Category Archives: BBC bias

Ok, I am sure you may well have seen the events unfold over the past hour. Labour embraces the hardline marxist Jeremy Corbyn. Thoughts on the BBC coverage?

Here you go, a new OPEN thread for your completion! Going into a weekend that may see Corbyn elected Labour leader, and has seen Khan win the gig to be Labour’s London Mayoral candidate, I expect the BBC will be fervently behind the comrades.

I have frequently heard guests on BBC programmes, and indeed BBC presenters, say that the UK is responsible for what happened in LIbya, that Britain initiated the war and is therefore responsible for the outcome and the resultant flow of migrants launching themselves from the coast of Libya.

However, just as the war in Syria has no link to the UK the war in Libya was not the responsibility of Britain.  The war began, as in Syria, after Libyans began demonstrations against the regime and were subsequently attacked by the regime.  The UN declared no’fly zones and authorised air-strikes to protect civilians in missions controlled by NATO.

This was a multi-nation operation conducted under UN jurisdiction to help protect civilians and to stop a massacre.

The BBC seems to think we should have stood back and let it happen….where’s that famous ‘moral obligation’ now then?  Guess it only gets run up the flagpole when it suits the BBC’s agenda……perhaps the BBC should remember its own previous analysis of events in Libya:

2011 February – Arrest of human rights campaigner sparks violent protests in eastern city of Benghazi that rapidly spread to other cities, leading to escalating clashes between security forces and rebels. Gaddafi insists that he will not quit, and remains in control of the capital, Tripoli.

2011 March – UN Security Council authorises a no-fly zone over Libya and air strikes to protect civilians, over which NATO assumes command.

The BBC’s Labour supporting old dinosaur, James Naughtie, is a man desperately in need of a common-man dictionary with the word ‘impartial’ explained for him rather than the BBC official issue that obviously has a different interpretation of that word to the everyday one as understood by the ‘common man’.

The Telegraph tells us that Naughtie is destined to be the voice of the BBC, the vessel through which our understanding of the EU referendum is filtered…

Mr Naughtie, 64, is leaving the Today programme in January after 21 years. He will instead becoming Radio 4’s Special Correspondent, and “will have a responsibility for charting the course of the constitutional changes at the heart of the UK political debate – devolution and independence, parliamentary reform and the changes in the UK’s relations with Europe”.

He will act as a roving reporter in the UK and around the world, covering the Scottish, US and French elections and the EU referendum, in addition to presenting radio documentaries.

The importance of that job makes it remarkable that a man such as  Naughtie, who can demonstrate an incredibly high degree of pig-ignorant arrogance, should get the job when you realise he is entirely unconcerned about the facts and has a sneeringly dismissive attitude to anyone who dares to raise the very serious problem of BBC bias…a bias ironically very ably demonstrated by Naughtie as he attempts to deny it and move the debate away from anything that might actually shed some light on matters…a sheer arrogance which the Spectator reports in full….

Jenkin: There is the other problem. Jim, you know the history of the BBC’s coverage of the European Union question. There was the report commissioned in 2005 under chairmanship of Lord Wilson of Dinton, the former cabinet secretary, that found that and I quote “we have found there is widespread perception that the BBC suffers from certain forms of cultural and unintentional bias”.

Naughtie: A widespread perception?

Jenkin: The BBC governance accepted that and we know that the Today programme basically got the presentation of the Euro wrong. We know that, that’s now been accepted.

Naughtie: Can we get back to the issue?

Jenkin: This is an important point Jim because every morning we have someone on the Today programme from business and they’re always asked the question “do you think we should stay in the EU?” but you tend to choose people from a certain sector of business who are going to say what they think the establishment wants to hear.

Naughtie: Sorry, we want to get back to the point but can I just tell you that is simply not true.

Jenkin: It’s an important issue and I hope you will address it in a future programme.

Naughtie: Finally, do you think that the fact the government was beaten last night on this indicates that particularly on European questions but on a whole host of things, the Prime Minister is skating on very thin ice?

Jenkin: Well, I think this question actually indicates part of the unintentional cultural bias of the BBC.

Naughtie: Oh for goodness sake.

Jenkin: No listen, let me just explain that.

Naughtie: This really is tedious.

Jenkin: This was a cross party dispassionate discussion about how to create a fair referendum. If there is to be a new politics, it’s this kind of politics where a select committee on cross-party basis makes recommendations and the opposition in a rather non-partisan way I have to say supports that case. That’s what happen last night and your question wants to see it through the lens of party politics, the party game at Westminster and who’s in and who’s out and whether the Prime Minister is weaker or stronger. That’s not what this was about, it was about a fairer referendum…

Naughtie: …a game you have never participated in…

Jenkin: …we’ve got a step closer to a fairer referendum, which is the kind of thing the British people want.

The BBC’s Chris Mason on 5Live today displayed a similarly arrogant and  dismissive tone when he told us that ‘inevitably‘ Nigel Farage raised doubts about the EU opening the doors to migrants.  ‘Inevitably’ suggests Mason thinks Farage’s views are also rather ‘tedious’ and without merit.

The BBC treated us to a ‘Migration Special’ today…not sure why it was ‘special’ as it seemed to be the same old unpleasant, emotive trickery rank with the odour of sanctimonious and completely unearned moral superiority that BBC journalists wrap themselves in.

The BBC mashed together as many of its old reports on the migrants that it could, the more emotive, the more sympathy inducing, the more guilt inducing the better.  This was pure propaganda designed to ‘change your mind’ should you have doubts about the wisdom of opening the borders in the way they have been to what can only be described as an invasion, one that seems to consist mostly of highly aggressive young men which can’t bode well for the future.

The BBC has three prongs to its attack…one, make you feel sympathy for the plight of the ‘refugees’, and we are constantly assured that they are refugees despite many coming from safe countries, second, to make you feel guilty that perhaps you are not being compassionate or humane enough, the BBC telling us we just don’t understand how these migrants/refugees must feel, third, failing all that they try to shame us by suggesting that anyone who doesn’t support the migration must be a Nazi…of course they don’t say this outright but they head off to Hungary or the Czech Republic, quote someone from there, make a sweeping conclusion from that one quote that the whole country is therefore packed full of racists and that you don’t really want to be seen to be like them…do you?  The BBC’s Rob Cameron claimed that East Europeans are a bit too white and a bit too culturally unenlightened…they haven’t learnt of the benefits of a multicultural society as we have in the UK…such as Rotherham, or the Trojan Horse scandal or bombs going off in London or a British soldier being almost beheaded in an English city.

As I say, nowt but propaganda.

And the BBC isn’t giving up….it’s not just the news being fabricated to fit the BBC agenda but they have started to use licence payers money to pump out dramas that are pure propaganda for the migrant cause.

Tonight we had a drama that must have been churned out as fast as possible in the hope that putting the plight of the migrants in a form that wasn’t ‘cold, hard news’, in a form that could be artistically embellished [to a greater extent than they have already achieved with the news] would increase the emotional manipulation and be more effective than ‘straight news’ that people might view less emotionally and more critically….and of course it allows the BBC to build ‘loveable’ characters and invent life stories and dramatic and perilous troubles that supposedly hook  the viewer and  link them to the characters and their situation, all intended to hopefully produce a feeling of personal connection and sympathy which will then translate into real life and how you feel about real refugees.

When the BBC churns out highly political messages dressed up as entertainment, as drama, then you have to think the BBC has stepped way over the line and has completely lost the plot as it moves from a supposedly impartial observer and reporter helping people understand the issues to an activist, an alarmist campaigner peddling its own views and attempting to label anyone who disagrees as inhumane nazis.

BBC news is shaped not to inform but to reform.  You are too uneducated or too prejudiced to be allowed to make your own decisions…the BBC will make them for you and if you don’t agree then it will publicly denounce you as a racist, a Nazi or as someone lacking compassion and humanity hoping to make it ‘socially unacceptable’ to express concerns about immigration.

The only light at the end of the tunnel is that despite all this mawkish and emotive propaganda from the BBC I have yet to meet anyone who thinks opening the borders is a good idea…or that helping British jihadis on their way to martyrdom is a bad thing….many would happily send the bill for the hellfire missile that ended their murderous lives to the families of the recently deceased seeing as how ready the jihadis and Co are to sue the British government.

A Biased BBC reader saw this and then posted me this…

“How benevolent of you to manage to draw Israel into the migrant crisis in Europe in your report. It appears that at every opportunity you have available you like to get the message across to viewers, listeners and readers that somewhere along the line the Jews have a responsibility. You could have gone to any of the other cities and towns to file your report but somehow following your instincts the Yarmouk “refugee” camp exactly suited you anti-Israel agenda and bias.

It is clear that to the average viewer/reader your filed report is accurate and to be relied upon but in essence it was distorted and far from honest. As BBC Mid East Editor since the Balen Report of 2004 your focus on Israel is beyond the realms of good honest journalism.

It is time you acknowledged you have a bias against Jews and Israel and desisted from taking every opportunity to bash us.”

Hear Hear….

For several days, the BBC ran the sob story that “Aylan Kurdi” ended up being drowned off the Turkish coast because his father, Abdullah, had to flee Islamic State in an act of desperation and nobility. On the basis of this story, the EU has opened up its borders to potentially millions of muslims. It is now clear that there are some serious holes in this story not LEAST the fact that his father was living in Turkey for 3 years before the drowning. Islamic State didn’t exist back then, so how could be be fleeing them? Isn’t this worth the BBC at least considering? Or was this all just a concerted effort to destroy even the fiction of EU borders to North Africa? The source is …The Guardian.

Here you go, a new OPEN THREAD to detail the bias!

I listened to the BBC run yet ANOTHER sympathetic piece concerning the plight of all those poor “refugees” at the Jungle camp near Calais (7.30, Today programme) This time it’s about those noble caring leftists who send Aid to the illegal immigrants. Funny how the “world class” BBC talent misses THIS story…

“150kg of clothes sent to the Calais migrants in aid. they’ve just set fire to the lot”

Lovely people. Culturally enriching and full of gratitude.

Woke up this morning to the Today programme demanding to know why the UK had ..gasp…killed two Islamic Jihadists. This is the same Today programme that has been shrieking that we must accept those who flee Islamic State. I wonder do they ever sit down and examine the extreme cognitive dissonance that permeates their daily ‘coverage”?