It is now 5 [actually 6] days on and still no BBC coverage on what should be a major story alleging, as it does, a longstanding Saddam-Osama link. As for the press, the lockstep we see up ’til now is impressive. Where is the BBC on this? As Jack Shafer writes (for a non-Murdoch outlet by the way!): Everybody knows how the press loves to herd itself into a snarling … Continue reading
Earlier on this evening I was watching Channel Five’s early evening news. They were doing an item on the changes that have been made to the UK’s directory enquiry service. Time after time they said things like “…things got worse after deregulation” and “Has deregulation been a disaster?” etc. Only one problem. It wasn’t deregulated. Precisely the opposite in fact. What happened was that BT (the UK’s largest phone operator) … Continue reading
. A few days ago Andy Whittles and I were e-debating a scarifying BBConline report on an Iraqi health warning by British medical charity Medact. We decided we hadn’t got enough to go on, though I later discovered that one of Medact’s leading funders was the European Commission (ahem). A sparkling Mark Steyn’s not so shy in denouncing them, the protesters-to-be, and by association with the uncritical article noted above, … Continue reading
reported here. The BBC seems ever willing to indulge the loony left, be it Red Ken or “antiimperialista” “militants” raising funds for the Iraqi “resistance”. Via InstaPundit Click through to read and contribute comments on this post.
. It’s difficult to predict just how bad the BBC coverage of Bush’s visit to the UK will be. The trouble is that they have a lot of room for manoeuvre given the range of groups that might be evident in the anti-Bush, anti-war protests. I’ve already indicated one problem- there are those who don’t like Bush (for example anti-death penalty people) and there are those who don’t like the … Continue reading
to cover this. UPDATE: It’s 19 November and still not a sniff from the Beeb on this. It’s as clear an example in recent memory of committing bias by omission. Conflicted? What’s to be conficted about if you just ignore it? Click through to read and contribute comments on this post.
More from renowned BBBC correspondent Winston Churchill. Here’s the ‘latest’ courtesy of Andrew Sullivan: ‘Churchill’s doctor, Lord Moran, favored continuing the BBC monopoly. When he questioned Churchill about it, the great man exploded. “For eleven years they kept me off the air. They prevented me from expressing views which have proved to be right. Their behavior has been tyrannical. They are honeycombed with Socialists – probably with Communists.” ‘ … Continue reading
with which we have been dosed for so long” –how the BBC was described a while back. “These well-meaning gentlemen of the British Broadcasting Corporation have absolutely no qualifications and no claim to represent British public opinion. They have no right to say that they voice the opinions of English or British people whatever. If anyone can do that it is His Majesty’s government; and there may be two opinions … Continue reading
. By my definition (1 paragraph = 1 Spoonful) there are 14 spoonfuls of anti-quagmiritis medicine in this article by Austin Bay courtesy of the Instapundit. I think those who think that BBC coverage is biased against the US efforts in Iraq should respond most vigorously to the treatment. Warning: some may experience an allergic reaction- if so, discontinue treatment. I recommend the full dosage personally, as the disease is … Continue reading
which is already being used to support the party line of the pro-tyrant left that Iraq is ‘a quagmire’ and and now entering a ‘spiral of violence’–in reference to the latest French pronouncement. (Mr Villepin’s moralising hypocrisy is hard to stomach when some of those missiles killing and maiming Iraqi civilians and coalition soldiers were made in France during the sanctions period.) Though the CIA has consistently got it wrong, … Continue reading
