Someone could try telling Magdi Abdelhadi of the BBC. Abdelhadi has an opinion piece in which he attributes the cartoon situation to three factors: ‘1)the rise of violent political Islam 2)America’s war on terror 3)modern transnational media.’ So it’s one part bad muslims, one part bad America, and one part neutral (I suppose). Well, curious. I thought that ‘America’s’ war on terror was contingent on a certain act of Islamic … Continue reading
Do we believe this? I don’t. This page entitled “Should ‘anti-Islam’ cartoons have been published?” is an edited roundup of opinions sent in by readers of the BBC website. This is the style that the BBC used to have for all its Have Your Say pages until the organisation rather creditably changed to a lightly moderated forum style last year, in which posts can either be read in the order … Continue reading
Stephen Pollard takes issue with a Michael Buchanan piece – which has since been stealth-edited. As for the idea that, All the Danes can do now is hope the repeated apologies for the offence caused, by both the government and the newspaper, will end this unseemly row, has a sentence more indicative of the BBC world view ever been written? Take a running jump, Mr Buchanan. So much for the … Continue reading
A reader writes: Just wanted to point out how quickly the story of the storming of the EU offices was taken down from the Beeb’s Middle East section on the News website. It was first merely squeezed into the other stories list and then in the blink of an eye removed from the page altogether. In contrast, a story such as ‘One killed in Israeli air strike’ was first entered … Continue reading
but they are chary of showing even a picture of the cartoons in a newspaper. At Harry’s Place a commenter notes that BBC television news showed the cover and inside pages of France Soir newspaper (where various cartoons of Mohammed are reproduced) but did so in a ludicrous, semi-blacked out style thereby preventing viewers seeing what the fuss is about. Treating satirical cartoons as if they were pornography is disgraceful. … Continue reading
Mike Jericho has put together a valuable post on the subject (he was a little upset some of his efforts had been overlooked, but I am rectifying that somewhat now. It points out the value of pointing out matters in the comments section). For every article on the BBC website that reveals some hard information, there will be several soft-wad padding articles, usually with a strong politically correct dimension, linked … Continue reading
I am sure everyone at Biased BBC would like to say that they’ll make an effort to buy Danish in the light of the Islamic boycott of Denmark (and Norway, apparently). I plan to scout around for some Danish bacon… mmmm. The BBC’s responsibility to report this news should extend to critically examining whether cartoons should merit an apology, just for depicting a religious icon in an unflattering light. But, … Continue reading
Please could someone tell Jim Muir. He doesn’t seem to have a clue. He’s unapologetic about it though. Look, we’ve had the tears for Arafat episode. How many times does the BBC need to hear that they are notto take sides? Where to start, where Muir gives us the film-set intro or where he describes the origins of Hamas’ success as being among ‘men of undoubted and bearded piety’? Right … Continue reading
. A commenter on B-BBC, Thomas, aka Grumpy Troll, has got a result from BBC Newswatch regarding the now more widely known BBC omission of coverage concerning Iran’s condemned-to-death rape victim (please check out the horrific details if you haven’t yet heard about it properly- we’re not talking about something in doubt here) I notice that Mr Jolly (the BBC Newswatch man who responded) tries to excuse it by saying … Continue reading
We report, you decide. Thanks to Clive Davis (via Instapundit). Click through to read and contribute comments on this post.
