OK, this is a NEW Open Thread for your use! Enjoy.
OPEN THREAD
Bookmark the permalink.
Search Biased BBC
Recent Comments
- Thoughtful April 25, 2024 at 8:28 am on Midweek 24th April 2024More moves are afoot to steal the sovereign wealth of Russia by the corrupt elites of the West. Christine Lagarde...
- AsISeeIt April 25, 2024 at 8:26 am on Midweek 24th April 2024We awake this morning to news of: Broadcaster's bias alert (FT) Don't imagine for a moment that this warning is...
- tomo April 25, 2024 at 7:38 am on Midweek 24th April 2024https://twitter.com/banthebbc/status/1783374850003722423
- vlad April 25, 2024 at 7:11 am on Midweek 24th April 2024We all know of the danger posed by violent Islamism (except for the BBC of course, but I mean intelligent...
- JohnC April 25, 2024 at 6:38 am on Midweek 24th April 2024Searching for missing loved ones in Gaza’s mass graves https://www.bbc.com/news/world-middle-east-68891216 'For four days Kareema Elras has ...
- JohnC April 25, 2024 at 4:39 am on Midweek 24th April 2024Arizona indicts Trump allies over 2020 fake elector scheme https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-68893365 Arizona is the 4th state to do ...
- Broadcasting-on-Behalf-of-the-Caliphate April 25, 2024 at 3:17 am on Midweek 24th April 2024Well done to the new Slovakian Government which the BBC absolutely hates for abolishing the national broadcaster RTVS for political...
- JohnC April 25, 2024 at 2:30 am on Midweek 24th April 2024Seven teens with alleged 'extremist ideology' arrested in Sydney raids https://www.bbc.com/news/world-australia-68887448 WTF is going on in ...
- JohnC April 25, 2024 at 1:59 am on Midweek 24th April 2024The BBC would call that high-spirited and vibrant multiculturalism. We have to wait until their own middle-class neighbourhoods get infested...
- JohnC April 25, 2024 at 1:57 am on Midweek 24th April 2024And I will guarantee you that none of those will be accusing BAME of racism against whites. They've even changed...
Categories
agw anti-American anti-conservative anti-Israel anti Israel. pro Palestinian Antisemitism BBC - sickeningly biased at all times. BBC agenda BBC bias bbc bias and balance. bbc bias by omission BBC censorship BBC Question Time BBC selectivity bias Biased BBC climate change dhimmis general thread immigration Islam israel Mark Mardell obama obama bias Obamalove open thread pro-labour pro-palestinian pro EU pro Hamas pro Islam pro Labour bias pro Obama PRO OBAMA AT ALL COSTS. pro Obama BBC agenda question time question time live Richard Black save gordon. USA politics US economy US News US politics US presidential elections
I wonder if the political value judgement laden headline which INBBC chooses to run with on this court case involving jihad has anything to do with an INBBC link mentioned well down the INBBC article?:-
INBBC headline:
“London Stock Exchange terror bomb plot was ‘amateurish'”
Also revealed by INBBC:
“He appeared on a BBC documentary, called My Name is Mohammed, on which he talked about bringing Sharia law to the UK.”
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-16951623
What are the odds, huh?
First we had Comic Relief giving money to the mad bombers, then the ‘Don’t Panic I’m Islamic’ guy getting convicted, now this.
Let’s just take time out to imagine what the BBC would say if UKIP, Fox News Channel or the Daily Mail turned out to have had Anders Brevik on the pay roll.
“Let’s just take time out to imagine what the BBC would say if it turned out that UKIP, Fox News Channel or the Daily Mail had Anders Brevik on the pay roll.”
They would say it was a scandal. They would say they should be closed down. Ever since the early days of ITV the BBC has attempted to eliminate its competitors. The whole concept of a broadcasting tax that only goes to one broadcaster is anti-competitive.
The BBC are still trying to promote the notion that some journalists from a rival news organisation who got some of their stories by listening to private phone messages (now that is what I call double checking the reliability of the story!) is the greatest scandal since Hitler invaded Poland.
The fact that News International is a commercial rival of the BBC is of course entirely coincidental. The fact that News International (unlike the Mirror Group) every now and then supports a political Party other than the Labour Party is (as jug ears would say) again entirely coincidental.
I have yet to meet a single person who thinks that the reading private messages breach of privacy merits the attention the BBC is giving the issue. Then again I am not a celebrity hoping for a pay out.
In the days after the Norwegian massacre I remember the shocking revelations that he had read Melanie Phillips were quite prominent on the Beebs output.
I hope the BBC repeat this comedy classic!
Contrast to INBBC ‘reporting’ on jihad case:
London jihad plotters told to claim benefits to fund training
Amateurish? On a par with Gazan home-made rockets. Nothing to see then?
Update, despite INBBC:
“Terrorism gang jailed for plotting to blow up London Stock Exchange.A gang of Muslim extremists inspired to launch a deadly UK terror campaign by hate preacher Anjem Choudary were jailed for a total of nearly 95 years today. ”
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/terrorism-in-the-uk/9072455/Terrorism-gang-jailed-for-plotting-to-blow-up-London-Stock-Exchange.html
BBC mistakenly told everyone Harry Redknapp was guilty: http://www.telegraph.co.uk/culture/tvandradio/bbc/9068960/Harry-Redknapp-tax-evasion-trial-BBC-get-jury-verdict-wrong.html
Multiple Layers of Fict Chucking!
BBC mistakenly told everyone Harry Redknapp was guilty: http://www.telegraph.co.uk/culture/tvandradio/bbc/9068960/Harry-Redknapp-tax-evasion-trial-BBC-get-jury-verdict-wrong.html
Well it is odd inasmuch as it was a boo-boo, they admit it and are embarassed, vs. the usual of being wrong on purpose, covering it up when caught and then defying anyone to do anything.
“We apologise for any confusion.”
‘Normal service will be maintained as much as possible… we won’t be apologising’.
The bBC reporting from the Falkland’s and half a story.
Downing Street denies UK is ‘militarising’ Falklands
Downing Street has denied claims by Argentina that it is “militarising the South Atlantic”, in a dispute about the Falkland Islands. Argentine President Cristina Fernandez de Kirchner has said she intends to make a formal complaint to the UN over the increased military presence. Last month, the UK said it was sending a destroyer to the region.
She added: “We cannot interpret in any other way the deployment of an ultra-modern destroyer accompanying the heir to the throne, who we would prefer to see in civilian attire.”
So the bbC continues spreading its anti-British message by telling half the story , you know like not reporting how HMS Dauntless is replacing HMS Montrose which around May time.(6 month tour) Which in turn replaced HMS Edinburgh in Nov. I mean why should the bbC report the truth when half truths is so much better in which to castigate the British.
Which brings me to ask why the bBC didn’t quote the bleeding obvious (No Dez, Not’Allah Ackba’)
That how could HMS Dauntless escort the heir to the throne to the Falklands when his six week detachment will be over around 6 weeks before HMS dauntless arrives on station. In otherwords the closest he will get to HMS Dauntless in the next few months will be when he is back in the Uk.
The bBC, traitors to the core.
‘why should the bbC report the truth when half truths is so much better’
Becuase they can? And want to?
How the bBC reports on a story about taking the fight to..Black gangs in London.
More than 200 held as Met Police crack down on gangs
More than 200 people have been arrested during raids across London by the Metropolitan Police’s new dedicated unit tackling gang crime. The Trident Gang Crime Command, which consists of about 1,000 officers, will monitor gang activity and work with London boroughs.The unit, thought to be the largest in the country, will have 19 dedicated gang crime task forces.More than 300 raids have been taking place across the city since dawn.The Met said it had made 213 arrests so far and executed 171 warrants. The operation involved about 1,300 officers……………………
Claudia Webbe, joint chair of Trident Independent Advisory Group, described the unit as “a political gamble” taken by the mayor.
Liberal Democrat mayoral candidate Brian Paddick said: “There is a danger that this new Trident unit detracts from the serious problem of gun crime and gives gangs a status they don’t deserve.
Ken Livingstone, Labour’s candidate, said: “I will back the police’s work to tackle gangs by reversing Boris Johnson’s decision to cut 1,700 police officers from London.”
Jenny Jones, who is the Green Party candidate, said: “The new approach will fail if it is all stick and no carrot… the best solution to gangs, violence and knives, is a job.”
It isn’t hard to see whom the bBC see’s as the victims in this story, not the innocent people intimidated, threatened and murdered by these black gangs (Yes bBC ,black gangs) which is why they spend more time opining about these poor little black gangsters which is why they end with this line:
Have you been affected by the issues raised in this story? Send us your comments using the form below.
Yup, bring out a hooded thug unable to string a coherent sentence together, but the bBC will no doubt ask his opinion about how his human rights have been breached by this government.
The bBC, traitors to the core.
Pounce,
80% of this report is about Boris Johnson’s new policy to tackle London Gangs. 20% is about his polical opponents’ criticism of that policy.
From this, you deduce that;
“It isn’t hard to see whom the bBC see’s as the victims in this story, not the innocent people intimidated, threatened and murdered by these black gangs”
and; “which is why they spend more time opining about these poor little black gangsters…”
Which doesn’t even come close to making any rational sense. Even if you start with the bizzare opinion that to criticise Johnson’s policy is to be unsympathetic to the victims of gang crime – that criticism only makes up 20% of the BBC report.
Hello Dez,
You know something, your worse than the Sgt I work with. He’s as thick as two short planks and keeps on asking the same question, minutes after I’ve told him the answer to it. He does my swede in and your acting like him. Please there’s only so many hours in the day.
As for your defence of how the bBC supports anybody who os agaisnt Boris. Ask yourself this question have you ever seen the bBC defend Boris you know the man the people of London voted in to be Mayor. No then ask yourself how often they defended Red Ken.
Yeah right. By the way How’s your wife with my kids.
BTW DEez I do enjoy the fact how I have got under your skin, Makes my day how I can piss off a servent of allah.
Pounce,
“…your worse than the Sgt I work with. He’s as thick as two short planks and keeps on asking the same question, minutes after I’ve told him the answer to it.”
Not really Pounce; I couldn’t care less how many spuds you’ve peeled since reveille.
“Ask yourself this question have you ever seen the bBC defend Boris you know the man the people of London voted in to be Mayor. No then ask yourself how often they defended Red Ken.”
Well, in the above report you commented on, 80% is given over to Boris Johnson and those who support his policy and 3% is given to Ken Livingstone’s reponse.
So you appear to be pissing into a facing wind.
But if that’s what you like to do to give yourself a nice warm feeling all over, then don’t let me stop you.
I wouldn’t want to spoil your fun ;p
It is not about the precentage of column inches 80:20, as you know Dez, it is about to whom they give that covetted slot in all journalism – the last word. It is standatrd practice to give the mark lots of space, then demolish their case with a “but so and so said..” In this case, they gave it to Red Ken and the Greenie.
why does anyone give that cretin the dignity of a direct response to his hit and run crappy attempts at countering clear cases of lefty bias?
it only encourages the idiot
You’re right of course but it’s an easy slap, once in a while, to keep that right hook trim for times when we really need it.
5live this morning ran an interview with an Syrian spokesman for, pro Asad
organisations,(the majority of the syrian population) and just as yesterday
warned against a misguided western “cavalry charge” to placate a islamist
rebel narrative, which would only lead to civil war.
Again just as yesterday, completely goes over the heads,(not difficult) of i think Salford Jetsetter, V Drearybyshires show. rst of the day same old same old arab/media driven hysteria.
whats the chances of that eh!
5live this morning ran an interview with an Syrian spokesman for, pro Asad
organisations,(the majority of the Syrian population) and just as yesterday
warned against a misguided western “cavalry charge” to placate a islamist
rebel narrative, which would only lead to civil war.
Again just as yesterday, completely goes over the heads,(not difficult) of I think Salford Jetsetter, V Drearybyshires show.
Rest of the day same old same old … arab/media driven hysteria.
highly suspect, mobile phone ins, etc etc. treated as gospel truth.
Whats the chances of that happening eh! BBC.
Just for the record. Assad is a member of the minority Alawite group (arguaby Shiite – arguably a breakaway sect of Islam). He and Daddy kept in power by assuring that virtually all security positions went to loyal Alawites. The majority of Syrians are Sunni Muslim.
If they had fair elections in Syria (L.O.L) it’s hard to see a majority voting for Assad.
like egypt you mean 😀 anyway who said anything about elections? : D
i think the jist was, hardline islamists under a pseudo rebel cause
would cause civil war, as they are attempting to now ..
and possibly learn from the lessons of egypt, libya etc not repeat them.
I wonder if the BBC will be taking note, or will employees’ tweets continue to represent personal views only, even though the BBC logo is present in their Twitter profile.
Sky News clamps down on Twitter use
Reporters banned from reposting non-company tweets and told to check with the news desk before breaking news stories
Sky News has told its journalists not to repost information from any Twitter users who are not an employee of the broadcaster.
Asked and answered…sort of – they only refer to the ‘breaking news’ part of the equation…
http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/theeditors/2012/02/twitter_guidelines_for_bbc_jou.html
“Public sector high life: Recession? That’s for other people”
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/financialcrisis/9066927/Public-sector-high-life-Recession-Thats-for-other-people.html
‘The BBC newsreader Jane Hill, who is paid an estimated £80,000 to £100,000 a year, has let it be known in a magazine article that she thinks she is entitled to a clothes allowance.
What planet is she living on? Doesn’t she realise that, in the present economic climate, the biggest priority at the BBC is cutting costs?
Whatever force there may be in her argument that women newsreaders need to spend more on clothes than their male counterparts, this is not the time for fripperies.
I must have watched Hill read the news hundreds of times. She has informed me about wars and hurricanes and cabinet reshuffles. She has recited the football scores and handed over to the weather man. But I have never noticed what she is wearing or experienced a burning desire to see her in a different dress. She is a newsreader, for heaven’s sake, not the Duchess of Cambridge at a film premiere’
I’d provide Hill with a Burkha allowance, she’s got a face like a smacked arse.
Why doesn`t she move to radio ?
Radio Albania.
I was just wondering what the definition of “value judgement” was in the light of the BBC saying that they avoid them. Well it means:
“A value judgment is a judgment of the rightness or wrongness of something, or of the usefulness of something, based on a comparison or other relativity.”
“Most commonly the term value judgment refers to an individual’s opinion. Of course, the individual’s opinion is formed to a degree by their belief system, and the culture to which they belong”
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Value_judgment
It is the BBCs “opinion” that terrorists should be called “militants” Only in the world where the BBC creeps would someone who murders thousands of people be called a “millitant”, in the real world he is a “terrorist”. The BBC live in a different planet than the rest of the British people.
If the BBC can only see wrong in the Christian West and activly support “militants” with weasal words then they should have the word “British” removed from their title.
The Public Purposes of the BBC are as follows—
(a)sustaining citizenship and civil society;
(b)promoting education and learning;
(c)stimulating creativity and cultural excellence;
(d)representing the UK, its nations, regions and communities
http://www.bbc.co.uk/bbctrust/assets/files/pdf/about/how_we_govern/charter.txt
Nothing there about calling threats to our civil society a “valued judgement”
More on the descent of Daniel Radcliffe – Labour Superstar.
http://www.observer.com/2012/02/daniel-radcliffe-slept-with-harry-potter-groupies-while-drunk/
http://popwatch.ew.com/2012/02/03/daniel-radcliffe-drunk-harry-potter/
http://www.digitalspy.com/celebrity/news/a364664/daniel-radcliffe-harry-potters-richard-harris-inspired-my-drinking.html
And we are asked to take him seriously?
I forgot to link to the BBC story about this:
Oh, yeah, there isn’t one.
Hows about that then…..
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2083783/Jimmy-Saville-child-sex-claims-investigated-BBC-days-stars-death–program-axed.html
‘….senior figures in the corporation then told reporters to scrap the report, which would have clashed with a Boxing Day Jim’ll Fix It tribute programme hosted by Shane Richie’.
How the bBC reports the Falklands issue to British children:
Falklands: Argentina to complain to UN about Britain
The argument over the Falkland Islands is heating up, after Argentina’s president said she’s going to complain to the United Nations about Britain.The islands in the South Atlantic have been ruled by Britain since 1833, but Argentina wants them back.President Cristina Fernandez de Kirchner is upset that Britain’s sent a warship to the area – and that Prince William’s gone there too. But the British government said these things are “routine” – not unusual.
So according to the bbC all Argentina wants is for the UK to hand the Falklands back to them, thus implying that we the British stole them off Argentina in the first place. really? the British claim to the Island began in 1764, Argentina didn’t come into being until 1816 , but hey don’t let the fact prevent the bBC from spining a few lies .
As for the naval deployment nothing from the bBC in which to explain that the RN has a ship on deployment for 6 months at a time again the bbC spreading the lie that the British can’t be trusted
The bBC, traitors to the core
I agree.
According to Wikipedia, prior to 1982 Argentina had only ever occupied the Falklands for a very short time:
‘In November 1832, Argentina sent Commander Mestivier as an interim commander to found a penal settlement, but he was killed in a mutiny after 4 days.The following January, British forces returned and requested the Argentine garrison leave. Don Pinedo, captain of the ARA Sarandi and senior officer present, protested but ultimately complied.’
So to say that ‘Argentina wants them back’ is a bit misleading – it implies that Britain had originally stolen the islands from the Argentines, rather than taking back territory that they’d previously claimed (in 1774), following a brief occupation!
Jeff
It seems that Capello`s been crap all along!
Yet since 2008, the BBC haven`t been the only ones saying how great he was and that famous discipline from the Italian Renaissance Man.
But now he`s gone-he`s a flop, autocratic, belligerent and cost us £24Million…and for what?
The BBC are reduced to snooping throught players Twitter (yes, Joey Barton again!)…and they have ex Englands “John Scales”.to tell us all about it.
For a bunch of Nick Hornbys, the BBCs coverage has been pititful!
Indeed and did you know that:
“Former England striker Gary Lineker feels the FA must appoint a successor to Fabio Capello as soon as possible and says that Harry Redknapp is the “nations choice” to take the job. ”
http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/football/16957225
When did they carry out this poll of who would be the “nations choice” I must have missed it.
When did they carry out this poll of who would be the “nations choice”
It happned as they were busy speaking for the UK…. allll the time.
Actually, having endured the slow news day BS on SKY the last 30mins… I could really care less.
“The BBC are reduced to snooping throught players Twitter…” But that is how they get all their news – it is the norm.
Just reading the bBC version of how ken livingstone saying
How the Tories are full of gays is a good thing. I wonder how the bBC would react if a tory MP said the same thing about labour. Why they would call him a bigot have the story on the front page for a week and push for him to be removed. Yet when a left wing MP does the same he’s to be admired.
But here’s the catch, in around 6 weeks London votes for a new mayor.a labour MP opines the current party is full of gays and nobody asks just who that comment is aimed at?
Let see a certain peaceful bunch of people who hate Jews,gays and white people and who the left love to suck up to.
Instead of talking about homophobia the bBC make kens hateful comments into a goodthing.
There’s a BBC version? It must have been omitted from my edition of the 10 O’Clock News, because I can’t recall hearing about it.
Don’t anyone bother to come on here saying it wouldn’t have been mentioned had a prominent Tory said it, or indeed someone who was once a Tory candidate in an obscure council ward. Because I won’t believe you.
Of course the BBC covered Livingstone’s comments. Last item on BBC London News.
In the not too distant future, an intrepid explorer will stagger into the Islamic Republic of Tower Hamlets, lurch towards the last white man standing, & say, ‘Kenneth Livingstone, I presume? A grateful country wishes me to thank you for 40 years dedicated service to cultural Marxism, & the obliteration of the British nation state. I’m privileged to present you with the Bumsucker’s Twig, Beeboid First Class, as you know, the highest award going for conspicuous collaboration with the moon jockeys. There you go mate, looks really good on your Mao jacket. By the way, what happened to Simon Hughes? Oh, they chopped his head off did they? Any chance of a few beers & a little gay fun then? Only joking, Ken. I’ll be OK with Mecca Bingo. Eyes down, Qatada!’
1%? :-[
BBC presenter Zeinab Bedawi ‘will have to tear down £50k extension’
Zeinab Badawi is said to have converted the loft of her £1.85 million townhouse into an extra bedroom and en suite bathroom without first applying for planning permission.
No it’s under the 2 million pound mansion tax plan by the Lib Dems, from what I hear everyone at the BBC owns a house worth 1.9 million.
Pure poverty.
Come now, I’m sure she needed that extra bedroom to avoid her children having to share and being classed as in poverty.
‘BBC presenter Zeinab Bedawi ‘will have to tear down £50k extension’
Oh dear.
She presents Hardtalk on the WS from time to time and she has evidently been to the John Humphrys school of butting in every five seconds.
I know Hardtalk is intended to be a grilling but her constant heckling of Hilde Johnson in yesterday’s programme was intensely irritating and actually pretty offensive.
Sarah Montague and Stephen Sackur are both excellent anchors (they at least allow their interviewees to speak for more than ten seconds) but Ms. Badawi is rude, opinionated and a little too keen on the sound of her own voice.
The BBC like to show clips of TV interviewers from the past asking “Have you anything to say to the Nation Sir?” and we are meant to roll about laughing saying, ah, how we have progressed.
Well to anybody interested in politics WANTS the politicians to have the chance to quietly and calmly explain what they are doing, just so long as opposition politicians are also given time to express their opinions on the matter as well.
The focus on the journalist not only simply shifts the focus away from the politician (using the lame excuse that the journalist is only asking the questions the public wants to hear) it replaces the politician with the views of the person doing the interview, and the logical endpoint of this is a correspondent in the studio telling you what to think about the issue without even bothering to supply you with any of the content which enables you to make up your own mind.
It’s racism from the council, I tell you.
BBC presenter Zeinab Bedawi ‘will have to tear down £50k extension’
Prediction: it won’t happen.
Perhaps the BBC’s friends from Dale Farm can organise a protest for her, and bring in lots of professional lefty agitators to cause trouble.
Todays show leads today with lots more kids now being “taken into care”…alcoholic, druggie parents ,so we`re told.
Later we hear that 13 year-olds girls in schools are now getting contraceptive implants or injections without the knowledge of their parents(and their GPs-which , oddly isn`t mentioned!)
Evan Davis sneers at Cameron having an opinion on Fabio Capello…”befitting a grand issue of state” or suchlike.
Then the “contraceptive” debate-where the Tory MP against the “sexualisation of our children”, gets a couple of words in between first and last perorations from the pro-bloke at Brook Advisory…classic BBC sandwich(is no-one telling the Tories?)
Show ends with Camerons views on Capello replacing the kids in care story into second place.
There you are-did my stint on shift by the BBCs windmill of madness and crass liberalist agitprop!
Oh-and Fabios struggle with English now turns out to be a problem….how unlike EU economic policies and laws, I`m presuming regarding less important issues that the England football teams status in the world!
It was alright for Tony Blair to get involved in the Glenn Hoddle affair though; don’t remember the Beeb minding that one bit.
…and I don’t remember any sneering at Blair for wasting parliamentary time to comment on plotlines in Coronation Street, to remind us all that he really was just ‘a regular sort of guy’. Puke.
The boy done good….
Prime Minister’s Questions were knocked off the news agenda yesterday by off-the-field sporting events.
Mind you, the BBC as our national broadcaster could not ignore events in Parliament.
Funny thing is every comment I hear from the BBC tells me that Ed Miliband is doing better.
Iain Watson:
‘Overall a confident performance from Ed Miliband….’
Nick Robinson:
‘Ed Miliband had the PM on the backfoot….’
Gosh, Ed must be a brilliant leader. I wonder what opinion polls have to say?
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2087355/Further-blow-Ed-Miliband-70-followers-say-dont-believe-him.html
‘The YouGov poll gives him his worst rating since winning the Labour leadership and a sure sign that supporters are turning away from him’
‘Now even 70% of Labour supporters say they don’t believe in Miliband’
Are BBC commentators inhabitants of some alternative universe? Yes, I think they are.
‘Are BBC commentators inhabitants of some alternative universe?’
Yah think?
Had to like this comment on what was already a rather oddly penned ‘analysis’:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-16953094
‘Nick, is it in the BBC’s charter to headline every absurd utterance / allegation that the Labour party make about the Tories or is it just an ongoing coincidence?’
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-london-16951807
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-london-16951807
Boris Johnson given ‘£90m election bung’, says Labour
On current performance, I am pretty sure the ‘says Labour’ bit got dropped ‘to fit’ on twitter, iPhones, etc.
Lord Lawson’s Global Warming Foundation today publishes it’s free-to-download report, ‘Royal Society’, on the sorry state of the (allegedly independent) Royal Society and it’s deplorable role in politicising and promoting the AGW climate scam, with special reference to the role played by it’s current President, Sir Paul Nurse and his appalling pro-AGW propaganda piece made for the BBC’s Horizon series entitled ‘Science Under Attack‘.
You can read the GWF article here: http://www.thegwpf.org/science-news/4922-royal-society-urged-to-restore-culture-of-open-mindedness-on-climate-science-a-policy-debates.html
and download the free PDF report ‘Royal Society’ here: http://www.thegwpf.org/images/stories/gwpf-reports/montford-royal_society.pdf
The Royal Society claims it is an independent organisation, providing ‘impartial’ advice to the UK government on issues related to climate change, amongst many other things. As the GWF’s excellent report notes, the Society is principally funded via taxpayers – to the tune of some £40-50million annually, of which a whopping £2.5million is retained directly by the Society for what it describes ‘administrative costs’.
Just how ‘independent’ do you imagine their ‘advice’ to their paymaster actually is?
The BBC apologises to Jew haters, again:
BBC apologizes for quiz question on Israeli cities
Anti-Israel activists have brought the BBC to task, forcing it to apologize for referring to Ariel as an Israeli city during a lighthearted cable quiz show.
Only Connections – a quiz show which requires connections to be made between things – asked what connected Acre, Eilat, Holon and Ariel. The program aired on January 30 on BBC4, a channel available only to subscribers.
After the answer was given that they were all Israeli cities, anti-Israel activists, Rachel Lever, a one-state solution advocate, and Abe Hayeem, a Palestine Solidarity Campaign member, wrote to the BBC demanding an apology.
In her complaint, Lever said that any question about “Israeli cities” is highly sensitive and controversial.
[…]
In 2007, the BBC apologized for referring to Jerusalem as Israel’s capital during a soccer program, and promised not to repeat “the mistake,” following a complaint by anti-Israel activists.
Read it all…
I have no doubt the BBC are truly repentent about this one. The correct answer was Acre, Eilat, Holon and Ariel are all part of occupied Palestine.
I’m curious. This link came from the Jerusalem Post. Where is the BBC link? Is there a special section for apologies in the BBC?
‘Is there a special section for apologies in the BBC?’
Like Helen Boaden’s complaint email address, I think it is ‘special’ to the point of being ‘uniquely non-extant.
The programme is actually called “Only Connect”.
A search on the BBC website for “Only Connect”, Ariel gives the first result as Profile: Marwan Barghouti :'(
So, not a mention anywhere on the BBC website of this apology, but here’s the blog of the complainant:
http://thetanjara.blogspot.com/2012/02/bbc-apologises-for-quiz-answer-saying.html
That is pathetic. Unfortunately, now this incident will be used as eternal proof that the BBC isn’t biased against Israel, because not only do they get complaints from both sides, but apparently blithely slip Israeli propaganda into their light entertainment.
Oh dear, how are Black/Harribin/Shukman going to spin this:
http://eureferendum.blogspot.com/2012/02/glaciergate-no-more.html
From Black:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/8468358.stm
http://biasedbbc.tv/2012/01/richard-black-97-1-metre-sea-level-rise.html
http://www.bishop-hill.net/blog/2011/11/3/blackening-the-name-of-the-bbc.html?currentPage=2
Mr. ‘My wife is a big shot in the BBC’ has decided to have a pop at a rival on twitter use…
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-16946279
Not sure it is panning out as planned.
But I think the Corporation, very nervous about the whole idea at first, has come to this settled conclusion – that Twitter and other social networks can be brilliant tools for broadcasters as long as they remember that the same rules apply as in any other form of broadcasting.
Since when? What a load of BS. We know for a fact that they view Twitter as lying outside normal rules of behavior. They can say anything they like as long as they have that “opinions my own” disclaimer, and even those who do have officially sanctioned accounts tweet their bias regularly.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/theeditors/2012/02/twitter_guidelines_for_bbc_jou.html
Rather hilariously, there is a new addendum, totally ignoring the actual critiques levelled so far, but we do get..
‘It’s about making sure stories are broken as quickly and efficiently as possible to our large audiences on a wide range of platforms – Twitter, other social networks, our own website, continuous TV and radio news channels, TV and radio bulletins and programmes across several networks.’
Actually publishing accurate stuff across it all… not so much.
Helen will be so proud.
Slow news day, so here’s a track from the 70s by an all white band which I suppoe wouldn’t get the time of day today from the bBC. (the TV show isn’t British) But the Music is great:
Always like to check what news there is from Liverpool.
Today the BBC have an interesting story. Makes a change from the recent cat on Twitter and people lost in the fog.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-16961668
‘The former wife of Sir Paul McCartney has denied authorising former Daily Mirror editor Piers Morgan to access her voicemail messages.
It makes it on to the national on-line page and I suppose it is on the Liverpool page because of the Macca connection. I’ve missed this story on TV and radio bulletins. I sense the Beeb have lost interest since the News of the World ‘scandal’.
But BBC, is there nothing of national interest happening in Liverpool?
Here’s Libcom.com
http://libcom.org/blog/nazi-opportunists-descend-liverpool-06022012
‘libertarian communist’ (strange combo – but pretty leftist in outlook)
“Always like to check what news there is from Liverpool.”
No, there is nothing, honestly, absolutely nothing whatsoever, happening in Liverpool. Don’t know why anybody would suggest otherwise.
Nothing, zero, nowt, zilch – nothing at all. Don’t go there and don’t even dream of googling it. Understand?
Mind your own business.
Well I’ve searched the INBBC site, and sure enough there’s nothing at all happening in Liverpool of note…well…well…….!
zilch, zero, dont look plebs.
nothing to see move along there sir.
nothing at all.
Told you so.
Now get back to work before you start getting ideas.
Anyone else think we’re being exposed to an overdose of Claire Balding? Has one of her “friends” conjured up a lot of work for her? There seem to be an awful lot of wimmin on the radio these last couple of days, I wonder why
The BBC spins the impending bank settlement over bad mortgages and forclosure misdeeds as the President punishing banks for fraud and in turn helping out millions of homeowners.
Except most people won’t be helped much at all. Some will get a $2000 check, others who are underwater on their mortgages will get some yet unkown level of refinancing, but half of all bad mortgages won’t be affected because they’re owned by Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac. Only the BBC doesn’t tell you that last part. All you get is the White House spin. But it looks good, right? Robin Hood makes the nasty, greedy banks redistribute their stolen lucre back to the good people of Nottingham or whatever.
What this is really about, though, is yet another attempt to shore up housing prices, a major factor in the economy. I guess Kingstone hasn’t read the whole NY Times article yet this morning. The theory this time is that allowing/forcing banks to write down some mortgages (which means taking a loss) getting a good number of foreclosed homes back into the market. Some geniuses think that will restore some stability to housing prices, leading to recovery, etc.
I’m not saying that there was no bad behavior by banks with some of these foreclosures. I know there was some bad behavior in kicking people out without proper procedure. But what’s left out of all this is that none of this would have happened – i.e. the whole sub-prime mortgage and aggressive lending wouldn’t exist – without Clinton and the Democrats’ scheme that forced banks to do this in the first place, and the making it worse with Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac.
How adding even more stock to a depressed market will keep prices from dropping further is beyond me, but I’m not trying to show how I’m saving million of families in an election year. In any case, Steve Kingstone gives you the White House spin on this, and doesn’t tell you what’s really going on. I realize it’s because he doesn’t actually know, and is just repeating summaries from wire services and whatever Jay Carney sent round this morning. What’s odd is that he’s taking credit for this, rather than leaving it as an anonymous news brief like they usually do.
Your license fee hard at work.
Why is this worthy of a spot on the US & (some other country we never hear about) page:
News Corp profits swing to growth
Media giant News Corporation has seen its net profits rise 65% in the three months to the end of December 2011 compared to the same period in 2010.
and not something about yet another government-subsidized green company going down the toilet, or that government-subsidized (and Obamessiah moneyman’s) LightSquared’s product is a disaster and will cost us hundreds of millions, or former Clinton Adminstration official Robert Reich (for whom the BBC usually has time) complaining that the President has handed the election over to the super-rich with His endorsement of Super-PACs, or a follow-up on the escalating story of the President trying to force Catholic businesses to provide birth control for their employees, or that the White House is already disavowing the President’s statement on job figures before He even makes it publicly? I mean, there are so many stories more important and newsworthy than whether or not NewsCorp. made a profit last quarter, so why is this worth mentioning above all those other stories the BBC isn’t covering? Or at least, why isn’t this buried deep within the business section and not taking the spot of more important stories in the US?
Oh:
One area which saw a decline despite the ongoing use of paywalls, was News Corporation’s publishing businesses including the Wall Street Journal and the Times newspaper in London.
The company said the losses were mainly due to lower advertising income from its Australian newspapers and the gap in revenue left by the closure of the News of the World in 2011.
The firm has so far had to pay $87m in relation to the ongoing investigations surrounding the closure of the News of the World.
The BBC is still obsessed with evil Uncle Rupert, and so think you are as well. Any opportunity to mention this scandal….
Of a pretty sparse colelction of pond-dwellling risibility in news coverage, I consider Newsnight about as low as it gets. One of many reasons:
BBCNewsnight BBC Newsnight As the 30th anniversary of the Falklands War nears, local politician and Argentine journalist go head-to-head. bbc.in/zF7yp9
They are proud of that set-up.
A fairly hairy country vs. country row in progress, on the back of a not so long past killing war, and the teenie-boppers think it’s ratings gold to get in two extremes (albeit one has a degree of justification in fighting their corner) to go ‘head-to-head’! No sober opinion from any dispassionate coners in sight.
Why don’t the pricks just run around the studio shrieking ‘fight..fight!’?
I consider the BBC too often, on too many subjects, to be an incitement to making things worse, and it is done in my name with my money. NaughtieMarr, Cameron, Clegg, Patten.. why is that you useless bunch of soundbiters?
The Beeboids have never forgiven Mrs. Thatcher for the Belgravia. That and the fact that so many of the bien pensant crowd roll their eyes at any nation who has the bizarre notion that they might want a bit of real estate more than a few miles from their own shores. The Falklands are too far away, and are closer to Argentina, therefore the UK has no right to claim it, regardless of historical fact. The desires of the local population are irrelevant, because the bien pensants simply know better. And all BBC journalism on the matter is prepared from that perspective.
The Belgrano, David! The Belgravia, SW1, was full of Saudis – allies, of a sort, at the time. Although things have changed with their funding of stealth extremism in the universities & madrassas. If Mrs Thatcher had ordered an attack on Broadcasting House then the beeboids might have been moaning, but much of the nation would have seen it as a justifiable pre-emptive strike. Alternately, you may have made a very clever joke!
What’s the difference between these two reports of the same incident?
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-manchester-16964808
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2098726/Second-unprovoked-Asian-gang-attack-white-man-probed-beaten-bottle.html
The BBC must think it’s all a bit unhelpful for their multi-culti agenda.
Where is the all-important context, BBC?
Well done to Jackie Mason for making sure that Richard Bacon didn’t open his mouth for ten minutes.
Ken Livingstone has been making some colourful comments lately.
Inevitably the Beeb has focused on the word ‘riddled’.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-london-16955851
‘Conservative MPs have called for Labour’s candidate for London mayor to apologise for saying their party is “riddled” with homosexuals’.
Nothing from the BBC about the phrase ‘morale imbecile’.
http://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/2012/02/08/ken-livingstons-bizarre-rant_n_1262981.html
‘Livingstone also branded the director general of the BBC Mark Thompson “a moral imbecile” for censoring the word Palestine in a song’
‘Nothing from the BBC about the phrase ‘morale imbecile’. ‘
Evidently the BBC only holds those who had power, and seek to hold it again, to account in a selective manner?
I am sure the cherry vultures have a resaonable explanaation for the odd focus and omissions in their, ahem, ‘news’ coverage.
Frankly, the overuse of the term ‘faux outrage’ by certain hypocrites is also worthy of derision, too.
Nice opportunity to promote Red Ken even more. Well done, BBC.
BBC-NUJ still grossly overstaffed as evidenced by this self-indulgent, non-journalism piece:
“Why is Hebden Bridge the lesbian capital?”
By Sophie Robehmed BBC News Magazine, Hebden Bridge.
(Of course, Hebden Bridge is within striking distance of the latest expansion of the Beeboid broadcasting empire in Manchester.)
I was particularly taken with the final paragraph:
“‘A lot of women here have children,’ says Mellis. ‘It’s an appealing place to bring up children. Women feel safe and included. My girlfriend and I have talked about settling down here and having kids.'”
How?
A child to fit in with a lifestyle.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/magazine-16962898
“How?” How indeed.
Why is Hebden Bridge the lesbian capital? – http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/magazine-16962898
The subtext seems to be ‘Tofu eating bohemian liberal types are good, tolerant people, and as a result homosexuals prefer to live in areas populated by such folk’.
BTW, if the author thinks that Blackpool is prosperous because it’s a seaside town, she should come and visit the place! The biggest employers are probably the council and the dole office!
Jeff
Or the friendly, multicultural kebab industry.
Oh, man, the Beeboids are going to absolutely hate this one. Check out who’s running to fill Rep. Gabrielle Giffords’ seat:
Republican Martha McSally Set To Join CD8 Race Tomorrow
We mentioned last week that former Air Force A-10 Thunderbolt II pilot Martha McSally was considering jumping into the April 17 GOP primary for the special election to complete the term of Gabrielle Giffords, who resigned from Congress on Jan. 25.
McSally is preparing to announce her entrance into the Congressional District 8 race tomorrow afternoon at Zinburger’s Grant Road location, according to Sam Stone, her communications director.
Col. McSally (no, that’s not a joke name) was not only the first woman to fly in combat, but also the first woman to command a USAF fighter squadron. She was part of the effort to enforce the No-Fly Zone on Sadaam back in the day. But it gets better:
She also successfully challenged the US policy of forcing women troops to wear the headscarf, or any other Muslim-required attire, while stationed in Saudia Arabia.
The BBC will probably feel like they need to cover the election result when it happens, due to the story about Giffords. Read the “Why I’m Running” section of the McSally for Congress site, and you’ll know why they’re not going to like Col. McSally one bit.
Thanks for this!
So depressing to read of the lady having to fight for the US women not to have to wear anything Islamic and showing cultural sensitivity.
What the hell is the US Miiltary doing, pretnding that they`re social workers in Tower Hamlets….do they really think that Qatada would ease off on the cassettes as long as the US women wear scarves?
Why don`t the blokes do it then?…
I understand that the extremist – sorry “radical” Islamist would be bombers are in reality just “fantasists, and not really a threat to the peoples of this Country…It must be true, as I get my information from the National state broadcaster, that has always got my interests at heart…
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-16953938
Interesting defence as put out by the defence team wasn`t it…and oh-so-faithful to the BBCs Happy Families narrative regarding Islam?
Turns out that these plotters of terrorism were more fantasists than much else…misguided and probably incompetent…harmless really!
Just an extension of that mad woman and her terror haikus…and they surely were just as deluded as that white bloke who pretended to want Robin Hood Airport blown up.
Think Bomber Harris has his defence now…and one of those 9/11 planes definitely banked rather comically as the pilot went off the flight path in 2001 and into that building that ought to have had better lights up on its roof!
The BBC make my blood boil…don`t recall incompetence or delusions being any defence for the Compton St Gay Bomber way back!
Some more balanced reporting on the BBC web:: “US CATHOLICS ANGRY AT COTRACEPTION RULE”
“US Catholics have strongly criticised a White House rule that would make Church-linked schools and hospitals give employees access to birth control.”
So it is Catholics who are the active ones against a passive White House, even though the White House initiated the rule and the Catholics reacted
Contrast:
“Catholic League head Bill Donohue said it would be fought with lawsuits and “maybe even in the streets”
“I think we need to lower our voices and get together.” – a quote from Obama henchman David Axelrod.
In a subsequent paragraph Sebelius, Secretary of Health and Human Services, is quoted: “We are working to strike the right balance between respecting religious beliefs and increasing women’s access to critical preventive health services.”
Finally to underline how out of touch the Catholic Church with their own people the BBC quotes a “recent poll”: “52% of American Catholics believe religiously affiliated colleges and hospitals should have to provide coverage that includes contraception.”
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-16931403
But this isn’t simply an issue about contraception (or abortion,) it is about an Administration deciding (without any input from Congress) to push ahead with its agenda. There is no hint about the seriousness of this rule – and the BBC will continue to absolve Obama from any subservice intent, leaving viewers, listeners and readers perplexed about what the fuss is all about.
When is the BBC’s American bureau going to start telling it like it is?
I was thinking about commenting on this the other day, but couldn’t figure out just what to say. I suppose in the end, what the Beeboids leave out is that this is an unlawful demand on people to disobey their religion.
The White House position, dutifully relayed by the BBC from the encyclical they received from Katty Kay’s friend, Jay Carney, is that employees of Catholic-run institutions might want birth control, and they should have a right to get it. Except it’s not actually the Government’s duty to provide it, or to force anyone to pay for it. The Government can’t force an employer to provide dental care, so WTF, you know?
That factor is missing from BBC reporting and “analysis”. Of course, from the BBC perspective, the Government must provide everything from womb to grave if given half a chance, so there you are.
“A majority of Catholics (52%) say that religiously affiliated colleges and hospitals should have to provide coverage that includes contraception.
Among Catholic voters, however, only 45% support this requirement, while 52% oppose it.
Only about 4-in-10 (41%) white Catholics support this requirement, compared to 58% who oppose it.”
http://publicreligion.org/research/2012/02/january-tracking-poll-2012/
“The margin of error for the survey is +/B 3.5 percentage points at the 95% level of confidence. In addition to sampling error, surveys may also be subject to error or bias due to question wording, context and order effects.”
Click to access January-Follow-up-Topline.pdf
Not so clear cut.
Well, who’s to say that this poll means anything other than the opinions of laxed/liberal/non-observant Catholics? And how many of those polled work for Catholic-led institutions? And…um…if this matters….what’s the official position of the Church?
Really, polls of lay folk are irrelevant. This is about the Government ordering a religious organization (okay, a private company voluntarily governed by a religious organization) to violate their religious beliefs. It’s exactly the same thing as telling CAIR that they have to provide health insurance for the partners of homosexual employees.
Oh, wait…..
In any case, the President Himself knows He’s got a problem here, as He just dodged a question about it, expecting the press to dutifully bow to His wishes. The President Himself doesn’t seem to have the conviction of Jay Carney on this issue.
It seems Muslims are against this too. I’m sure the mighty O will listen to them.
Really worrying this!
I`ve always been impressed at the USA leading Europe in matters like this.
The likes of Harman and Eagle are a European perversion of freedom and rights….whereas the USA did more than use these weasel words to ensure “conformity to the compliance agenda”.
Therefore it worries me greatly that Obama thinks he`s a budding socialist hoping to get on in Strasbourg-and not the figurehead for true Freedom and Rights, that his country represents to the rest of us.
I hope the Catholics turn him over, and we get ANYBODY but this creepy wannbe Eurostar!
Editorial guidelines on banned words override the BBC Charter duty to ‘inform’.
Tonight on BBC London News ‘men fron London and Cardiff’ are sentenced for planning acts of terrorism.
No sign of the I word or the M word or even the AQ words. A couple of mentions of the T word but that could hardly be avoided considering that was the crime for which they were convicted.
As for why they did it – well who knows? I could guess. I could speculate, but the BBC sure ain’t informing me.
Interesting phraseology on BBC 10 O’clock News. Apparently China has ‘exercised sovereignty’ over Tibet for 60 years.
Good grief. Is that what it takes to get past the Chinese censors these days? Anything for a bung to the Worldwide coffers, I guess.
That jumped out at me too, I was waiting for reference to “Occupied Tibet”.
In vain obviously.
My last post was all screwed up but Paul the twat Mason and Newsnight were on their anti capitalism rant, this time over the supermarkets and the pay levels.
Of course I don’t EVER remember comrade Mason highlighting this when his beloved one eyed retard was running the economy?
Also, the BBC seem to have double standards, they don’t mind buying all those fancy Apple products that are churned out in sweatshops in China and I’m quite sure that the workers standards in a UK Tesco are better than where an Apple product is churned out.
Good point. “Income inequality” somehow wasn’t ramped up (if it ever was, obviously) during the Labour years.
What is it with the BBC and peoples pay? We do not live in a BBC type communist country. There are in all parts of the world people on different levels of pay. There is inequality and there always will be. Does the BBC think there are no millionaires in Cuba, but that the whole population is living on a few pesos?
They attack peoples pay because they know that envy is a powerful weapon in their war against capitalism. People mostly don’t see past the mantra “the BBC says bankers and other capitalists are getting more mony than me, its a bloody disgrace. It was them what caused the crisis” It doesn’t occur to them that people get more because they have worked hard for it. No, if I can’t get it for sitting on my backside doing nothing why should anyone else – I’m voting Labour.
When the BBC desribe someone not on who they are or what they have done, but in terms of money, you can guess that this person is not liked by the BBC.
For years Capello was refered to as the “English Coach”, he is now being described as “£6 million”.
The BBC propaganda in our DNA.
‘the BBC seem to have double standards,’
Sometimes to an exceptional level..
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-15199917
‘When I went on holiday this year I took an iPad ..; my iPhone ..; and my MacBook Pro, which has all the work I have done since the day Lehman Brothers fell stored on it. Ah yes, and a 160gb iPod.’
He does allude to the fatal factory issues where his frequent Currys card cache was produced, but seems cool on that… in this case. And who knows what else he has gifted his muse?
Interestingly enough, I can choose not to shop at Tesco if their business model offends me. Our Paul and his paymaster (we simply stump up the money).. not so much.
Have to say kudos to comrade Mason the actors were great all tears Pained faces really shows that RADA are a class [unlike Mason who is just class obsessed ]act, also loved the slightly off angle close ups really gave a feel of pure contrived B/s of Couganesque stature!
How much does Newsnight pay its interns do you think. The same as the other interns i.e. nothing?
So Mason gets what multiple over the lowest paid at the BBC? Infinite?
Oh god the BBC have just GOT to have Panda face on (This Week) yet again giving us he left wing bollocks.
How the traitorous bBC reports the news in which to substantiate its leftwing bias.
Argentina minister to raise ‘UK militarisation’ at UN
Argentina’s Foreign Minister Hector Marcos Timerman is to lodge a protest at the UN on Friday against the UK’s “militarisation” of the Falklands. Mr Timerman is expected to hand the complaint to the secretary general and the president of the Security Council. The move was announced by Argentine President Cristina Fernandez de Kirchner on Wednesday.
So according to the bBC the UK is guilty of militarisation of the falklands. Yet for some reason the bBC doesn’t mention just what military assets the Uk has down there. (believe me its no state secret) Well there are 4 fighter jets, I destroyer and a usually an Infantry regiment , that figure hasn’t changed since the late 80s, yet the bBC doesn’t mention any of that, instead it promotes the Argentine view as fact.
Tensions over the islands known in Argentina as the Malvinas have been increasing in recent weeks.
Yes they have, but from which direction has the tempo been raised from Argentina or the Uk, well seeing as how the Uk hasn’t done anything, bar send Prince William down south for a 6 week tour and Argentina has been bitching on a daily basis, you’d think the bBC would point that sailent fact out.
Last month, the UK said it was sending a destroyer to the region in March amid growing tension over the islands in a move described as “routine”. Prince William, grandson of Queen Elizabeth II and second-in-line to the throne, was also deployed to the islands in his role as a search and rescue helicopter pilot.
As I have mentioned before (which the bBC doesn’t) HMS Dauntless is simply replacing HMS Montrose for a six month stint , But notice how the bBC makes out the sending of Prince William has dark imperialistic overtones by pointing out he’s the grandson of Queen Elizabeth. Yup the bbC just loves to play the victim angle for those who hate us, be it Islamic terrorists, rioting thugs or even Argentiana, the bBC will always put them (and their viewpoint)t before that of the people who fund it.
The bBC, the traitors in our midst.
‘the bBC doesn’t mention any of that, instead it promotes the Argentine view as fact. ‘
Which seems rather a pendulum swing in propaganda in a very odd direction for the Brtish National Boradcaster.
Though OK for one trusted so much, if not by ther military here (with good reason) and any of the public becoming aware of what is vs. what they punt out.
Interested in who this chap is: The BBC’s Vladimir Hernandez
He does offer this, plus still using ‘the Falklands’:
‘The latest escalation was prompted by the decision of Mercosur, a South American trading bloc, to close its ports to ships flying the Falkland Islands flag in December’
However, some other ‘facts’ are less than supported by those one reads oustide the BBC bubble.
A bit naughty (but as the BBC ‘news’ does about the same in ‘selecting’ its sources, so why not), I thought his bio here was apposite:
http://journalisted.com/vladimir-hernandez#tab-bio
And speaking of twitter, here’s the output of the guy who will be our guide on this issue:
http://topsy.com/twitter/bbc_hernandez
Relatively neutral… well…
bbc_hernandez Vladimir Hernandez Worth remembering #Argentina‘s view on Tue. about Prince#William‘s #Falklands arrival/ “we regret that he comes as a conqueror in uniform”
bbc_hernandez Vladimir Hernandez #Argentina rejects “the British attempt to militarise a conflict” after the UK announces the deployment of a new war ship to the Falklands
Not so many about sabre-rattling by Ms. Kirchner. In fact most seem relaying Agentinian government PR.
Paying for the propaganda of a hostile other nation seems… unique.
Stephanie Flanders on QE: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-16974497
‘If there’s more borrowing, there’ll be more spending and faster growth’.
What Ms Flanders fails to point out is that QE doesn’t create wealth – it merely transfers it from savers to borrowers. Here is a more balanced assessment: http://www.telegraph.co.uk/comment/9073196/Quantitative-easing-Pensioners-are-paying-the-price-for-Sir-Mervyns-funny-money.html
Jeff
‘it merely transfers it from savers to ..’
Not just QE, really.
Can see why a force-funding supported BBC staffer may have aq unique way of piitching it.
Simple political calculation, pensioners outnumbered five to one, savings ruined, can’t fight back. Evil bastard Mervyn King.
OT, but as I don’t watch it I am wondering if the BBC is alive wiv spokespersons from da hood on the latest gang initiative.
Actually the young lad and lady so far on SKY were quite engaging and articulate, so good choices to front up.
Not so sure about the statements they were drilled to parrot out as I have rarely heard such carefully considered ways to decirbe certain actions, bless ’em.
Oh, and SKY, the Harry obsession is getting silly. I’d say his awesome skill in negotiating the 1/2″ of snow on the flat carpark was not hurt by him driving a freaking great Range Rover 4WD.
Our media have lost any sense of what is news, and what is simply filling space with dross.
Have we lost all sense of proportion in this country? Heard on Today this morning:
“A severe weather warning has been issued for the south east of England, with up to three inches of snow expected…”
Three whole inches!!! Call in the army!
Actually, I’m surprised they said inches. Smacked handies there. Centimetres would have sounded more apocalyptic.
Oh for gods sake Dame Nikki and Radio 5 are having yet another go at ‘Fatcher’ today.
This time the phone in is “was she good or bad”
How about a phone in on the one eyed tosser from Fife?
Jesus I give up
I know this has bee on Guido’s blog for a while but now the Mail are running it.
BBC shelved Savile sex abuse investigation ‘to protect its own reputation’http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2099141/BBC-shelved-Savile-sex-abuse-investigation-protect-reputation.html
Funny thing but I don’t recall the BBC name-checking Margaret Thatcher quite so often when Labour were in Government.
They sure did – in the weeks before the last general election. Every day you heard that voting Tory would drag the country back to the 80s and the worst of the Thatcher years.
Sorry to hear of the death of Ray Honeyford, who dies aged 77 last Sunday.
Obviously too late to make BBCs “Last Word” last week, but there`ll have been no excuse for this week will there?
And just say, the “snow” has prevented them from gettin up there….surely this great prophet of education that split the nation in 1985(and still does today, if you check the websites!) will feature prominently in one of the coming programmes!
Much more relevant that Castros Grooms of the Stool-or equivalents that the Beeb seem keen to give a heads up in death.
Much as they give a hand up-or hand out-to the same creepy toady socialists and faux-rebels in life!
Let`s see if the BBC will go all brave and impartial on us just this once eh?
Ha!
Oh-and just in case they can`t find Manchester or Bradford….it`s where Sarah Montague went in order to search for the soul of Shannon Matthews…and managed to keep her job and ignorance intact afterwards!
Think I`ll name my next free/faith school after him!
Yes, Ray HONEYFORD was a critic of, and victim of enforced ‘multiculturalism’.
‘Daily Mail’ today:
“Farewell to a martyr to political correctness: Bradford headmaster Ray Honeyford – hounded for warning of the perils of multiculturalism – dies a saddened but vindicated man.”
By Leo Mckinstry
Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2099068/Bradford-headmaster-Ray-Honeyford–hounded-warning-perils-multiculturalism–dies-saddened-vindicated-man.html#ixzz1lyPS591H
‘Daily Telegraph’ had this appreciation of Ray HONEYFORD (2006)
“Headteacher who never taught again after daring to criticise multiculturalism.”
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/1527371/Headteacher-who-never-taught-again-after-daring-to-criticise-multiculturalism.html
BBC-NUJ has the word ‘racist’ as a first word of its headline on Mr HONEYFORD:
“Ray Honeyford: Racist or right?”
In its obituary of Ray HONEYFORD, BBC-NUJ’s Mr Justin Parkinson, giving a large space, of course, to critics of Mr Honeyford, omits reference to BBC-NUJ’s active role in political advocacy of ‘multiculturalism’ and comes up with this odd, unsubstantiated assertion as a cryptic conclusion:
“Political opinion may have moved in Mr Honeyford’s direction, but not completely.”
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-16968930
He had the courage to speak the truth and was vilified for it.
“The term ‘racism’ functions not as a word with which to create insight, but as a slogan designed to suppress constructive thought. It conflates prejudice and discrimination … It is the icon word of those committed to the race game. And they apply it with the same sort of mindless zeal as the inquisitors voiced ‘heretic’ or Senator McCarthy spat out ‘Commie’.”
Exactly.
I intended to include this:
The Man Who Predicted the Race Riots
Currently listening to Last Word.
As I See It below cites the BBC mindset-and I`m proud to say that Last Word has no mention of Honeyford-whose influence on education and the race industry has been profound for this country.
Instead we have a SoulTrain talking head, a Catalan artist and a socialite toff(of the bisexual poshocracy).
So apart from the Auschwitz hero mentioned-the usual slew of well regarded lefties and bohemians get a tribute.
Typical despicable BBC!
Love it, hate it, last night’s Question Time was at least a neatly crystalized picture of the BBC outlook and bias.
David Dimbleby: self-important, pontificating, well-fed, self-appointed, centre-leftist who assumes the unilateral role of the voice of reason.
Shirley Williams: centre-left, esteemed old patriation who pontificates out of her depth while we forget her unelected life on expenses and her floundering at least three eons ago when she actually had her leftist hands on the levers of power. If you think we are in state these days then forget how we got here folks.
Philip Hammond: tame, lame, dripping wet Tory meekly soaking up the accumilated flak.
Steve Coogan: supposedly the joker in the pack- but actually the self-centred enfant terrible of luvviedom is now matured through years of publicly subsidised substance abuse and priapic missadventure into a fuller understanding and sincere yet flamboyant belief in left-wingery. Leaving his habits aside; his financial arrangements may be no less unfair (as the current parlance has it) than a city boy – although it’s funny how the entertainment industry does so like to dip into the communal purse – but his political badges certainly please the audience.
Alistair Campbell: the never-elected politician of the left. The reliable party line from the Labour Party. Let’s be honest for once – the ruthless professional propagandist for the left. Populist, crazy back story from the recently past golden Gorden and Tony era. Whatever you do don’t mention the war.
Ann Leslie: ah, the real joker in the pack. The tipsy eccentric from the right – just the way the Beeb love them. With funny big words you won’t hear from the bread and butter coblestone heros of the left. Coogan’s not really laugh out loud anymore but with a righty pantomime dame laid on we’re sure to get the audience going. Ooooh look out the Daily Mail is behind you! Boooo! The villians!
Don’t forget the audience. The ancient and modern Greek chorus of public servant payroll voters, trades unionist volunteer NHS angels and single issue campaigners with no seats left for a silent majority in this colourful rainbow diversity camera shot Britain.
Gosh I’m at a lost to know where and why we are going wrong in Britain today. Can’t imagine why we have all these problems…..But I think we might start by giving the BBC a kick up the jacksie.
Great analysis again Sir!
And saves a lot of us the effort of having to sit through it!
AISI, ironically, though you are being being provacative (and funny) you have crystallised a BBC producer’s thought process. The object of the exercise is to have a stacked deck to give the required result. Do you know what would happen if a right leaning commentator got the better of the others in a QT discussion? The producer would be on the carpet…
The most important elements in such shows are not the old lame bigotted champaigne lefties, but the wet Tories who allow them to get away with their views by not challenging their basic beliefs. (Daniel Hannan – where are you when we need you?!?)
Just for laughs,I thought I’d link to a golden oldie from QT: remember when Harriet Harman controlled Dimbleby with a hand on his arm? It seems to have disappeared from YOUTUBE. Does anyone have it downloaded?
Louis, do you really see David Dimbleby as part of the left wing cabal at the BBC?
I’ve always viewed him as exactly the sort of person one wants at the BBC – he typifies all that is best about it in my view, although clearly not his production team.
No way is Dimblebore balanced! If you take the best one at the BBC (Andrew Neil) then line up Marr, Dimblebore, Paxman, rat face, Dame Nikki, Bacon, Pollard etc and none of them come close to Brillo.
It’s not so much a lefty cabal as a liberal mindset, within the BBC there is this ‘Borg’ collective view of everything, you can replace the crap you get from Paxman with Marr or Dame Nikki, it’s the same PC shite day in and day out.
Why for example is the BBC obsessed with ‘Fatcher’? They just can’t leave her alone even though Gordon Brown did far more damage in his 13 years than she ever did. The BBC obsession with drugs and homosexuality, do you know anyone that snorts coke? or is part of some lefty gay mafia? I don’t, but within the wine bars of Islington the sort of crap pumped out by the BBC and the mindset of beeboids is exactly the sort of pap that Dimblebore and co think is the norm.
How often does Dimblebore remind Labour politicians of their dodgy expenses? Yet Tories are reminded on a regular basis, the BBC are trying to wipe 13 years of dismal failure of socialism from the minds of a population.
Last night Newsnight gave Mason demanding to know why people in low paid jobs needed benefits to live on, but Mason never asked that in 13 years of Gordon Brown, not ONCE did that commie twat ever ask why benefits are needed. It’s not the low wages it’s the high taxes, perhaps Mason should ask why 80% of the cost of a litre of petrol is tax and why it’s needed to fund unlimited housing benefits for any twat from Somalia?
Stepping on debate and carefully selecting questions to drive certain issues is exactly what you want at the BBC?
Actually, hippiepooter, I respected David Dimbleby. At the time, I didn’t know his politics – a good thing. I worked with him as a young assistant film editor when he was a young presenter of the old “24 Hours” current affairs programme. I assumed he was left leaning as everyone else was but these days I have only his TV persona to judge by. He was very smart and hardworking. His problem now is that he is tied to Question Time, so the politics of THAT show rubs off on him.
I don’t know about David (I would say that Jonathan is beyond doubt the standard lefty Beeboid and blatantly biased on Any Questions?) but I do wonder how much influence and say he has over the composition and running of Question Time. He must be aware that he lends his name and authority to it so will inevitably be associated with it and any criticism of the quality of the programme. He is in many ways the consummate traditional Beeboid broadcaster with the sound and polish that is so beguiling: smooth, serene, knowledgeable and benignly authoritative.
Richard, David, and Jonathan.
How likely is it that all three Dimblebys were recuited on merit? Any more members of this dynasty in the pipeline?
I agree the Beeboids running QT certainly lack the courage of their convictions – how else to explain why they won’t give a seat more often to the likes of the highly articulate, totally fearless Daniel Hannan, or allow spineless, moronic Ministers to defend their discredited pro-AGW policies against intellects such as Nigel Lawson or Christopher Monckton? They wouldn’t dare. It will not do to have the ugly truth exposed for all to see.
Coogan was an embarassment on last night’s QT. I shuddered at his cringeworthy ‘right-on’ Mob-baiting comments. You could also see him mentally ticking the boxes as he reeled off his cretinous comments. Not a very pleasant man. Reminds me of a great many careerist NuLabour twonks.
I suspect many won’t appear even if asked, the issue is the audience not the guests, if the audience reflected the views of the population all the politicians would get a far harder time.
But they don’t they select the same type of person every week (lefty, gay, minority, public sector, student or unwashed lesbian) who parrot the Guardian/BBC view of the world.
It was Iain Dale who noted that in a show from Reading I think it was, the front row was made up of Labour activists and local Councillors, how did that happen when presumably the audience is selected at ‘random’?
Only it’s not entirely random, as even the BBC admits that they select audience members from profile info they gather beforehand to ensure “balance”.