The BBC is turning into a propaganda machine for various causes. I have chronicled the evidence of this carefully on these pages and have become almost bored with the process, so relentless and certain is the progress. Extraordinary in this journey, however, is what has now happened to one of the main propaganda arms of the corporation, the World Service Trust, originally set up in 1999 as a charity in connection with the BBC World Service “to reduce poverty and promote human rights”. Of course, that is and always has been the greenie code for wanting world government, to smash capitalism, drive us all into fuel poverty, and to introduce endless climate change measures; and the real reason WST was set up was that as a separate arms-length charity it could do things that the BBC itself could not.
Now – with sickening inevitability, any pretence at moderation in this battle has been dropped. World Service Trust has become – I kid you not – BBC Media Action. The trigger for the change appears to have been massive new funding from the government. Back in November, it was announced that it would get an extra £20m a year from DFID – adding to the £24.8m it already received from the government, the EU and greenie foundations. At the heart of its new identity is, of course, eco-nuttery. Already, WST has worked extensively whipping up alarm in Africa; now the focus has shifted to Asia, and big dollops of shiny new BBC Media Action cash are going towards:
Climate Asia is a two year project that will provide the first comprehensive study into people’s understandings of climate change across Asia. It will focus on the role media can play to support people affected by their changing environment.
Working in seven countries – Bangladesh, China, India, Indonesia, Nepal, Pakistan and Vietnam – Climate Asia will include a survey of 25,000 people. This will be the largest ever regional investigation into public knowledge and attitudes towards climate change.
The project’s aim is to understand the best ways to use media to provide people with the information they need to build resilience and take effective action on climate change.
This is not just spreading lies; it is Rolls-Royce propaganda being disseminated with deadly venom. The Goebbels-in-chief of this massive exercise in hatred and misinformation is Caroline Nursey, who learned her craft with greenie-liars-in-chief Oxfam. Now she has £45m plus a year to play with.
Another of our legion of alert readers draws our attention to this…
“The link below is a news ‘item’ from Newsbeat, the BBC’s service for youngerteenagers. You will note the mealy-mouthed disclaimer below the clip that thisis part of a wider ‘investigation’ of pornography, but the woman featured isnot challenged on any of her (somewhat outlandish) claims regarding thepornographic business. I wonder how many impressionable young girls will watchthis and consider a career in the sex industry lucrative and enjoyable? Theshamelessness of the BBC seems to know no bounds… http://www.bbc.co.uk/newsbeat/13040300“
Fascinating post here at Counting Cats in Zanzibar concerning BBC efforts to re-write history and in particular the Royal Navy’s valiant efforts against German u-boats in the North Atlantic during ww2.
“This is a genuine question – in that I do not know the answer (and would like to know). I only know “The Cruel Sea” from the film (about the Royal Navy against the German “U Boats” in the North Atlantic during World War II) so I do not know what the book (or whatever) was like.
I ask because the BBC radio production (which I heard an episode of on Sunday) of “The Cruel Sea” was full of socialist propaganda – and some of it was very odd.
For example, I can understand (just about) someone who has just seen an oil tanker ship blown up by a German submarine, rage against people who waste fuel by “speeding to their golf club”. It would not be my first thought whilst watching men die – but people are different, perhaps someone else would blame people who speed to golf clubs (rather than the Germans).”
However, a lot of the rest of the production was harder to accept. For example the Captain of the new Royal Navy ship lines up the crew and tells them that they have been unemployed for years because of the greed and selfishness of other people. Whatever the faults of 1930s Britain – it was not exactly famous for “greed” and “selfishness”, it was a rather austere place. Then he tells the crew that now everyone (on the ship) will work together for the common good and….. (a speech that might have come out of the mouth of a Nazi SS commander rather than a Royal Navy Captain – who would have been more likely to say “carry on men” and not wasted any more time).
Do please read the full post. It’s quite stunning to read how the BBC distorts and inserts its socialist agenda into events like those discussed. My thanks to the B-BBC reader for bringing this to my attention.
B-BBC contributor Alan observes
“I almost choked whenI read the below….had George Monbiot, the Guardian’s greenie guardian,suddenly come out as a climate sceptic, scourge of BBC environmentalcorrespondents and dissolute politicans?
‘This column is a plea for distrust. Distrust is the resource on whichdemocracy relies. Distrust inspires the scrutiny and accountability withoutwhich representation becomes a lie. Distrust is all that stands between us andbamboozlement by people who, like the BBC’s Black and Harrabin, channel theinstincts of the billionaire owners of newspapers and broadcasters.’
Actually no, there was no mention of Black, Harrabin or the BBC….I made thatup…..but I think if he’s so keen on this distrust thingy, accountability,democracy and bringing the media to book then it should apply equally toall….not just the select political and commercial rivals of those who controlmost of the mainstream media….ie the BBC and friends.
I was most amused by the James Naughtie interview on Today this morning with Peter Horrocks and John McCarthy concerning the BBC World Service and it’s 80th birthday! Yes, we were informed of the global reach of the BBC and the trust it enjoys across the world. Seems it is increasingly popular in Iran and let’s not forget the vital role in played during “the Arab Spring”. It’s the impartiality of the World Service that so appeals, we told by Naughtie. Alright – who agrees?
Time for a new Open thread….
BBC Media Action and BBC Arabic have produced two versions of the BBC’s Question Time, called Sa’at Hissab, in partnership with Tunisian television. The audience came to the studio in the hope that the BBC programme would give them an opportunity – for the first time ever – to question their politicians and officials.
Wonder will it be less pro Islamist than UK Question Time? I doubt it…
Imagine David Attenborough’s version of Proud and Prejudiced. He’d most likely take the anthropologist’s view of the inhabitants of Luton. He’d examine Islamist Sayful, the dominant male, and peer at the female of the species, squawking as they flock together in their black head-to-toe plumage; the males, beards glistening luxuriantly, displaying. He might scrutinise the indigenous tribe, their dull appearance enlivened by the odd tattoo, and perhaps allude to its vigorous attempts to defend its miserable territory, driven by a fear that the invading species threatens to drive it to extinction. Would David have used the word ‘misguided’ to describe Tommy Robinson as the C4 narrator did early on in the programme? Would he have warned the audience to distrust his emphatic protestations that the EDL wasn’t based on racism?
There was no need for any explanation from the narrator regarding the Islamist inhabitants of Luton. They did exactly what it says on their tin. They behaved like the ludicrous cartoon characters they obviously were.
However much the programme makers wanted to portray the EDL as the ideological equivalent of the radical extremists, Tommy Robinson and his fellow EDLers wouldn’t play ball. They persisted in conducting themselves within reasonable bounds of respectability, forcing the filmmakers to resort to simply telling the audience that they were liars. A stupid childish drunken episode was mustered up, which somewhat dented Tommy’s credibility, but a couple of shots of tattooed, chanting shaven-headed men giggling as they behaved badly hardly amounted to the ideological equivalent of the religious rabble hell-bent on imposing their will upon a hitherto complacent majority.
I realise that this was not a BBC programme, unlike the Stacey Dooley’s strangely blindfolded effort aimed at BBC3’s youth orientated audience. But it is alarming that the press have almost unanimously swallowed the moral equivalence that the programme makers were driving at, apparently taking it on board wholeheartedly. The BBC’s continual portrayal of Islam as if it embodies righteousness on a par with applehood and mother pie plays no mean part in this tectonic swindle.
Take the Huffington Post. (please) Mark Hawker thinks the Jihad is a mere war of words. But he reveals a little more about the tint of his lenses when he continues: “Their anger at UK foreign policy is understandable, in my view.” So that’s his opinion filed in room 101.
But the Telegraph?
Andrew Marszal’s review was a diatribe warning us not to fall for the lies of Tommy Robinson. His final paragraph tells us what, in his opinion, was the most chilling thing the film had shown:
”But perhaps the documentary’s most chilling moment came when Robinson, out on a drinking binge, began doing “humorous” impersonations of Norwegian mass-murderer Anders Breivik, who killed 77 people in a bomb blast and gun rampage in Norway last year. Breivik claimed to be an EDL sympathiser – a disturbing reminder of how high the stakes in this quarrel really are.”
No mate. I’d say Andrew Marszal in the Telegraph writing such tripe is a much better reminder.
One of the great things about Biased BBC is the tremendous expertise we have on the topic of AGW – with Robin Horbury in particular dissecting much of the nonsense spouted by the BBC on this issue. I was amused by this latest headline from our dear friend, Richard Black.
The progressive shrinking of Arctic sea ice is bringing colder, snowier winters to the UK and other areas of Europe, North America and China, a study shows.As global temperatures have risen, the area of Arctic Ocean covered by ice in summer and autumn has been falling. Writing in Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences (PNAS), a US/China-based team show this affects the jet stream and brings cold, snowy weather.
And for those who can’t be bothered wading through the dross, there’s a nice picture of a Greek city swathed in snow. Oh, and there’s a picture of a Walrus looking sad. Do you think Richard wants us to really really believe in AGW perchance? Right, let’s take this drivel from Black apart…
Check out how the BBC reflexively sides with WikiHacks and their publishing of stolen emails from Stratfor. Stratfor is not a government agency, and has not been accused of any crime, yet the BBC opens the piece by describing WikiHacks as a “whistleblowing website”. Of course, anyone who is aware of boss Julian Assange’s open declaration that his intent is to harm US geopolitical goals will know what his real agenda is here.
In any case, in stark contrast to their treatment of the leaked CRU emails (there is still not a single scrap of evidence that they were stolen), the BBC sees nothing wrong – declines to editorialize against, really – with the fact that WikiHacks got the Stratfor emails from the hacker group, Anonymous, who admits to illegally obtaining the emails, along with credit card numbers and other data.
Notice also the accompanying photo of a gently beaming, serene St. Julian. Selecting photos is an editorial decision, one which can influence the readers’ interpretation of a story.
St. Julian is on record, we’re told, as stating that some of the far-left activist groups on which Stratfor was gathering information are “fighting for a just cause”. So it’s not so much whistleblowing as it is an attempt to undermine a political enemy. But never mind, he’s still a hero to the BBC for doing it. To further cast aspersions on Stratfor – the victim of a crime here – we even get a quote from Barron’s that the organization is a kind of “shadow CIA”. Just so you all know who the real bad guys are here, and to re-inforce the false description of WikiHacks as whistleblowers.
Then comes the outrageous bit:
Despite the new disclosures, Wikileaks is still facing difficulties on several fronts.
Despite? Despite releasing stolen information from an organization not of the Left, BBC? In other words, the Beeboid who wrote this – and an approving editor – believe that releasing stolen emails from Stratfor should go a long way towards rehabilitating WikiHacks in the public eye. This is the BBC taking sides against Stratfor and in favor of WikiHacks.
One of the big problems with the BBC is the bias by omission that singularly characterises much of the daily output. Consider this analysis put together by B-BBC contributor Alan;
“Whilst the BBC isconcerned about the deleterious effects on the democratic process that is beingTrumped by wads of Yankee greenbacks corrupting the smooth progress andundoubtedly fair Scottish government’s imposition of windfarms upon theScottish people it is less concerned about economies being destroyed byenvironmental policies that raise massive green taxes and make energy a costthat is ruinous to industry….as the Germans are finding out but which seemsto have escaped the BBC’s notice…and it surely is a big story, one of greatimportance for every country….consider Britain has targets to reduce CO2 by80% by 2050…..more than any other country in the world…..
‘Government pledges to cut carbon emissions by 80% by 2050. New climate change secretary Ed Miliband sets new goal.’ Thursday 16 October2008
Miliband told MPs that the tough economic conditions were not an excuse to”row back” on the commitment to tackle global warming.’ ”To meet it will require determined action from Gordon Brown and every one ofhis successors for the next four decades. Hard choices will be made that willtouch every Briton, but it can and must be done.”
Four decades of green austerity then….on top of years of austerity to battlerecession. Of course if you think perhaps the Tories are against this think again:
‘Greg Clark, the shadow climate change secretary, also welcomed theannouncements. He said: “The choice between aggressive and ambitiousaction on carbon reduction and a successful, powerful economy is, in fact, nota choice at all – they are one and the same.” He welcomed the acceptance of the 80% target, saying: “We have always saidthat we should be guided by the science on that matter.” ‘
So all round delusions.And this is what a Biased BBC commenter has drawn attention to:
‘….a Cabinet Minister indicated – in effect, and with scarcely-concealedregret – that the party line set by David Cameron in response to variousopinion polls, focus groups and other such artifices for identifying andfollowing a consensus rather than setting a lead, and not the objectivescientific and economic truth, was likely to remain the basis of UK climatepolicy.’
So UK policy has nothing to do with either science or economics…..Cameron hasjust decided that is the consensus of opinion amongst fellow politicians andthe bien pensant and so has made his decision regardless of the harm to thenational economy.
Here is what the reality is away from the cosy political clubs(except oneswhere Labour MP’s start a drunken punch up) and agreeable likemindedness of thepoliticians. Shouldn’t hold your breath for Black to report this…and it is surely a bigstory with implications not just for Germany….not even on his Twitter feedthat has infinite space for such links and which he uses in a highly selectiveway to control what you do and do not get to read and therefore think.
Monday morning and a brand new Open Thread to relieve the pressure on the last one! Enjoy!!!
I don’t know about you but I’m with Conservative MP Priti Patel who has claimed the BBC is showing bias in favour of hard left activists as concerns the current “Workfare” issue;
She claimed BBC 2 Newsnight had ‘spent all week putting solitary Government Ministers up against panels made up of the hard Left’. Sources say David Cameron is ‘determined’ to rescue the scheme and is ‘livid’ at the BBC’s role. On Tuesday’s Newsnight, Tory MP Harriett Baldwin was put up against three critics who had experience of workfare schemes. Jeremy Paxman asked Baldwin four times: ‘Do you understand why people find the schemes offensive?’ And on Thursday, presenter Kirsty Wark said: ‘It’s just essentially cheap labour.’ On Friday morning’s Today programme, Evan Davis said: ‘The amount you are going to learn stacking shelves is not going to be very great – it’s been over-sold. What do you learn when you go and do work experience in supermarkets?’
Throw in some of Stephen Nolan’s comments and you have a full on jihad against Government policy which coincidentally echoes the campaign from the hard Marxist left…
The BBC has willingly taken on this agitprop role and this is but the latest manifestation. I have no sympathy for Cameron, he has consistently failed to confront the monster so he cannot be surprised when it bites.
The BBC’s quest to find climate change hype knows no bounds. Here, in alleged news about the collapse of Mayan civilisation, the BBC reporter has constructed his story so that its focus is a warning that the cause was drought. He adds:
The reconstructed droughts are similar in extent to some predictions for the near future of the same region as a result of climate change.
“There are differences too, but the warning is clear – what seems like a minor reduction in water availability may lead to important, long-lasting problems,” Professor Martin Medina-Elizalde said.
Thus, the BBC foists its ruthless and relentless climate change beliefs on the reinterpretation of history and in the construction of warped futurology. This was a tactic pursued with equal fanaticism by Stalinist Russia. Many years ago, I read archaeology at one of our oldest universities, and I saw at first hand the back somersaults which were performed by the country’s Marxist antiquarians in order to meld its past into dialectical materialistic orthodoxy. The BBC’s copy tasters are performing exactly the same task, looking out like hawks in search of their prey any smidgeon of academic garbage that will support their crusade.
You don’t have to search far to find where their heroes in this quest are. Here the BBC warmist priest Mike Amos lauds without qualification the work of the EU’s European Research Council, which is in charge of frittering away billions of pounds worth of Politburo-style research effort. Mr Amos picks out from the Council for special attention Dr Nicole Boivin(speciality – ‘the relationship between human activity and environmental change’), and says:
She is investigating the initial steps to globalisation, with particular reference to the Indian Ocean where some of the first major cross-cultural interactions took place thousands of years ago. Her project employs some innovative approaches, pulling together expertise from a range of disciplines – not just standard archaeology, but fields such as historical linguistics, molecular biology and palaeo-environmental studies.
In other words, the fragrant Dr Boivin, one of the tens of thousands of publicly-funded climate change activists and leeches, is being paid to reinforce the EU – and BBC – globalisation agenda and to re-write history in that pursuit. And the BBC worships at her altar.