmmm….I seem to remember Boris being called a raicst for pointing out that Obama might have a dislike of Britain as he was part-Kenyan and his Kenyan grandfather had been tortured by the colonial Brits.  Guess one rule for the Left and one rule for the Right.  Is Webb not racist then for saying this about Trump?

Webb then told a porkie, claiming that there was no evidence to suggest that voter fraud could happen in the US…and he backed that up by claiming Trump’s evidence was merely some anecdote from a German golfer.  Well we’ve already looked at this and there is evidence that non-citizens do vote and influence elections, that other voter fraud does happen and that the US electoral system is quite open to it.

Nick Robinson then joined in at 08:10 interviewing Michael Fallon about May’s trip to the US.  Robinson also told a huge porkie, and went on to repeat it throughout the interview despite Fallon pointing out he was wrong.

Robinson stated that Trump was going to introduce torture.  We’ve also looked at this...and, as Fallon pointed out, Trump has merely said he would if he could, but…he defers the decision to his advisers, both of whom have voiced opposition to the use of torture, and that he would only do what was legal.  So once again we have the BBC misleading its audience, telling complete lies about a major news topic.  False news?  You bet it is.  Robinson doubled up by suggesting May was defiling herself by embracing Trump who ‘some might say turned their stomach with his appalling policies’.  No bias there then.. No Nobel Peace prize for being white?

In between Webb and Robinson we had a Rabbi come on to do the Thought for the Day…now this followed directly in from Webb’s assault on Trump and claims that Trump was a liar.  The Rabbi intoned that we should beware false narratives and news, it is divisive and leads to conflict and he went on to compare Trump to Goebbels…not directly of course but by implication and association.  I might suggest the Rabbi should take a look around at his location and who he is joining forces with…the same people who think it is OK to kill Jews because of what Israel does, the same people who downplay the fact that Corbyn’s party is rife with anti-Semitism and that Corbyn himself is ‘friends’ with terrorist groups like Hamas and Hezbollah who want to wipe Israel off the face of the earth, the same people at the BBC who distort the news from the Middle East and mislead people as to what is actually happening and paint Israel as an evil war criminal state.  False narratives and false news?  The Rabbi should look closer to home.

Yep, just another day at the lefty tabloid BBC.

One of the BBC’s last desperate resorts to win the EU referendum was to claim that ‘science’ would suffer as ‘EU’ funding was withdrawn.  Curiously this was ‘EU funding’ whilst at the same time the BBC was arguing hard that EU funding was in fact British money anyway, re £350 million, and not really money sent to the evil Brussels.

Naturally that was nonsense…funding and investment for science would continue as the government has made clear….and private investers also seem to think that we are worth investing in #DespiteBrexit…as the Telegraph and Guido reports but the BBC oddly doesn’t…

The Remain campaign’s Scientists for EU group once warned: “Less money, not more, available for UK for science if we leave.” Well, according to buoyant boffins, the UK’s world-leading life sciences sector will enjoy a boom in investment and growth post-Brexit. London Stock Exchange figures released today show angel and seed investment into British life sciences grew 258% and 365% respectively last year compared to 2015 levels. Dr Eliot Forster, chairman of life sciences hub MedCity, said:

“Enthusiasm for UK life sciences will encourage more players to come here for the first time and may be one of the defining factors of 2017.”

More investors were piling into British companies and that a lot of the money that has now been raised from venture capital funds would get deployed into biotechs over the next five years.

No, still not a peep from the BBC website 24 hours on from the report first coming out.

We haven’t down any climate change for a while, taken over by Trump and Brexit as we have been….but here goes...the BBC’s take on Trump’s climate change policies……

Are the recent actions taken by the Trump team on the issues of climate and energy the opening shots in a war on knowledge?

So are all these moves evidence of a malevolent mindset, determined to crush all this snowflake climate change chatter… taking an ideological stand against what they might see as “warmist” propaganda?

Definitely, according to Alden Meyer, a veteran climate campaigner with the Union of Concerned Scientists.

A ‘war on knowledge’ and a ‘malevolent mindset’?  Cor blimey.  Stone the crows.  It’s wrtten by the BBC’s Matt McGrath but its sensationalist, alarmist, fact-free, highly speculative and childish tone suggests another hand at work.

“We are beginning to see our fears realised less than a week after President Trump has taken office,” said Bob Ward, from the Grantham Research Institute on Climate Change and the Environment.

“I hope that the Prime Minister will challenge President Trump about this censorship and political interference in the process of gaining and sharing knowledge about climate change during their meeting on Friday.”

Bob Ward eh?  Who’d have thought that the BBC would go to the shrill non-scientist PR monkey of Big Oil for a quote?  This is what his ‘green’ boss says…. ‘Our first responsibility is to make money for our clients….and nothing is more important than oil.’…..not ‘The Truth’ then?

Last night, CCCEP spokesman Bob Ward admitted it had ‘made mistakes’, both in claiming credit for studies which it had not funded and for papers published by rival academics. ‘This is regrettable, but mistakes can happen… We will take steps over the next week to amend these mistakes,’ he said.

Never mind there’s going to be a march…..

A march on Washington by scientists is being proposed, Facebook pages and Twitter accounts have been created based on the the idea that “an American government that ignores science to pursue ideological agendas endangers the world”.

Guarantee you’ll hear a lot about that on the Beeb.  The end of the world is nigh.  Or not.

From Janet Daley in the Telegraph…

The BBC foists on us a skewed version of reality
The news media are engaged in a political argument about whether the purpose of journalism is to report the world as it is or to purvey an idealised view
So this is where the bigger question comes in: what is the dissemination of news for? For the BBC – by which I mean, for those who decide these things at the corporation – there is little doubt that the function of news broadcasting is to enlighten the public. I use that word advisedly, in its specialised sense, meaning not simply to inform but to “free from prejudice and superstition”.
BBC news output is specifically designed to counter what it sees as ignorance and popular prejudices. Its coverage of issues in which it believes such prejudices to be rife – immigration, for example – is intended to be instructional and, specifically corrective of what its managers think of, and describe openly in conversation, as the influence of the “Right-wing press”.
The unabashed dissemination of this highly political official viewpoint is justified on the grounds that it is needed to balance the influence of scurrilous newspapers.

Whilst the BBC cheerfully explains away the murder of Jews in Europe by Muslims as justifiable because of what the BBC considers Israel’s ‘war crimes’ in Gaza it reacts with horror, and dishonesty, to Trump’s statement that he thinks waterboarding works and can be justified.

The BBC started the day with a brief moment of honesty as it reported that Trump said he would defer to his security and intelligence advisers as to whether to use such interrogation techniques.  This qualifying piece of information, kind of essential you’d think to the story, rapidly vanished from the news bulletins and all we got was ‘Trump’s going to drill the kneecaps of Muslim babies!!!’ [oh…no, that’s the BBC’s other favoured terror group, the IRA]…this is a normal BBC tactic…have at least one mention of the full story so that when someone complains they can point to that and say everything’s very, very impartial and above board.  For example the BBC does report that he would defer to his advisers here.…but why edit that out in other reports when it is so relevant and critical to the story?

What else is missing?  That he would only do what is legal.

Look at this write up on the BBC website…..both important qualifications to the story are missing…that he would defer to his advisers and that he would only do what is legal.  How can the BBC miss out two such important parts of the story?  Only if you’re desperate to paint Trump as some sort of wild-eyed, reckless thug with no respect for humanity or the rule of law would you do that…I’m sure the BBC is not trying to do that.

Here’s the limited BBC quote…

The issue of torture rose up the agenda after the president’s comments to ABC News on Wednesday.

He said: “When they’re shooting, when they’re chopping off the heads of our people and other people, when they’re chopping off the heads of people because they happen to be a Christian in the Middle East, when Isis (IS) is doing things that nobody has ever heard of since Medieval times, would I feel strongly about waterboarding?

“I have spoken with people at the highest level of intelligence and I asked them the question ‘Does it work? Does torture work?’ and the answer was ‘Yes, absolutely’.”

Ae least they include the bit where he says the intelligence people say torture works…which is at odds with what the BBC has been reporting elsewhere telling us that an ex-CIA chief said waterboarding doesn’t work.

This video is also interesting…check out the reaction of the audience…very much at odds with the BBC’s assertion that Trump is at loggerheads with the CIA….

The BBC is upset…Trump thinks illegal immigrants may have voted in the election….The BBC has mobilised its ‘Reality Check’ team to counter Trump’s lies…

Donald Trump and his team have referred to two studies they say show the threat posed by unauthorised voting; both have been challenged.

A 2014 study published in Electoral Studies found evidence that suggested non-citizens do vote and “can change the outcome of close races”. Donald Trump referred to this study on the campaign trail in Wisconsin on 17 October.

The research has been roundly criticised by political scientists who said it misinterpreted the data.

During the campaign, Mr Trump also referred to a 2012 Pew Center on the States study that found 1.8 million dead Americans were still registered. The deceased, alleged Mr Trump, were still voting. The report, however, does not make any statements about this claim.

The BBC dismisses Trump’s concerns with a swift reference to ‘others roundly criticising’.  That of course does not mean they are right but the BBC for some reason accepts their word.

What did the 2014 study say?

First use of representative sample to measure non-citizen voting in USA.

Some non-citizens cast votes in U.S. elections despite legal bans.

Non-citizens favor Democratic candidates over Republican candidates.

Non-citizen voting likely changed 2008 outcomes including Electoral College votes and the composition of Congress.

Voter photo-identification rules have limited effect on non-citizen participation.

In spite of substantial public controversy, very little reliable data exists concerning the frequency with which non-citizen immigrants participate in United States elections. Although such participation is a violation of election laws in most parts of the United States, enforcement depends principally on disclosure of citizenship status at the time of voter registration. This study examines participation rates by non-citizens using a nationally representative sample that includes non-citizen immigrants. We find that some non-citizens participate in U.S. elections, and that this participation has been large enough to change meaningful election outcomes including Electoral College votes, and Congressional elections. Non-citizen votes likely gave Senate Democrats the pivotal 60th vote needed to overcome filibusters in order to pass health care reform and other Obama administration priorities in the 111th Congress.

Pretty clear what that study found.

What of the Pew study?, and note the Pew studies are only of a few thousand people exactly the same as the above…and yet the BBC’s critics of Trump say that study is not representative enough.

The Pew study says that the US voter registration system is open to fraud as well as being inefficient, costly and lessens confidence in the integrity of the system and thus in the results of any election….

Inaccurate, Costly, and Inefficient
Evidence That America’s Voter Registration System
Needs an Upgrade

These systems are plagued with errors and inefficiencies that waste taxpayer dollars, undermine voter confidence, and fuel partisan disputes over the integrity of our elections.

The inability of this paper-based process to keep up with voters as they move or die can lead to problems with the rolls, including the perception that they lack integrity or could be susceptible to fraud.

In all, more than 2.75 million people appear to have multiple registrations.

Research commissioned by the Pew Center on the States highlights the extent of the challenge:

1. Approximately 24 million—one of
   every eight—voter registrations in the
   United States are no longer valid or
   are significantly inaccurate.
2. More than 1.8 million deceased
   individuals are listed as voters.
3. Approximately 2.75 million people
   have registrations in more than one
   state.
   Meanwhile, researchers estimate at least
   51 million eligible U.S. citizens are
   unregistered, or more than 24 percent of
   the eligible population

In the 2008 general election, 2.2 million votes were lost because of registration problems, according to a survey by researchers at the California Institute of Technology/Massachusetts Institute of Technology Voting Technology Project.

Although clearly not linked to illegal immigrants directly it does suggest that elections in the US are not as confidence inspiring as they should be…if this was the UK I’m sure the BBC and Guardian would be spluttering in outrage…until they found out that it was mostly in certain immigrant areas that voter fraud was prevalent.

Trump may have a legitimate concern but the BBC are determined to ‘prove’ him wrong regardless and sides with his critics….the BBC tells us Trump is going to have an investigation but that he ‘has no evidence’….well, the studies show he does have enough evidence that would raise concerns and that is why he is having an ‘investigation’….an investigation is not a policy enacted to tackle a known problem which is what the BBC seems to be saying, it’s an ‘investigation’ to determine if there really is a problem.

Note that ‘liberal leaning’ parties like the Democrats want loose electoral laws as it favours them (as in the UK where immigrants will mostly vote Labour…and that was one of the main intentions behind Labour’s mass immigration open door policy of course.)

Nate Silver, an acclaimed statistician with the forecasting firm Five Thirty Eight, calculated that states with newly implemented voter ID laws will experience turnout decrease by as much as 2.4 percent of the registered voter population.

Almost every day, I get e-mails and Twitter messages asking me about the effect of voter identification laws on turnout. Most of these messages, I presume, are from Democrats. They worry that more onerous laws, like those in Pennsylvania, could make it more difficult for Democratic-leaning voting groups like African-Americans and young voters to participate in this November’s election.

My view is that something which might reduce turnout by 2 percent in a key state is meaningful in a practical sense.

It’s clear enough that stricter voter ID requirements are probably bad for Democrats, on balance. In almost every state where the ID laws have been at issue, Republican governors and legislatures have been on the side of passing stricter ones, while Democrats have sought to block them…. higher turnout is helpful to Democrats, on balance. If you take the average between them, it suggests that a 1-point increase in turnout would improve the Democrat’s margin in the popular vote by a half a percentage point, accounting for other factors.

 

Shortly before Sid Miller was sworn into office, the newly elected Texas agriculture chief was asked at a conservative policy forum what keeps him up at night.

“Bad Mexican food,” he said.

Then, after allowing a few moments for laughter: 

“Actually, I sleep pretty well, but I do have some long-range concerns as I hold those two grandbabies on my lap, and I happen to wonder: When they have grandbabies to hold in their lap, will we be a socialist country? Will we be a Muslim country?”

Poor old Sid Miller, invited to talk on the BBC he probably thought he was going to appear on one of the world’s most prestigious and respected political and current affairs programmes that would treat him with fairness, impartiality and respect.  Little did he realise that it is a Democrat supporting nest of liberals who hate American values and culture and have nothing but disdain and contempt for good ole boys like him.

Nick Robinson won himself another pat on the back from the liberal orthodox [07:12] as he confirmed his right-on progressive credentials, giving further evidence of his conversion to the approved liberal mindset with a perfect demonstration of liberal superiority and a haughty disapproval of Sid Miller’s concerns about immigration and Islam.

Miller gave a perfectly reasoned and moderate interview about the concerns over illegal entry into the US but Robinson ended the interview with what you must suspect was the real reason the BBC dragged in what to most Brits must be a pretty obscure character from the depths of Texas.  The BBC wanted to create the impression that Trump is surrounded by and supported by Redneck racists and to that end Robinson hissed his disapproval in a very hostile atmosphere for a comment Miller had made in a previous interview in the US…except of course it wasn’t exactly what he said.

Robinson asked him if he had said he was kept awake at night at the thought that the US might become a Muslim country…..indeed Miller said that, but, as you can see from the quote at the top of this post he first said he was kept awake by the thought that the US might become Socialist.  Why would Robinson miss that out?   Why would Robinson think that anyone who was concerned about Islam taking over their country is a bigot…as Robinson’s attitude clearly indicated he did….and you could hear a pin drop when Miller made the joke about ‘bad Mexican food’.  I’m guessing he won’t be offered a job on the new Top Gear…though prissy Robinson might….good for the soft top cars eh?

‘An age of unprecedented mobility is shaping the world we live in for better and for worse.’  James Harding BBC

Robinson tried to make out firstly that the demographics don’t suggest Muslims will be taking over any time soon, but of course it’s not just the numbers but how much power and influence you cede to them….as in Europe today…a few bombs and suddenly everyone is eager to placate and pander to Muslims….just look at the BBC…how many programmes are dedicated to Muslim issues and how many new Muslim presenters and commentators are suddenly appearing on air?  And of course the demographics in Europe are rapidly changing….and the intent of Muslim activists is very definitely to make Europe and the US ‘Muslim’.

YUSUF QARADAWI: So Constantinople has been conquered and now the second part of the prophecy remains, which is the conquest of Rome. This means that Islam will return to Europe once again.

Perhaps the next conquest will be the conquest of dawah and ideas. There’s no need for conquest to be with the sword. We might conquer these countries without armies. We want armies of dawah preachers and teachers.

Second of course Robinson’s narrative is that there is obviously no problem with Islam when clearly many, many people think, know, there is….just look at a previous post where Historian Tom Holland suggests we had better start thinking about what is happening in Europe…and the problem is compounded by those who don’t or just refuse, to understand…like Nick Robinson who is more intent on signalling his liberal credentials than reporting the truth…

The achievement of Wood’s gripping, sobering and revelatory book is to open our eyes to what the implications of that for all of us may be.

The Spectator explains the problem…and the BBC is a big part of that problem….

All of which nicely demonstrates part of the pickle this country is in. Even the papers that will report on one of the biggest underlying stories of our time, and one which demonstrates an unprecedented change in the make-up of our country, must on all accounts be turned into a good news story. And since expressing any worries about the fact is undoubtedly terribly bigoted and nasty, we’ll all just have to nod our heads, keep our fingers crossed, mouth the same platitudes and all put our collective future in the hopes of Sheikh Mogra.

Sheikh Ibrahim Mogra, the assistant secretary-general of the Muslim Council of Britain. He doesn’t seem to see the large increase in the Muslim population of the UK as posing any particular challenges and is quoted saying: ‘I just wouldn’t want our fellow citizens to be alarmed by an increase in number… This generation is very much British. They feel very much this is their home.’

Of course they do…except they feel Muslim first…how very ‘Trumpian’.

 Why is the left so blinkered to Islamic extremism?

The article is based upon a report which calls out the left for embracing fundamentalists……

Siding With The Oppressor….The Pro-Islamist Left

Emma Barnett…if I was getting paid for this I’d be rolling in it as long as she’s on air.  What a star.  Today’s speciality?  Women MPs, in particular, are under attack….ala Jo Cox…and new recruits are being frightened off.  Well, might suggest alarmist and false claims by the likes of Barnett won’t help.  She told us that one woman was considering taking up the cudgel as an MP but had decided not to due to the perceived violence against women MPs.  On comes the said woman and we find out that’s complete horlicks….not the reason at all that she didn’t want to do the job.  And was Jo Cox targeted because she was a woman? No, not at all. So why is Barnett saying she was and that women MPs in particular are be so targeted? And why link it slyly to Brexit when so many Labour MPs were targeted by Corbyn fans during his leadership election and on many other occasions…men and women?

Just the usual false, sensationalist stories peddled by the BBC in order to create headlines and ‘issues’ and to push their own political agenda.

We had this article recently [apologies to whomever posted it in the comments, I’ve forgotten who you were]..

Most media chiefs believe fake news is good for business

According to the survey of 145 chief executives, editors and digital leaders across 24 countries, 70% believe their position will be “strengthened” by consumers’ desire for trusted and accurate news.

Most respondents see the rise of fake news as “a chance for quality journalism to stand out”

That is one of the reasons the BBC pushes the notion that there is a massive wave of fake news out there on the internet and on the pages of its rivals’ newspapers.  The BBC is trying to create the impression that it is the gold standard and thus become the ‘trusted’ goto provider of news…which means it will have a monopoly of what news people see and hear and thus what they think and how they react.  All very Orwellian.  It is also the chance to discredit other news providers and the internet blogs which the BBC hopes will result in government controls on them….already in operation with Leveson of course which may well result in the destruction of Fleet Street.

The irony is of course that the BBC itself is the biggest generator of fake news and alternate facts….which is why this site has been going relentlessly for over a decade…Bias is just another word for false or fake….when you see it post it here……..another open thread…