Category Archives: BBC bias

Harriet Harman spoke and the BBC listened. 

Harman, Deputy Labour Party Leader, Shadow Deputy Prime Minister, Shadow Secretary of State for Culture, Media and Sport gave her speech last night on capping Media monopoly and the BBC have already started to implement her ideas…capping their news output…by not reporting anything she said.

 Nothing.  Zip.  Nada.  Zilch.  Sweet Fanny Adams.

A speech from someone in her position on a subject of unique interest to the BBC….and yet not a dicky bird today.

The speech is all over the internet and the newpapers…..but one of the world’s most powerful news gatherers and providers has decided not to report the speech…how so?

Amusingly Harman says:

There’s an absolute aversion to that [political interference  in the press] from all sides of the House of Commons.  No parliamentarian has called for political interference in the press.

And:

….this isn’t just about Rupert Murdoch.

 Pull the other one Harry!

Actually the BBC didn’t miss the story…on the 8th of May they broadcast an interview with Harman on this very subject on the Media Show. (3 mins in)…but not reported in the ‘news’ as far as I can see.

…and yes…it is ALL about Murdoch….the ‘culture of invincibiltiy….dictating the political agenda’.

The interviewer was reasonably rigorous and fair and put the question to her:

‘Do you include the BBC as part of your calculations?‘

 She ignored that.

He asked again:

‘Do you think the BBC is too big a force…it had 59% share of the news in 2003 and that rose to 74% in 2011?’

Harman replied that ….no, the BBC is not included…there is all the difference in the world between a privately owned broadcaster and a public broadcaster which has its own mechanisms for accountability [ha ha] and no I don’t include it as a monopoly…it’s not a private monopoly.

I put it on one side….the standards the BBC offers are important..it offers a gold standard for other broadcasters…the role of the BBC is absolutely essential…there is no need for protection from the BBC, far from it, we need to strengthen the BBC.

So the BBC has 74% share of the news…and that will only get bigger as Harman’s regulation would be implemented and other news providers reined in…..nice plan…especially as the BBC supports Labour and left wing political narratives.

One interesting point was raised….as newspapers are struggling and some may ‘go under’….that makes the survivors bigger by default….Harman’s regulation would mean that they would then have to cut their newspaper sales to reduce their share of the market…a never ending death spiral resulting in one state controlled media provider running the show.

No political interference?    Doesn’t she know that Communism doesn’t work?

Patten, BBC, Trust…oh and Europe.

All words which are increasingly hard to put together in one sentence that you could say out loud without laughing.

Thinking of complaining to the BBC Trust about the BBC’s coverage of Europe?…shouldn’t bother judging by Patten’s latest bit of thinking out loud:

 ‘Conservative Eurosceptics could be sending the party down the path to “political suicide” if they show they are unwilling to accept British membership of the EU in any form.’

Impartiality in his DNA.

He also seems to believe that the BBC in its present form is sacrosanct and cannot be reduced in any shape or form:

“I have got no doubt at all that a smaller licence fee would result in cuts in services. Every time in the last couple of years we have tried to reduce services there has been a storm.

“I think we should be realistic the next time we negotiate the licence fee about what the consequences would be if the licence fee was substantially reduced.”

Well…what exactly would those consequences be?  Think we could live with them somehow.

This is already going strongly on the Open Thread but I think it deserves top billing for a while:

 Harriet Harman is due to give a speech  in which she will outline a plan to limit media ownership….can’t see any mention of the BBC funnily enough….maybe that’s the Guardian’s editing.

 A media ownership cap as low as 15% across newspapers, broadcasting companies and online sites must be considered to stop companies feeling they are “above the rule of law”, according to Harriet Harman.

“Media monopoly matters in a democracy. The concentration of unaccountable media power distorts the political system. The media shapes how we see ourselves and how we see the world. In a democracy, the free flow of information, of different points of view, is crucial for open debate.

“Too much power in too few hands hinders proper debate. Plurality ensures that no media owner can exert such a damaging influence on public opinion and on policy makers. It ensures that no media company can have so much influence that it feels itself immune, above the rule of law. It ensures no private interest can set itself above the public interest.

I see absolutely no reason why such a cap shouldn’t apply just as readily to the BBC as any commercial company…the BBC is all the more ‘influential’ because people expect it to be impartial…and often give it the benefit of the doubt and so genuine bias by the BBC slips by unnoticed as such whereas a commercial company is expected to have a particular political or social outlook and its reports are viewed with that in mind.

The BBC smothers national debate, distorts and corrupts politics and turns a democracy into a one party state by forcing politicians to dance to its tune….hence all politicians look and sound the same.

Too big, too powerful and too unaccountable.

Time for change.

Excellent post on Elder of Ziyon.

Remember Howard Gutman? He is the US ambassador to Belgium who made an outrageous and ignorant speech in 2011 saying that Muslim antisemitism is nothing like the traditional European type, because it is really a result of Israeli policies.

A DS [Bureau of Diplomatic Security] agent was called off a case against US Ambassador to Belgium Howard Gutman over claims that he solicited prostitutes, including minors.

“The agent began his investigation and had determined that the ambassador routinely ditched his protective security detail in order to solicit sexual favors from both prostitutes and minor children,” says the memo.

“The ambassador’s protective detail and the embassy’s surveillance detection team . . . were well aware of the behavior.”

Undersecretary of State for Management Patrick Kennedy ordered the investigation ceased, and the ambassador remains in place, according to the memo.

Gutman was a big Democratic donor before taking the post, having raised $500,000 for President Obama’s 2008 campaign and helping finance his inauguration.

Just taking care of business, right? Odd how the BBC misses these kind of stories…

Hi all. Can see the old thread is as full as Tim Yeo’s bank account so here is a new one for you!

Mandela still alive, BBC breathlessly informs us. It is remarkable how MUCH attention the BBC lavishes on the former South African President. I will be sorry when he dies as this will cause grief to his family and Nation … and leftists everywhere. However Mandela’s long association with communism, with terrorism, and with dislike of the USA needs covered too.

In case you missed this excellent analysis of the BBC’s 25 year trouble with the terrorism word. Do read.

A Biased BBC reader sent me this and I am simply sharing. It concerns how the BBC covered the protests against the recent Bilderberg conference.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-22832994

use of clearly biased label ‘Shock jock’ to describe Alex Jones, and subsequent editing and highlighting of certain aspects of his interview on iPlayer (see attached screenshot) “Andrew Neil described him as ‘the worst person he’d ever interviewed'” Andrew Neil’s concerted effort throughout coverage of Bilderberg on the Politics show on BBC to scoff at, discredit and devalue the opinions of opposition to Bilderberg.  At the end of the interview he does a crazy loopy hand signal to viewers, insinuating that his guest is crazy.  This is clear, unacceptable bias.

See this interview with Bilderberg researcher Tony Gosling:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ObQdARkFbNs

See this BBC reporter (quite difficult to hear her questions but they are clearly biased, she was briefed to antagonise Jones clearly)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mzfaCfXeea4

I was at the Bilderberg Fringe Festival (a space for peaceful protest and platform for opposition of the group’s meetings to publicly state why they oppose it) where I saw firsthand how the BBC was biased in it’s coverage.  It’s really opened my eyes, before I trusted the BBC to an extent. One of the speakers at the Bilderberg fringe festival was child actor Ben Fellows who has been involved in a criminal investigation into Kenneth Clarke’s alleged link to the paedophile ring as uncovered in the BBC via Saville-gate.  I can only imagine that the BBC are concerned that further evidence is going to come to light about not only their ingrained corruption but it’s links to Parliament.  It’s a total can of worms.”

The BBC and others have been quick to associate the EDL with the fires at two Islamic centres.

The fire at the Islamic school has been established as caused by arson and four teenagers have been arrested.

The cause of the first fire at the Al Rahma Islamic Centre is as yet undeclared….but blame has been instantly attached to the EDL because of graffiti sprayed onto the wall of the building.

The EDL has pointed out that jumping to such conclusions may be premature as in 2011 similar events occurred….but the culprits were in fact Muslims themselves:

Cops say EDL ‘not linked’ to attacks 

FOUR cars have been destroyed by arsonists in attacks outside Luton homes over the past week.

The spate of firebombings began in the early hours of Sunday morning (March 27) in Bushmead, when a car was set alight outside a house in Chalkdown.

Another car was then set on fire in Brompton Gardens in Marsh Farm in the early hours of Monday morning, followed by incidents in Carlton Close, Biscot, and Newark Road, Bury Park, in the early hours of Tuesday morning.

Houses have also been spray painted with graffiti and windows broken in a string of 21 criminal damage incidents which stretch back seven weeks, a spokesman for Bedfordshire Police said.

Several properties have had the letters ‘EDL’ spray painted on them, but the English Defence League says it is in no way connected with the incidents.

Det Insp Steve Ashdown, said: “The two people arrested have been investigated and there is no evidence linking them to the English Defence League.”

The police today should release as soon as possible the cause of the fire at the Al Rahma Islamic Centre and release some relevant details about the identity of the four teenagers arrested for the arson attack on the school.

As the BBC ratchets up tensions with claims of ever increasing numbers of anti-Muslim attacks the real cause of the first fire should be determined and suggestions that the four teenagers are in fact pupils from the school be dismissed if they are untrue.

It is of course unlikely that the arsonists were from the school…the BBC after all wouldn’t be so irresponsible as to keep claiming that the fire was an anti-Muslim attack if it was in truth set by pupils from the school or indeed any other Muslim….would they?

The EDL says Islam is ‘Extreme’.

Is it?

People who cut other people’s heads off in the name of Islam are obviously extreme, suicide bombers are extreme, people who hang 16 year old girls from cranes are extreme.

 But is Islam, when compared to our democratic, progressive, secular nation ‘extreme’?

That’s not a question many people will ask..or ‘allow’ to be asked.

To do so means disposing  ‘of the first taboo, and accepting that the problem is Islam. Islam is the problem.’

Having listened to Tommy Robinson’s interview on the Today programme in which he suggests Islam is ‘extreme’ we saw the hysterical reaction…a reaction that lacks any rationality or reasonableness based as it was on pure prejudice and bile rather than any coherent thoughts. 

Apparently the BBC has ‘poisoned the airwaves’ with this interview.

Polly Billington, Labour candidate for Thurrock, wrote on Twitter: “That interview did not constitute scrutiny. Unchallenged lies and hatred poison our national debate…“This did not clear the air. It poisoned it”

The truth is though that Robinson said no more than Cameron or Blair or Boris Johnson or many other ‘respectable’ and authoritative voices.

Ironically it is the BBC, the Islamophobia industry and those on their political bandwagons themselves who have made it impossible to challenge Tommy Robinson in any intelligent and critical manner on their own terms….all that remains is to shout ‘racist’ or ‘islamophobe’ as often and as loudly as possible.

The whole basis of the EDL’s existence is to challenge the Islamic ideology, the teachings and values of the ‘religion’.

To ‘challenge’ the EDL’s claims you have to examine Islam.

The BBC et al have steadfastly refused to do that in any meaningful way, steadfastly refused to examine Islam and the beliefs and values that stem from that ideology….and they will not do so  because they know that to do so would raise some very awkward questions about the ‘religion’ and the consequences of allowing it to spread in a democratic, secular or Christian nation.

If the BBC can’t bring itself to critique Islam then it cannot hope to challenge the EDL because it will have nothing to argue with….it cannot say ‘Islam says this or that whilst you in the EDL say this.’..because it doesn’t know or admit what Islam says or means.

Such questions about Islam also then beg answers…answers that no politician dare even contemplate…hence we hear ‘Islam is a religion of peace‘.  The politicians kick the questions down the road and hope nothing serious happens on their watch that they have to deal with.　

Robinson said ‘It ain’t going to be pretty’……what is he predicting? Nigeria, Sudan, Somalia, Pakistan?

Maybe we should talk…..about Islam.

Perhaps Boris Johnson could kick start the conversation:　

The question is what action we take now to solve the problem in our own country, and what language we should use to describe such action.

This is a cultural calamity that will take decades to correct.

We — non-Muslims — cannot solve the problem; we cannot brainwash them out of their fundamentalist beliefs. The Islamicists last week horribly and irrefutably asserted the supreme importance of that faith, overriding all worldly considerations, and it will take a huge effort of courage and skill to win round the many thousands of British Muslims who are in a similar state of alienation, and to make them see that their faith must be compatible with British values and with loyalty to Britain. That means disposing of the first taboo, and accepting that the problem is Islam. Islam is the problem.

To any non-Muslim reader of the Koran, Islamophobia — fear of Islam — seems a natural reaction, and, indeed, exactly what that text is intended to provoke. Judged purely on its scripture — to say nothing of what is preached in the mosques — it is the most viciously sectarian of all religions in its heartlessness towards unbelievers. As the killer of Theo Van Gogh told his victim’s mother this week in a Dutch courtroom, he could not care for her, could not sympathise, because she was not a Muslim.

The trouble with this disgusting arrogance and condescension is that it is widely supported in Koranic texts, and we look in vain for the enlightened Islamic teachers and preachers who will begin the process of reform. What is going on in these mosques and madrasas? When is someone going to get 18th century on Islam’s mediaeval ass?

It is time that we started to insist that the Muslim Council of Great Britain, and all the preachers in all the mosques, extremist or moderate, began to acculturate themselves more closely to what we think of as British values.