A fresh Open Thread for Wednesday
A fresh Open Thread for Wednesday
‘Perception of bias can be as damaging as the reality’
Met. Police Commissioner Bernard Hogan Howe
This is from a document from the BBC (via Guido) which is making the case for them not revealing their spending but it also reveals their level of management reduction which you might bear in mind as you read the interview by Victoria Derbyshire with the Met. Police Commissioner Bernard Hogan Howe…..
‘Between 2009 and 2011, we reduced the senior management pay bill by 26.9% and reduced headcount by 24.4%.’
One of the biggest and most contentious issues in Government policy is the cutting of the Police budget by 20%. This has been a favourite subject of the Media and in particular the BBC over the last couple of years.
It played out in front of us with ‘Plebgate’ as the police looked to be playing a political game to embarrass the Government and the Police Federation milked it for all it was worth.
We are frequently warned that cuts will lead to frontline officer numbers being reduced and that crime will rise as a result.
You might think that a long interview with the Metropolitan Police Commissioner, in which he speaks about the effect of the cuts on the effectiveness of his force, would be news.
You would only be partially right in thinking that….for some parts of the interview were deemed more newsworthy than others for the BBC editors….Plebgate for instance was highlighted, police moral over pay and pensions was highlighted with a suggestion that public sector pay should be allowed to go up, the BBC’s own interest in regard to the Savile investigation was highlighted…but one revealing part of the interview went missing.
You might have thought that the senior policeman in charge of the Met. saying that the budget cuts and the actions taken to meet them meant he would have a better and leaner police force, that the changes were reasonable and sensible, would be news. You might think that when he says that the changes should be made even if we were not in a recession somebody at the BBC would think ‘That’s an important statement that contrasts starkly with what opponents of the cuts say’.
You’d be wrong if you thought that. The BBC ignored the inconvenient and highly politically embarrassing comments for some, and proceeded to highlight everything it could that it thought would make the cuts look like they will damage the police force….for instance how often do you hear that an extra 2000 police constables will be on the ‘frontline’ in those news bulletins? Not once.
This is the BBC once more playing politics and hiding the facts to suit its own agenda.
Judge for yourself…..
This is the BBC introduction to the radio interview on 5Live:
‘The Metropolitan Police Commissioner Bernard Hogan Howe says he believes the police officers involved in plebgate row with Andrew Mitchell DID accurately report events. He also explains why morale in the force is low, and why public sector pay rises should be considered in future.’
The whole interview, about 50 mins long, is worth a listen as Hogan Howe is very open about everything and the interview is wideranging and covers a lot of contentious or well known issues.
Here is the relevant part of the interview (From 38 mins in …whole thing starts at 29 mins), slightly abridged…..
VD: Let’s talk about the cuts to the Metropolitan Police budget of £500 million by 2015, senior officers cut by a quarter and replaced by 2000 police constables….what kind of force will you be left with?
HH: Well it’ll be different but it will be better. There’s no doubt that any organisation trying to find £500m is a challenge…that said our budget is £3.5 billion/year, so it’s a significant amount of money but we have a significant budget.
I hope what you will see is we will be leaner, we’ll have less managers, I don’t think its always true that more managers make a better organisation. (Just ask Paxman).
VD: But you’re losing a quarter of senior officers, how can the force end up being better?
HH: More managers don’t make a better organisation.
VD: I’m not suggesting it does but with a quarter of officers gone….
HH: The point I was going to make…if you look at the ratio of managers to managed around the rest of the police forces around the country probably the least managed have a 1 to 10 ratio, the average is 1 to 7, and ours is 1 to 5.….so all we’re talking about is getting our ratio up to 1 to 6 because the Met is big and difficult to manage…we’re not Norfolk. Going from 1 to 5 to 1 to 6 is a 20% difference and I think it’s reasonable. We will try to concentrate the supervision where we most need it.
Our broad point is we can have less managers and when we do look at some of the roles in the Met. they can appear over ranked.
VD: What do you mean?
HH: Well if you look at management and command teams in Lambeth, which is a very challenging area, the command team, such as Chief Superintendents, deserve their money…but then there are also CSI’s who run policy units.
VD: You don’t need CSI’s to run policy units.
HH: No, and of course over the last 20 years the force has grown and some of the money has been spent wisely and some actually….it’s like for all of us…if we an get away with it we’ll do it. But at the moment we can’t get away with it so the challenge is to spend the money wisely.
They might be perceived as radical changes but we think they are sensible changes and even if we weren’t in a recession some of it we would do because it’s what we should be doing, spending money wisely.
I think this is a reasonable change.
Paul Mason has set up a Tumblr account.
You may like to have a look….either to try and dig some ‘dirt’ or just out of interest…..it does in fact look, from a spectator’s point of view, quite a diverting and absorbing site…just remember the Devil has the best tunes…don’t be fooled and sucked in.
One thing Mason does admit is that Orwell “…would have ripped the **** mercilessly out of Occupy. “
See. I said it might be interesting.
A little light relief from Gaza etc …..
Reading the passages rich in masochistic sex, you easily imagine Mason joyfully kicking free of BBC fact-checkers.
but….
The BBC are a bit shy about blowing Mason’s trumpet:
‘The full shortlist is: The Yips by Nicola Barker, The Adventuress by Nicholas Coleridge, Infrared by Nancy Huston, Rare Earth by Paul Mason, Noughties by Ben Masters, The Quiddity of Will Self by Sam Mills, The Divine Comedy by Craig Raine and Back to Blood by Tom Wolfe.‘
Bet he’s hoping they don’t start looking at what he writes for the main job…wouldn’t be enough room on the mantlepiece for the prizes.
Apparently the result is on the 4th of December.. the day before the budget. Hope he doesn’t win…will be in a bad mood if he does, might colour his opinion of Osborne’s budget…
Speaking of which, Mason hasn’t given up on the ‘Austerity = Nazis’ theme:
What the BBC’s Jon Donnison does link to is interesting…an ‘Economist’ (a Leftie publication) run down of the ‘numbers’ from the Israel/Palestine conflict.
MT @WyreDavies Number-crunching. #Gaza and #Israel in stats, from The Economist. http://www.economist.com/blogs/pomegranate/2012/11/israel-and-palestinians?fsrc=scn/tw_ec/gaza_abacus … …
The emphasis is that the Israelis suffer very few casualties whilst the Palestinians are being mown down….
‘Total number of Israelis killed by rocket, mortar or anti-tank fire from Gaza since 2006: 47 ‘
‘Number of Palestinians in Gaza killed by Israeli fire from April 1st 2006 to July 21st 2012: 2,879‘
Looks bad doesn’t it? So, what’s the word?… disproportionate.
Well it would because the Economist somehow misses out all those other Israelis killed in the last decade…like the Fogels, not killed with a rocket but slaughtered with a knife….understandable the Economist missed that one as the BBC didn’t bother reporting it….but there are many other deaths such as schoolboys being beaten to death with rocks, people run over by bulldozers, never mind the ones shot or blown up in school buses, restauraunts and nightclubs.
What might be a truer picture of Israeli casualties at the hands of the Palestinians?
‘According to the Israeli Ministry of Foreign Affairs and the Anti-Defamation League, a total of 1,194 Israelis and foreigners were killed and 7,000 wounded between September 2000 and August 2010 by Palestinian terror attacks.’
And is this really just a cynical, anti-Israeli piece by the Economist?
The last line suggests it is……a comment on the ‘real’ reason for the war according to the Left…..
‘Number of days before Israeli general election: 64‘
Good though that both the BBC’s Wyre Davies and Jon Donnison think this Economist piece is relevant to, and truly informative of, the events going on….when it is clearly misleading and distorts the public’s perceptions of the ‘justification’ for Israeli actions.
The piece is evidently trying to suggest that Israel is suffering few casualties from rocket fire(what number is too many then? Just how many bodies are needed before action is justifiable?) and that it therefore has no need to take military action against Hamas.
On The face of it, the Economist is putting out Hamas propaganda and the BBC are retweeting it. Good job boys!
BBC journos are all too ready to show victims of Israeli ‘brutality’….or even vicitms of Syrian bombings dressed up as victims of Israeli ‘aggression’.
Will they show this and the true nature of Hamas/Palestinian animals…..(Graphic photo)
a half dozen men on motorcycles just dragged the body of a man down a main street in #Gaza. They were yelling he was a spy for Israel—
Anderson Cooper (@andersoncooper) November 20, 2012
The BBC has been caught once again peddling Hamas propaganda. If they cannot be certain of the origin of a photo then should they be so ready to use it…especially of such an emotive subject?
The BBC knows, just as Hamas does, that the ‘tears of a child say more than words ever can’. A picture of an injured or dead child is ‘currency’ in the world of Hamas propaganda and will be ruthlessly exploited.
The first time was as shown here:
and here’s Hamas at it themselves:
and now (thanks to George R in the comments for pointing this out) here’s the BBC’s Jon Donnison:
via ‘Harry’s Place
Donnison admits mistake later:
One of the themes for the defence of the BBC and its management is that the BBC is ‘accountable’, that no other organisation would investigate itself so thoroughly and that top management took responsibility for the recent crisis.
Entwistle only went because he was ‘pushed’, and ‘pushed’ by his own side in the shape of John Humphrys. In that interview he tried to evade all responsibility just as he did with the Savile affair……just as Mark Thompson did also, claiming he had no knowledge of the Newsnight programme about Savile.
Mark Thompson is struggling to maintain that story (Via Guido):
“During my time as director general of the BBC, I never heard any allegations or received any complaints about Jimmy Savile.”
The other main claim is that the BBC is a victim of a plot against it, a political and commercially driven witch hunt.
This was the BBC’s latest defence that it deployed with an eager anticipation that just a mention of Murdoch and sleazy politicians would immediately engender feelings of loathing for the ‘enemy’ and sympathy for the BBC.
The BBC’s friends on the Left rallied to its support:
Here is the New Stateman dedicating one issue to defending the BBC’s honour (More in the print addition):
and here claiming that it was the Hutton inquiry which made the BBC too cautious and reliant on an overwhelming management structure to enforce that.
After the Newsnight debacle, it is excessive caution – not recklessness – that threatens the BBC.
However the most vicious critics were from within the BBC itself from the likes of Humphrys and Paxman and not from politicians or the Murdoch’s.
One interesting line that is very telling is this from Mehdi Hasan:
‘The BBC, despite its many faults, must be protected from its right-wing enemies. In the battle to preserve high-quality, non-partisan public-service broadcasting, Auntie is our last line of defence.’
‘Auntie is OUR last line of defence.’
‘OUR’ being ‘US’ on the Left.
As for high quality, well in a few cases maybe but for innovative, interesting and eyecatching TV the BBC is probably the last place to look, there is very little on it that you would bother to set the video for….and ‘non-partisan’…well no one believes that.
It is however a repository for all progressive and left wing economic, social and cultural values that it relentlessly champions not only ‘openly’ in documentaries but inserted into the narrative of most of its programming quietly subverting our views with subliminal propaganda posing as drama or comedy.
The BBC is indeed the Left’s best and last line of defence….who’d a thunk?
No wonder they prop it up so vigorously.
The Today programme bring on a ‘ringer’ (Last 5 minutes) in the form of Abd Al Bari Atwan, editor of Al Quds Al Arabi newspaper…from Gaza and who is pretty much an extremist where Israel is concerned….but the BBC don’t mention that when they usher him in to give us his take on the Israeli response to being bombarded by Palestinian rockets…….
He claims there is no military solution….in other words the Israelis must stop their ‘useless’ military measures….very convenient conclusion.
He said that the conclusion is that the only solution is a political settlement. He claims the Israelis are the only barrier to this having ‘derailed’ the peace talks and have besieged a starving population in Gaza.
He finishes by saying that the Palestinians are right to attack Israel as they were kicked out of their land by the Israelis….which, if you read that correctly, means that there can be no peace until the Israelis are ‘gone’, one way or another.
Atwan is famous for saying this…..
Speaking about Iran’s nuclear capability in an interview on Lebanese television in June 2007, Atwan stated:
“If the Iranian missiles strike Israel, by Allah, I will go to Trafalgar Square and dance with delight.”
He further stated in the case of war, Iran would retaliate against its Arab neighbors, American bases in the Gulf and “Allah willing, it will attack Israel, as well.”
What do others have to say about his trustworthiness…..
‘ Yemenite journalist and columnist for the London Arabic-language daily Al-Sharq Al-Awsat, Munir Al-Mawari, stated: “The Abd Al Bari Atwan [appearing] on CNN is completely different from the Abdel Bari Atwan on the Al Jazeera network or in his Al Quds Al Arabi daily. On CNN, Atwan speaks solemnly and with total composure, presenting rational and balanced views. This is in complete contrast with his fuming appearances on Al Jazeera and in Al Quds Al Arabi, in which he whips up the emotions of multitudes of viewers and readers.”
‘Lior Ben-Dor, a spokesman at the Israeli Embassy in London, said: “The problem is that when addressing the British public, he tends to hide his true opinions and ideology – his support for terror and the murder of civilians. This article reveals Atwan’s real colors, a supporter of fundamentalism and terror, and hence he should be treated accordingly.”
Maybe it is legitimate to have a multitude of voices and opinions in any discussion (save climate change naturally)…but it is only fit and proper that the BBC informs us exactly the nature of those people giving us their ‘honest’ opinion.
The BBC’s coverage is getting ever more disgraceful when you consider the ultimate consequences of the effect such coverage begets for Jews around the world.
This was a sequence of reports from the BBC on 5Live:
1. Multiple News bulletins….. ‘Israel continues its bombardment of Gaza which has been hit with 80 Israeli strikes….only one rocket was fired from Gaza.’
2. Single report……Jon Donnison reports that Israel has made 80 strikes into Gaza but that the Israeli army reports that 76 rockets were fired into Israel from Gaza on Sunday…
(Confirmed here…’Seventy-six rockets exploded during the course of the day in southern Israel, with Ashdod coming under its heaviest barrage yet by seven Grad rockets. Six were intercepted and one smashed into a residential building, wounding two residents lightly. The Iron Dome intercepted 38 rockets heading for built-up areas on Sunday.‘)…..and over 60 have been fired since midnight up to early afternoon.
3. Multiple News bulletins…..‘Israel continues its bombardment of Gaza which has been hit with 80 Israeli strikes….Hamas say they have fired a number of rockets.’
So the BBC know that 76 rockets were fired from Gaza on Sunday but, other than Donnison’s quick reference in his report the BBC don’t make further mention of it in their news bulletins….no mention in the bulletins of over 60 rockets launched today either…just ‘a number’.
Guess someone at the BBC isn’t too keen for you to hear that Israel is continuing to be ‘bombarded’ or ‘pounded’ by rockets.
The bias is becoming so noticeable that many more have started to comment:
Finally, the BBC’s pro-Palestinian propaganda machine has swung into action
On Saturday on the Today programme Justin Webb said . (1 hr 10 secs in )…
‘The ancient hatreds are winning the day.’
What does that mean? He is putting Israel on a par with Hamas and declaring that their actions in Gaza are a result of their ‘ancient hatreds’…presumably of Palestinians….rather than the result of tens of thousands of rockets fired into Israel since 2002.
Later the BBC’s Richard Galpin helpfully informs us that….‘Something like 1,400 Palestinians were killed in operation cast lead in 2009 and the vast majority of them…or I should say a significant number of them were civilians and 13 Israelis were killed.’
1,400 is Hamas’s own figure…the Israeli figure is 1,116.…300 of them civilians.
The BBC are always keen to repeat those figures of Palestinian casualties in 2009.…but refuse to mention that over 1000 Israelis had been killed by Palestinians and over 8000 injured in the previous 10 years.
Galpin is somewhat embarrassed apparently to be reporting from Israel……
Richard Galpin @Richardgalpin 54s
Please note I am only reporting #Israel side cos that is where I am. We also hv full team in #gaza reporting what’s happening there.
What can be the consequences of the BBC’s misleading, one sided broadcasts on public perceptions of the conflict and who is ‘right’? The BBC Governors spelt out the consequences of getting it wrong and how powerful the Media is….
The report quotes from another study…..
“Bad News from Israel” (Pluto Press 2004): ‘Greg Philo and Mike Berry of the Glasgow Media Group at Glasgow University co-authored this book reporting on a study of TV news coverage of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. This found, among other things……that audience identification with the protagonists in violent events in the conflict was influenced by the perceived legitimacy of the violence used, and that this was influenced by TV news presentation. ‘
The report goes on to say that the BBC’s narrative is an ‘important prize’….ie if you can shape the BBC’s narrative it is your story that gets the favourable coverage…
‘Since the conflict is not only local but engages also widespread international support and sponsorship, the BBC, which is highly regarded and influential internationally as well as in the UK, and the nature of its coverage, are important prizes.‘
The report goes on to say that the Jewish community in the UK felt that negative reporting will have serious consequences for them…..
‘It is important that the BBC as an institution, and all those within it with responsibilities for producing relevant programmes, should be fully conscious both that an account of events and issues – a human construct – is being created, and that they have a crucial interpretative role in that process.
Accordingly, in common with other international conflicts, there may be a domestic effect and the BBC must be aware of anxiety that its coverage may impact on the personal safety of members of communities within the UK. Some of the most troubling evidence put to the Panel was the fear expressed by members of the Jewish community that inaccurate, tendentious or unfair reporting of the conflict could be reflected in increased anti-Semitic attitudes or behaviour in the UK.
But the concern in the Jewish community, which is plainly and understandably deeply felt, is a salutary reminder that failing to observe the impartiality requirements could have serious practical consequences.‘