NEW Open thread. Will post more later…
OPEN THREAD
Bookmark the permalink.
Search Biased BBC
Recent Comments
- tomo April 26, 2024 at 9:25 am on Midweek 24th April 2024https://twitter.com/latimeralder/status/1783742498944278817
- tomo April 26, 2024 at 9:23 am on Midweek 24th April 2024BBC "Science" https://twitter.com/clim8resistance/status/1783631260822225158
- Guest Who April 26, 2024 at 8:33 am on Midweek 24th April 2024Speaking of whom. https://x.com/mwendling/status/1783665678274134406?s=61 6hrs, zero engagement. That is what per TVL payment?
- Guest Who April 26, 2024 at 8:31 am on Midweek 24th April 2024https://x.com/ritapanahi/status/1783607614649315548?s=61 JonDon and his Egyptian muse would have a Wendy Meltdown. Who ‘does’ Oz now?
- Thoughtful April 26, 2024 at 8:29 am on Midweek 24th April 2024George unpicks a Leftist media article about the US economy. If only we could have more illegal immigrants and start...
- AsISeeIt April 26, 2024 at 8:21 am on Midweek 24th April 2024Fighting age dipso females vulnerable to the blandishments of the Labour spin doctors edition Forced repatriation of migrants fleeing wartor...
- Guest Who April 26, 2024 at 8:18 am on Midweek 24th April 2024When Mehdi Met Saddo https://x.com/joshxhowie/status/1783641946952503590?s=61 Remember Mr. Hasan? A frequent bbc guest. Also a radical Islam...
- Fedup2 April 26, 2024 at 8:10 am on Midweek 24th April 2024…and obviously - the use of dodgy hamas originated numbers fuels those anti Israel demonstrations and attempts to obstruct the...
- Guest Who April 26, 2024 at 8:03 am on Midweek 24th April 2024Maybe they were ‘obviously beautiful’ and he was clearly in a bathrobe?
- Scroblene April 26, 2024 at 7:30 am on Midweek 24th April 2024https://youtube.com/shorts/KJVfMhwR0Pw?si=T4rF80qlaVYqlGwW I'm off for a cold shower now...
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
Give us the news and spare us the comment.
Late last night Stephen Nolan was hosting a BBC radio discussion about the big boxing story. Fair enough, sport is part of the 5 Live remit.
He interupts this item to deliver a news flash confirming that Rupert Murdoch is indeed launching the Sun on Sunday and doing it next weekend. No complaints there, news is also part of the 5 Live remit.
My heart sinks when Mr Nolan eagerly adds ‘We’ll bring you some comment as soon as we can!’
I could already predict the delivery of some lefty anti-Murdoch sloganeering.
Now I have mixed feelings about Nolan. I find his accent and geneality fairly easy on the ear. I assume he is a lefty and I know that some of our friends in Ulster would like to expell him from their local airwaves. Well, I would happily take him as long as he is given in exchange for the phony over-grown school boy Richard Bacon, the micro-light weight Dame Nicky and throw in any number of second generation female plastic paddies of the Shelagh Fogarty Rachel Burdon ilk.
I digress.
Mr Nolan was as true as his word. He soon russels up Beeboid and Guardianista Steve Hewlett on speed dial. He gives a brief comment and although not adding any new information and least avoids the delivery of the ultimate BBC money shot – Murdoch, him bad!
And that is where Twitter comes into its own. Nolan’s Beeboid team just happen to stumble across a lefty Twitter drone’s comment to be delivered in the manner of ‘some people are saying’.
“The Sun on Sunday will just be Murdoch’s News of the World in disguise”
The BBC, you may think we are biased, we couldn’t possibly comment.
Owen Jones was allowed out of the BBC studios to gurn his way through the Press Preview on Sky last night.
You’ll be pleased to hear that he supports a free press, just so long as he agrees with what they’re saying. All Murdoch papers must be forced to close according to him, as Murdoch’s nothing but a bloody foreigner who’s come over here from Australia/America creating all these jobs for the British!!!
Yes and he also wheeled out more of those made up statistics. Jesus, he spouts more bollocks than Brown or Balls combined.
I get depressed every time I retune my freeview box at the number of bBC tv and radio channels there are, more like a bleedin virus than a state broadcaster. *pours another large gin
‘Give us the news and spare us the comment.’
Amen.
Just back form a weekend in Wales at some great pubs, where the only downside was the rooms’ TVs being limited to the channels.
Hence each Breakfast I was introduced to the joys of Bill & Sian again, plus a collection of incomprehensible harpies on various beats presumably hired to make Sian seem smart.
But what got me was their addiction to ‘our views’. Nothing was safe from reading out a text or email.
And if the anchors are braindead and their guests of choice simply there to support a view, the level of insight from the carefully selected moronosphere timefillers was spectacular.
“And here’s one from Tom in Kent: what’s the big deal about a drought here? The UK is surrounded by water. Thanks Tom, keep them coming”
No, for the love of god, DO NOT keep ’em coming if you are going to do is re-intone bollocks from intellects that would rival sea cucumbers!!!
It is been so long since I was subjected to such dross, to be reminded that a reasonably raised 5 year old would hurl Lego though the screen at being so poorly serrved.
I expect the BBC will slag off the paper between now and launch day, taking every chance to convince the viewer that this paper is just NOTW mark 2, same staff, same sleaze, same Murdoch dominating the media etc. I can hear the whispers from Labour HQ now, ‘there’s a new Murdoch paper, it must be strangled at birth’.
“…taking every chance to convince the viewer that this paper is just NOTW mark 2”
Well Murdoch will hope they do! NOTW was the best-selling Sunday paper BY MILES!
The BBC states in a web article by the Pallab Ghosh. that the Canadian government has been accused of “muzzling” its scientists.
(http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-16861468)
The accusation is made by among others Professor Andrew Weaver. You can see from his wiki profile has absolutely no personal agenda for his accusations (!?!) http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Andrew_J._Weaver
A second scientist quoted is Dr Kristi Miller – no agenda here either (!?!) http://foodfreedom.wordpress.com/tag/dr-kristi-miller/
However the point I wish to make is this: Weaver describes his government’s actions as “Orwellian”. According to Weaver the protocol states: “Just as we have one department we should have one voice. This should include asking the program expert to respond with approved lines.” He adds “The information is so tightly controlled that the public is left in the dark”
“One department with one voice”? “Approved lines”? “Tightly controlled” information? “Muzzling” opposition?
Didn’t the equally Orwellian BBC adopt this as their own protocol in matters of climate change reporting some years ago?
‘Didn’t the equally Orwellian BBC adopt this as their own protocol in matters of climate change reporting some years ago? ‘
Are, yes..but.. it’s different here as they are unique, and… ‘get it about right’.
Apparently.
Did anyone else’s blood pressure take off during Thought for the Day this morning? It was about how individuals were entitled to their privacy, but the Freedom of Information Act was a very good thing when used in relation to corporate entities. Presumably this is except when it’s used to try and obtain a copy of the Balen Report.
Or find out what beeboids are paid.
‘Presumably this is except when it’s used to try and obtain a copy of the Balen Report.’
Are, yes..but.. it’s different here as they are unique, and… ‘get it about right’.
Apparently.
(spotting a trend here?)
Up date:
“He was greeted by shouts of “shame” and one woman refused to stand aside, saying: “I’ve had enough of you.””
Now reads: “Andrew Lansley was greeted with shouts of “shame” as he headed for a meeting inside No 10 about the NHS”
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-17093082
Guido reported that June Hautot was not some innocent old dear, she is in fact a former union rep and organiser, but could the bearded fellow supporting her be the same as here:
http://order-order.com/2012/02/20/scargills-granny-lansley-baiter-is-seasoned-lefty-agitator/
I have no proof (Newsniffer?) but I’m sure the lists of “those attending” and “those not attending”, also on the right, seems more equal NOW.
News Sniffer shows the BBC figured out who she was 40 minutes after originally updating the “developing story” to include her hassling Lansley. As if nobody knew at the time, and no intrepid BBC journalist asked her immediately after the incident, before rushing to report it.
David, they have also now added the harridan’ trot’s name to the headline…backtracking fast.
‘backtracking fast’
Shame Mr. Robinson was not here with his expertise.. in backtracking, that is.
Just catching up on my emails, and have a doozy in the in-box from his editor, telling me they think he got it about right phoning in the triple A story as a Balls victory, and then digging a hole when called on it by saying he hadn’t read it as he was on hols again.
I will share, with my reply, tomorrow.
yes, the original update was 40 minutes after the stroy but a further 40 minutes (versions 5 to 6 on newsniffer) was when they finally added her name and what she is…a full hour and twenty minutes elapsed (and the film appeared on several TV news programmes)…damage done.
“In news and current affairs content, achieving due accuracy is more important than speed.”
http://www.bbc.co.uk/editorialguidelines/page/guidelines-accuracy-introduction
Ah well there goes another “guideline” but who cares?
The BBC are akin to the “former” UK Border Agency, too important to be tied down to any regulation.
Need to put in a good word for Steve Hewlett – I think he does a pretty fair job on his “The Media Show” and (to me) isn’t so full of strident blood-red, marxoid bollocks that you usually hear on bBC progs about the media. I listen to his show every week, and he may be just a smidgen to the left – but that’s all. Compared to the rest of the foaming-at-the-mouth Murdoch- haters that we license-payers pay for he’s very small stuff. He gets my thumbs-up anyway.
Certainly he`s pretty good, but there is a visceral Beeboid mindset that he can fall victim too.
Remember him asking Mark Thompson about the opacity of BBC senior management, but then adding the “but for perfectly understandable reasons”.
Which is galling in that the BBC don`t allow that excuse to banks etc..which ARE commercially sensitive, unlke the BBC shallow pool of talent…Stephen Fry basically!
Carry on, Clarkson!
According to this report, those arbiters of the airwaves, Ofcom, have now pronounced that Clarkson did not breach the broadcast code when he said public sector strikers should be shot. Apparently, the context is all: we all know what he’s like; he didn’t really mean it and nobody is likely to go out and shoot public sector workers as a result. So there, whingers!
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2103768/Jeremy-Clarksons-jibe-striking-workers-did-breach-broadcasting-guidelines-says-Ofcom.html
Ah yes, context.
Unless you complain the very first time Ramsay says f*** or c**t, or Fry crack his loose arse muscle joke you’ve had it.
Of course try saying the ~ word any time, ever and you’re toast.
Some words you see… ‘edgier’ than others.
~ = the letter between M and O.
You know your movement’s over when, Part 1,247:
How ‘Occupy’ went wrong
A trashed house in Brooklyn has become a symbol of a movement that failed to capitalize on popular anger
Apparently a group of Occupiers, darlings of the BBC, took the next phase of their precious movement to the next level, claiming to be taking over houses on which evil bankers had foreclosed and fixing them up to provide shelter to a homeless family. Except – true to predicted form – instead of fixing that first home up, they trashed it.
BBC: ZZzzzzzzz
Still-there will be no end of retrospectives about how the movement stuck it to the Man!
No end of commisssions already going out to “tender” I bet.
We can expect Jamie Theakston, Siouxie Sioux, Lisa Tarbuck and Paul Ross telling us all about the “Years of Revolution”…and just like punk, they`ll have been spitting at the school wall as the camera roll, whilst still getting the golf buggy into the Quad for toasted muffins with the Dean!
Still-the narrative is already getting tie-dyed and set in aspic for the ages…tossers!
Funny how there’s been a distinct lack of “Has the movement run out of steam” pieces from the BBC. How unlike their hoping that the Tea Party was so yesterday’s news. Not sure this was all worth Laura Trevelyan’s breathless enthusiasm.
I can’t wait for this…
Born To Sh&t In Public: Bruce Springsteen’s New Album To Glorify Filth, Rapes, Drug Use Of Occupy Movement
Multi-Millionaire One-Percenter Bruce Springsteen Says Occupy Wall Street Inspiration For New Album
One of the comments…
Springsteen’s daughter, Jessica Rae Springsteen, is a nationally ranked champion equestrian, for Gawd’s sake. You don’t own five horses, train them, and ride them for peanuts.
Who does Springsteen think he is? He’s one of the privileged 1% and he dares to chide the rest of us who are being stretched to pay all the bills but who still respect and live by law and order?
I’m sick and tired of these gazillionaire socialists.
This, however, will certainly be worth a go…
http://www.occupyunmasked.com/
The difference between the Liberal words and the actualité is quite shocking, as is the venom directed at the Tea Party. Everything said is the exact opposite of the truth – the standard Liberal 180° position. Look forward to the bBC reviews of it.
The bBC serious gambling by Asians and half the story.
Asian children face higher risk of gambling addiction
British Asian children who gamble are twice as likely to become addicted as white children, new research suggests. Nine thousand 11-15 year olds were surveyed by the University of Salford and National Centre for Social Research (NatCen). Of the ethnic groups studied, Asians were the least likely to gamble, but those who did had the highest rates of problem addiction
OK so the bBC reports on a gambling problem amongst British Asians, which the facts be told is lowest in the UK. (So why isn’t the bBC reporting on the people with the biggest problem instead of the group with the least??) and instead of saying just who,the bBC uses the catch all ’Asian’ in which to encapsulate these so called Asian gamblers. So lets look in more detail at the names of these poor wretched folks who have picked up the habits of the white man. (Not been to Hong Kong or China then have you bBC?)
“I’ve been going to the arcades for 2 years,” said Imran, aged 12 who uses 10p slot machines.
Kasim, aged 15, said that placing a wager with friends makes computer games more fun.“Mostly nothing comes out, but it’s very addictive so we just keep coming back and spend most of our money.”
Yup good Asian names, which funny enough belong to one religious group (And not ethnic as the bBC keeps on trying to portray) Strangely enough it is also the same religious group which is forbidden to gamble.
So lets put this into prospective shall we. The group whom the bbC shall never name when it is guilty of wrongdoings but only when it came be made to look a victim is the group in question here, so while that group is forbidden to gamble according to the codex of its holy book, according to the bBC it has the largest problem in the Uk.
The same group I should tell that while forbidden from drinking alcohol have a very high rate of criminals locked up due to under the influence.
The same group which while forbidden from going near dogs is behind the huge rise in dog fighting in the UK
The same group which while professing to respect women is behind the inordinate number of child rapists and child groomers in the Uk
The same group who while professing that they belong to a religion of peace are behind the most odious crimes committed on a daily basis for the past 11 years.
And the bbC still tries to shove up my arse that the followers of this peaceful relgion are very pious indeed. Must be why I had the shits for the past 11 years.
Very interesting to see the BBC spinning the ‘drought’ scare for the south east. I was half expecting to hear “climate change” wheeled out.
The BBC failed to point out we get plenty of rain in the UK and the south east, it’s just that we don’t catch enough of it, god knows when the last new reservoirs were built, yet the south east has had a massive rise in population over the last 15 years.
What the BBC failed to point out was the starting point for the reservoir levels, if you’re taking out more water than you put in the levels will drop, that’s sod all to do with lack of rain but lack of storage.
Nothing to worry about – more rain is on its way. It must be true Captain Black has spoken:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-12484314
But …….
http://www.independent.co.uk/environment/climate-change/extreme-droughts-to-be-more-common-1983913.html
“Doublethink means the power of holding two contradictory beliefs in one’s mind simultaneously, and accepting both of them.” Orwell: 1984
Most agricultural crops in the UK are not irrigated. We do not know if farmers are going to suffer from drought this year because it will depend on the rain that is yet to come (a few showers on already damp ground do a lot of good) – yes there could be a problem in the east with potatoes and vegetable crops that depend on irrigation but the way the BBC is reporting it makes it sound as if all farming is suffering from drought…it may do in the summer months but it will depend on the rainfall in the spring months..but we just do not yet know.
I am very suspicious why man made climate change has not yet been seen as the cause by the BBC but I suspect within a day or two it will be reported to be the case. No mention of course of the increased number of people living in the South East and their water needs (both domestic and industrial).
The BBC have been caught out before spining the climate change myth. There’s no shortage of water in Scotland or the north west, only an idiot (lefty) could pretend that climate change could be responsible for the so called drought in the SE when the NW and Scotland are drowning under the stuff.
Well the population was declining but lately started shooting upwards , with predictions of 70 million soon .Due to ……immigration . No mention from Al Beb that this has an effect
Shh don’t mention the increase in population, it might lead to awkward questions being asked. I wonder if the water would be enough for pre 1997 population?
INBBC’s censored ‘reporting’ on Islamic jihad case in KENYA.
Compare and contrast:
1.) Daily Mail’
“British Muslim convert to face trial in Kenya over possession of explosives linked to al-Shabaab terror group”
Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2103799/British-Muslim-convert-face-trial-Kenya-possession-explosives-linked-al-Shabaab-terror-group.html#ixzz1mwkwNGfq
2.) INBBC’s censored version:
“Jermaine Grant to face Kenya bomb plot trial in May”
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-africa-17098703
I see your source of information is a football hoolligan / EDL blog. On balance, I think I’d probably find the BBC more reliable.
Yes, it’s those coarse working class oiks again.
So three days after iranian ships docked in Syria and started to unload weapons and what not and nothing from the bBC.
Funny enough they did the same thing when Russiana rms ships did likewise
And same again when the Russian fleet docked in Syria in Jan…Nothing.
Yet the story about how the Uk is going to send HMS Dauntless to the falklands at the end of March, well that was a right Human rights crime and had to be mentioned every chance they got. Unlike the thousands of people killed in Syria,
Funny that.
What is with these over-funded incompetent Beeboid broadcasters who cannot seem to utter a sentence without throwing in an obscenity?
This time it’s a weather forecaster Alex Deacon making a show of himself on TV on Saturday night. How is it even possible accidentally to come out with what he allegedly did? It doesn’t even fit. I can’t make any sense of it. Mind, the Beeboids have form for accidental-on-purpose obscenity in weather forecasting. I thought they’d given up on it, though, when they got rid of that oik who was notorious for finger gestures and other on-air antics.
http://www.thisislondon.co.uk/standard/article-24036871-outlook-poor-for-obscene-forecaster.do
Yes there are two or three like young Alex that fancy they are ‘performers’.
Alex, sonny, cut the c*** and just read your f****** autocue.
They don’t use autocue on the weather.
They obviously need to.
It wouldn’t work. You have the graphics set up, but the time you are given is alarmingly variable. You need to be able to lose or add 15 seconds at the drop of a hat. Can’t do that if you are using a foot pedal to scroll through to the summary script at speed.
Oh dear. So they have no option but to sack him then. Have they done it yet?
I see that the repugnant, racist fat walking sack of pus Dianne Fatty Abbot has quietly slipped back on the BBC and Sky daytime press reviews. Unbelievable when you consider how david Starkey was taken to the PC cleaners for speaking the truth! Mind you not surprising when you consider that she is from a minority group (according to Marxist scum) and as such is untouchable and can do what she likes without fear of losing her job or status. I really hate the politically correct dictatorship that has eating away at Western freedoms and commen sense like a cancer.
Looking at the BBC Mid-East webpage, I look for stories related to Israel and Palestinians and the only event I can find is this one:
Palestinian hunger strike goes on
This concerns the arrest by Israel of a leader of a Palestinian terrorist group, who subsequently went on a hunger strike. This story has been running for quite a few days now, and clearly the BBC think it deserves to be held on the main page, which fits it’s usual agenda.
In keeping with it’s agenda it decided to ignore completely that a mob of some 50 Palestinian Muslims stoned a group of Christian tourists atop Jerusalem’s Temple Mount on Sunday morning. Three of the Israeli police officers who acted to protect the Christian group were wounded by the stone-throwers.
Apparently also the attack is believed to have been instigated by the former Muslim mufti of Jerusalem, Ekrama Sabri, who told Palestinian media over the weekend that Jewish groups were planning to break into the mosques that occupy the holy compound and desecrate them. Sabri urged all local Muslims to protect the mosques from “the Israeli conspiracy against the city and its holy places.”
Of course it’s understandable that a group of Christian tourists could be mistaken for ultra religious Jews. Funny how the last time the BBC covered an almost identical story which happened in October 2009, the Palestinian stone throwers were acting under similar instructions from their ‘holy men’. You’d think they’d have learned to tell the difference by now.
Also ignored by the BBC is that Palestinian terrorists operating out of the Gaza Strip fired a Grad-type missile at the southern Israel city of Beersheva on Saturday. The projectile landed in an open area just outside Beersheva and did not cause any injuries or damage. Two more short-range rockets hit nearby Israeli towns.
Obviously they’re waiting for Israel to carry out a counter offensive before they decide to report about it. The only difference is then the headline can be ‘Israel bombs Gaza’
That rather silly arts R4 show at 7 had an item on the US Academy responsible for giving out the Oscars.
Shock and horror. Most of the members are white ,male and old. Something. anything must be done. How can it be permitted to continue? Pass some law against it and hurry up with affirmative action.
Yet another invented cause for the liberal beeboid to work itself (gender neutral) into a synthetic state of indignation about.
They really are a shower.
Has anyone ever counted just how many awards a McEwan, an Emin, a Goodyer or a Winslet can win in a year?
They seem to be picking up no manner of awards for doing only what they`re overpaid to do for fun anyway…ans still they`re squauking on in magazines or chat shows about lacking “self-esteem” or what have you?
Infantilised spoonfed freaks most of `em!
The socialist PC tyranny, indoctrination and mind control madness marches inexorably onwards:
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2103707/Mother-Nicola-Allen-slams-Griffin-Primary-School-branding-sons-question-racist-incident.html
We should all be very worried when an innocent child is hounded and interrogated by the thought police for an alleged hate crime. !984 anyone?!
Lord Prescott says he told Ed Miliband ‘wear a jacket’ – http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-17084965
An uncritical piece in praise of John Prescott. I wonder whether, in the name of balance, the BBC will fondly tell us next week about what a great guy Michael Hesiltine is…
Jeff
Actually Jeff, the BBC DO think Hesltine is a great guy, he is guaranteed to be a pro Europe, anti Maggie Blairite making non helpful comments about the Conservatives.
Span Ows –
Fair point, although they probably aren’t so keen on the coal mining redundancies he introduced. 🙂
Jeff
An uncritical piece in praise of John Prescott.
Is it not enough he is a permanent installation in the Green Rooms, but now we have to have each peral of wisdom that trips from his laips too?
“Lord Prescott has revealed the key advice he gave Ed Miliband on becoming party leader”
So… actually having policies that make sense and delivering them coherently… not so much. Worked for Lord Creosote of Hypocrisy, why not Mr. Miliband andf his merry band of brothers (well, bar one, actual brother).
And with the BBC in full PR shoring mode… not necessary.
anyone notice on the 6 o’clock news on radio 4 it was a tory free news,everyone had a go about the immigration news but didn’t here from the tories.Plenty of views but none from the woman herself,ed yes,the author of the report,etc…..Tory bashing non stop
We certainly did hear from the Home Secretary. She was the first clip in the first report. And it was made clear several times in the report that this was not a problem restricted to the current government. The next UK politics story was all about Conservative MPs attacking Vince Cable. If anyone is being “bashed” there it’s the Lib Dems and the Conservatives are doing the bashing.
Next was certainly audio from Mr Lansley’s encounter with the cuddly pensioner outside the health summit. But she was quite rightly labelled as a “trade union representative”. There was a clip from the PM and also from Ed Milliband (and it was also pointed out he agreed his party had started this process)
From the running order it looks like that was all the UK politics reports. And they sound as even handed and impartial as you’d expect from the BBC. I don’t think you can describe any bulletin featuring the Home Secretary, Prime Minister and a story arising from the concerns of backbench Tory MPs as a “Tory free news” or indeed “Tory bashing non stop”.
Still Reed, wild, Deborah, Number 7 and matthew rowe all heard something I didn’t. Did you listen to the 1800 yourselves?
Come off it, Mr Gregory!
This coalition has been in power for 21 months – the socialists were in power for 13 (long) years.The problems with the immigration service predated the coalition by several years, and a lot of the flawed practices were initiated by Labour. The coalition started the enquiry after just over a year in power after murky reports started coming out. To treat this as an evenhanded 50/50 problem between the two parties is hypocracy and bias of a very high order.
And how about highlighting the naked chutzpah and arrant political opportunism of the shadow Home Secretary, Yvette Cooper, berating the home secretary for something her own party was responsible for?
And while we’re at it, it’s very mealy mouthed of the BBC to describe the protester as a “trade union representative”. She’s a hard left militant, was a member of the Socialist Workers Party, and a militant Miners Strike Activist, who once shared a cell with Arthur Scargill’s wife! Not exactly your cuddly trade union representative, eh, Mr Gregory?
The problem you BBC apologists seem to have is that you think 2010 was Year Zero. You forget that for years we had Labour government spokesmen on, with no counterbalancing Opposition voices. I lost count of the number of times I shouted at the radio/televsion “What about the other point of view!” Now suddenly there is a Tory lead government, and there is a sudden reversion to putting the opposition’s arguments, no doubt in the “interests of balance”! (eg, the Today programme at 8-10 today with Alaister Darling on pontificating with no Government spokesman to counter him. It would never have happened in Gordon’s day!)
Forgive us if we are slightly cynical about BBC flacks talking about “balance”.
The BBC – “Bias is in our genes.”
Confirmation bias, innit?
Rubbish. Craig has given innumerable examples, using his template of minutes allowed and interruptions made – about as objective a method as seems to be possible in this context. I have never noticed you, Mr Gregory, making any attempt to refute any of these.
This comment about the 1800 and your post is interesting though. I saw the comment and thought “that’s terrible, if that’s true clear bias.” Bu then I checked the running order and then listened on the iplayer and discovered.
“it was a tory free news” – that’s not true.
“everyone had a go about the immigration news but didn’t here from the tories.Plenty of views but none from the woman herself” – that’s not true. The Home Secretary was the first clip in the bulletin.
“,ed yes,” – not true either. He was in a different report, after the PM and the script pointed up some difficult truths for him.
“Tory bashing non stop” – Not true either. But I’d expect that. But as I said it’s an especially bizarre accusation to level at a bulletin that based an entire report around the concerns of Tory backbenchers.
So you ask how did someone listen to this bulletin and come to such an erroneous conclusion. And the answer is exactly the same reason you shout at the radio/tv. Confirmation bias. Look it up.
I repeat, Craig has listed many examples of imbalance during BBC news and current affairs programmes, using his formula involving periods of time alloted and interruptions made. This does not take into account the tone of voice of the interviewer/moderater which is , I agree, a more subjective test. You have never responded to any of these postings.
Nor have you commented on the lack of comment by the BBC reporters on the hypocracy and political opportunism of the shadow home secretary.
Bleating “confirmation bias” is not enough.
I took it on trust that davejan had provided an accurate account. If you say that it is not accurate. Fair enough.
If Barack Obama does get re-elected this November, these precedents suggest his second term may be even harder going than his first. But in becoming the first black person to be elected to the White House, Obama has already demonstrated an extraordinary capacity to disregard precedents, and if he’s re-elected this autumn, he may yet surprise us all again. He may even surprise “the bankers”. – http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/magazine-17066912
All that’s missing is Ride of the Valykries as a soundtrack…
Jeff
Why aren’t the Tories monitoring this (and all the other examples obvious of bias) and doing something about it? It’s as if they *want* to be hounded out of power by the baying BBC and it’s army of followers/believers.
Newsnight’s new Political Editor’s debut tonight – Allegra Stratton.
Guess where she used to write……The Graun……….The Indie……and just for a little more leftward tilt —- The New Statesman.
It’s as yet unknown how many of the shadow cabinet she’s slept with.
Newsnight wheel out Allegra Stratton for her first lefty piece of bollocks.
So she interviews David Laws and manages not to tell us WHY he’s now a back bench MP (Laws is lucky not to be doing time with all thoser Labour MP’s)
Jeremy and his new friend Allegra show us the headlines of the mad old bat screeching at Lansley – but curiously omitted to tell us she’s been identified as a long time Worker’s Revolutionary Party activist who shared a jail cell with Scargill’s missus.
http://order-order.com/2012/02/20/scargills-granny-lansley-baiter-is-seasoned-lefty-agitator/
Perhaps she’s an old mate of theirs.
Concur with you both above.
I too wanted to see if the fearless BBC would remind us of why David Laws had to leave…but if he can be used to split the Coalition, then his part in fiddling his expenses can be quietly dropped.
I also wanted to see how Paxman would show the old woman actaully seeming to get physical with Lansley-surely he`s got a case in court…whiplash from that tongue of hers.
Earlier the BBC had made it clear that she just happened upon this, and didn`t ambush Lansley in any premediated way…but of course.
I too go to get my cat food from Downing St, when I`m ambling round the town centre.
At least we now know why the BBC are so keen on harvesting organs of the nearly-dead…they could make loads of grumpy old boilers from self-assembly kits, instead of having to wheel them into town from the Primrose Shipman Care Home.
Allegra was hopeless wasn`t she…surely yet another Oxbridge prep pony!
‘curiously omitted to tell us she’s been identified as a long time Worker’s Revolutionary Party activist’
Or, as the BBC calls it.. ‘reporting’ with just enough, but not too muchy.. ‘context’.
Allegra will fit right in.
I have just heard a report by Richard Black on the wireless and he didn’t mention climate change once.
I am shocked, I tell you. My flabber has been well and truly gasted.
Would you Adam and Eve it. The bBC actually defending Rupert Murdock for this political stance. Gee I wonder what it could be?
Scottish independence: Rupert Murdoch tweets ‘Let Scotland go and compete’
Typical left wing arse holes, not bothered who they get into bed with as long as he’s a prick.
As soon as the Heartland Institute documents and the patently fake document were released to blogs, Richard Black rushed to print.
Will he now rush to print the dramatic news that a noted Warmist with a blog at Huffington Post has now confessed to stealing the HI documents. He claims that the fake document had been sent to him – but his claim on that sounds ludicrous, and right from the start he had been fingerered because the fake text was similar to his own style of writing.
The Warmists are so frantic in their aim to propagandise us – who cares about accuracy, what’s wrong with a bit of fraud to support the case ?
I hope the HI continues its legal actions. And I hope it pursues Black and the idiots at the Guardian who swallowed the whole business so willingly and quickly.
Here is the link :
http://wattsupwiththat.com/2012/02/20/breaking-gleick-confesses/
http://dotearth.blogs.nytimes.com/2012/02/20/peter-gleick-admits-to-deception-in-obtaining-heartland-climate-files/
I hate this kind of crap…feel the shame, you nasty men. Your guilt is predetermined by your gender. Sexist?
Advert on Oxford Street shown only to women
The advertisement highlights the issue of women and girls in developing countries, who face poverty and discrimination, not getting the choice to decide how they want to lead their lives.
Males will not get to see the advertisement in order to make them aware about gender discrimination, the charity said.
So I guess I’m to be made to feel in some way responsible, as a white western male, for the oppression faced by women and girls in countries that I have never even visited. This campaign also presupposes that females in this country are already more aware of these issues than males, or are at least more receptive to learning about them. Males just need to go away and contemplate their unwitting culpability in the systemic oppression. It seems rather counter-productive to limit their message to 50% of the population, and reject the other half as unworthy.
Perhaps I could suggest a follow-up advert to you at Plan UK. As these countries that allow this kind of female oppression are predominantly in Africa, Asia and the Islamic world, might the next campaign detect skin colour and prevent the message being displayed to those with darker skin tones, to force them to consider their collective responsibility. Just a thought, as you’re trying to be so innovative and all that.
I really hate this kind of thing. Lefty, middle-class guilt tripping is so unproductive and divisive.
Plan UK – bugger off – I’ll give my money to someone that doesn’t treat me with such contempt. Patronising gits.
Plan UK? They’ve got plenty of time for white western men’s money, though. My Plan UK is for the coralling of all these bogus compassion seekers into secure detention centres. After processing & re-education, they would be released to spend the rest of their lives helping lonely elderly people in this country – doing something for their homeland, rather than all the sanctimonious wittering about the third world. It’s the cultural Marxist, leftopian mindset of these charities that’s turning Britain’s streets into the third world. Not the chariteers’ streets, though. Strange, that.
I would coral them into Hyde Park , arm them with machetes and take bets as they have to fight each other to death for two hours .
Then hang the survivors .
Obvious question but how will it detect those bull dykes that make up the feminist movement?
Would it trigger if Harman, Cooper or Abbott were detected? I doubt it, but Owen Jones or any male beeboid would def set the advert off.
More info about Plan UK at Fake Charities…
http://fakecharities.org/2009/03/charity-276035/
Leaving out fifty percent of the population would only matter if the aim was to actually accomplish anything. As we all know Liberal ‘protests’ are about massaging their egos and nothing else.
Paxo’s verdict on modern Britain: The BBC’s too PC, the Empire’s misunderstood and the Queen is brilliant, says ex-republican
Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2104003/Jeremy-Paxmans-verdict-modern-Britain-The-BBCs-PC-Empires-misunderstood-Queen-brilliant-says-ex-republican.html#ixzz1mzeKH9Qy
xpanding the BBC World Service as a way to spread influence, eh? What a giveaway, I don’t care how great an interrogator he is, or how much of an outspoken maverick he’s playing, or even if he gets cheers here for calling the BBC out as too PC.. Paxman is as bad and dangerous as the rest of them with that attitude. Keep your damned influence out of my country.
Quite. I’m quite content to see the UK having certain kinds of influence around the world, just not the BBC’s brand of influence. I’d rather not see their anti-patriotic, self-loathing contempt for all our traditions and history being broadcast to the rest of the world as though it were our nation’s natural disposition.
Paxman is the licensed jester-who`s been there long enough to tickle the feet of whoever is his line manager, with his “mot justes” and “bon mots”.
Old, past it, Oxbridge but been around long enough to go off piste as long as there`s no threat of Snow…his even more-tethered toady on Channel 4.
The Guardians soggy bottom boys think that their windsock is a sandbag as well…that Paxo is their benchmark and takes liberal elitism “to the max”-only shows how narrow the spectrum is for free and independent thought these days.
Does Jeremy PAXMAN know where he really stands politically?
For all his new-found apparent doubting of BBC ‘political correctness’, and for all his positive re-appraisal of the role of the British Empire in history, he was obsequious in the presence of arch leftist Noam CHOMSKY on ‘Newsnight’ quite recently.
And as David P (above), points out, the BBC is planning to expand its global ‘multicultural’ empire beyond its present Foreign Office monitored output; soon, BBC globally intends to join in an Al Jazeera-type project in providing a more thorough-going Islamic output for Muslims internationally which is totally non-critical of the tenets of Islam and of 1,300 years of Islamic imperialism. Of course, this will be paid for by British licence taxpayers, whose turn it must be to revolt against all this.
Still, Paxman’s current political soul-searching, in his pre-retirement phase bodes well for the possibility of the novelty of open debate among erstwhile politically repressed Beeboids.
I too am no fan of Paxman, but even a stopped clock is right twice a day.
It’s odd how the BBC responds to his criticism, when he questioned the logic of moving the BBC out of its west London Television Centre base to the newly renovated Broadcasting House in central London. (The project, which is still ongoing, has cost more than £1 billion so far, at a time when the corporation has been forced to shed thousands of jobs and shave hundreds of millions of pounds from its budget.
The reply from a ‘BBC spokesman’ was “We are surprised that Jeremy did not know that the move to Broadcasting House will save the BBC more than £700 million. “The BBC is reducing the size of its estate and Broadcasting House will become the primary BBC site in London and for the first time in the BBC’s history key network and global services in Television, Radio, News and Online will work together on one site.”
To my knowledge they are not selling off property, so will still be maintaining their existing ones. They have also spent further hundreds of millions moving studios around the country, so exactly how this is supposed to save £700 million is not explained in any way that makes sense. But it’s easy to say, and perhaps that is why Paxman “did not know”, and is also NOT WRONG. As he puts it – What organisation – at a time when it has no money, allegedly – would move from cheap square footage in west London to Oxford Circus?’
I would add – ‘and then claim it was doing it to save money’.
We all know the answer.
Electric cars are wonderful, they will sell by the bucket load, its going to be the new industrial revolution, what could possiiibly gu wrang??
This BBC report from 2010 says it all:
Nissan is to build its new electric car – the Leaf – at its Sunderland plant, the Japanese company has announced.
Hundreds of jobs are expected to be safeguarded once production begins in 2013 – part of a £420m investment in electric cars.
The investment is backed by a £20.7m government grant and up to £220m from the European Investment Bank.
Ministers have also backed Ford’s planned £1.5bn investment in cleaner engines with £360m in loan guarantees.
‘Vote of confidence’
About 50,000 Nissan Leaf hatchbacks, which run entirely on lithium-ion batteries, will roll off the Sunderland production line a year.
Lord Mandelson said the development was a “fantastic vote of confidence” in the plant and its “excellent workforce”.
It was good news all the way, figures plucked out of the air with no more meaning than hot air and the BBC forgot to include any notes of caution nor did they reserve judgement or even allow critics/deniers to comment. So two years later the BBC toady show comes up with the hilarious line that “electric cars have not exactly been a success” Oh yeah beeboids, the pope is a catholic and bears really do sh*t in the woods.
And so from the breathless BBC fanfare to the reality, electric cars have been a stunning faliure outstripping even the most cynical deniers predictions, the Nissan leaf production estimates has been cut and cut and cut and the UK government that promised the taxpayere that their investment would pay off big is now very quiet about how much the taxpayer will lose on the deal.
Only rich people can afford to buy one because you need to run a real car for any more than a run to the shops, even the taxpayer subsidies have only tempted regime/quango/stooge companies to buy them, normal people are stayiing away in droves.
The estimates that the BBC pimped only two years ago turn out to have been a bag of lies, the BBC are hooked on pimping lies.
‘And in other ne… um.. breathless BBC fanfare to the reality…’
World class.
And unique.
Plus trusted. Don’t forget trusted.
Imaginer if folk, especially those in power, based their decisions on what teh BBC ‘reports’, and/or the preceptions of the public swallowing it all.
Oh.
Surely the BBC could set us all an example by attempting to move their spider plants and amethyst crystals from London to Salford using an electric van.
Think there`s a power point at Newport Pagnell…and would make a fine programme…especially if Mandelson would drive it in in a thunderstorm.
Tell him Salford is a dinky parish in his Lordships Enclosure of Foy on the Wold, or wherever his title says is his!
Hilarious!
Met Office ‘needs supercomputers’
The Met Office needs new supercomputers to make confident extreme weather warnings and more accurate long-term forecasts, a group of MPs says.
Have we just entered the twighlight zone, gone back through time?
How long ago was it when the BBC peddled the met office plea for bigger and better super computers? The new mega expensive super computers that the taxpayer coughed up for were supposed to offer the met office the power to predict weather and climate into the next century.
Just hand over a few hundred million for a new super computer and we will be able to predict waht the weather will be down to a few miles way into the future with amazing accuracy and detail they promised and the BBC peddled and pimped these lies and now the met office far from admitting they were lying through their teeth the first time now want even more money to replace the computers they bought sucha short time before.
What the met office needs is a industrial scale sacking programme.
And some common-sense, right-of-centre, seaweed.
Good job Eisenhower didn’t have to depend on today’s Met Office for the weather forecast inorder to give the “Go” order for the D-Day landings. It was a R.A.F. officer, calculating on paper, who correctly predicted the window in the atrocious stormy weather that allowed the landings to go ahead. Who says weather forecasting has progressed?
It matters not how big the computer – when rubbish is put in only rubbish can be spewed out.
http://www.humanevents.com/article.php?id=34634
Peter Gleick, a prominent figure in the global warming movement, confessed to stealing electronic documents from The Heartland Institute in an attempt to discredit and embarrass a group that disagrees with his views. This is a serious offence, and one that casts a very negative light at the behaviour of climate change activists.
Yet on the BBC we hear nothing about this latest development, if you recall Richard Black went to town on the alleged Heartland Institutes emails, as always with Black he went on the attack without taking into account that many bloggers were already casting doubt on the alleged veracity of the emails.
Will we be reading any follow up story from Black on this amazing development?, I doubt it, but we should remember that the pro-AGW activists have just had their first Johann Hari moment!.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/peter-h-gleick/-the-origin-of-the-heartl_b_1289669.html
“My judgment was blinded by my frustration with the ongoing efforts — often anonymous, well-funded, and coordinated — to attack climate science and scientists and prevent this debate, and by the lack of transparency of the organizations involved.”
Credit where due. The BBC’s glee club are seldom anonymous. The rest seems to fit.
Even the ‘closed for comments’. Seems HuffPo is a’watetight oversight’ fan too.
When it suits.
Now, about Jonesey’s ‘report’ again…
Missed that opportunity: ‘BBC’s Gleik Club”:)
Black rushed to print a long piece on the original Heartland story – failing to check whether the documents were genuine. Whereas he had sat on ClimateGate I for many days.
I posted on this, in this thread, 7 hours ago. Black hasn’t posted a single line, as far as I know – even though the Gleick confession is a dramatic development in a story he had already worked on.
I expect the Warmists are trying to frame their response to all this. “Fake but accurate” was their original response. Now I predict that Black will fail to mention that Gleick is being directly accused of authoring the fake libellous document, he will persist with the nonsense that someone sent the document to Gleick.
I wonder what happened to real scientists
Maybe Gregory and his chums at the BBC should do a quick revision of how the scientific method works.
By applying the scientific method you can see how shaking the CAGW theory really is.
And if anyone wants to question the Aussie Professor here – base it on what he says and not that he may have bought 10 Woodbines in the 1970s.
Delingpole’s on to it:
http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/news/jamesdelingpole/100138560/peter-gleick-the-johann-hari-of-climate-science/
“to attack climate science and scientists and prevent this debate, and by the lack of transparency of the organizations involved.”
Amazing, isn’t it…this claim that it’s the skeptics that are trying to prevent debate! Reminds us all which side’s mantra is ‘the debate is over’.
…and then the doozy…that the skeptics are the ones devoid of transparency. Which side is it that kept it’s corrupt approach to science from prying eyes, in case this was to further increase the lack of certainty amongst the public – which would in turn open up the debate again.
It seems it’s becoming more and more desperate.
At about 7.20 Tuesday Radio 4 the Today programme had what could only be described as a party political broadcast on behalf of Labour on Education. It took the form of a preprepared question and answer session between Sarah Montague and Steven Twigg. Not a single interruption, shortish questions that Steven was then answered without him needing a second to think about his response.
Deborah,
I also listened to the interview, I was also struck by how friendly and easy the interview seemed to be.
The problem for Twigg and Montague was that even with the easy ride given to Twigg he still had no real policies, instead he came across as yet another politician who was all mouth no substance.
Twigg was the breathless girlyman who squealed with joy” the night they got Portillo” in 1997.
He`s also gay, and so in no danger of having kids to send to the schools that he presumes to speak for.
In short, the BBCs damp dream of a left leaning politico…and that he has a wind tunnel where his brain should be makes him a perfect media sleb, when Prescott is buried in the Bradford Hole.
Portillo presumably is ushered into the Bebb in a way as to avoid the plaque to the all too well known Tory that fell in `97…maybe Pattens of `92 is there too!
I thought Portillo was rehabilitated into the Kremloin since he “outed” himself ?
The BBC leftie and gay – root, branch and twigg…
See my comments following David Gregory’s posting earlier.
I was reading the Guardians latest defense of Gleick, what was instructive was the defense put forward by the so called Rapd Reaction Squad. They are claiming tat Glieck is a whistleblower who’s only crime is that of being to quick to publish his claims, if Richard Black deems to comment on this scandal look for more of the same type of spin…
Yet, if you read Gleick’s statment it seems that he has managed to even mess up his defence:
Actually, Peter’s memo has a serious logic flaw.
“I received an anonymous document in the mail describing what appeared to be details of the Heartland Institute’s climate program strategy”
“an” — A single document released.
“I solicited and received additional materials directly from the Heartland Institute under someone else’s name.”
Multiple documents released.
Yet what are the dates?
Feb 13 for the single fake document originally hypothesized to be Gleickian.
Jan 16 for the rest
You have the right to remain silent.
Anything you say can and will be used ……
Innocent until proven guilty, but I sure would like to see this guy’s hard-drive.
As Mr. Black and the rest of the Gleik Club will likely intone.. <sigh>… <yawn>… but what about those improperly disposed of other books eh..eh!!!`?
Let’s stir up a war in distraction quick.
“I solicited and received additional materials directly from the Heartland Institute under someone else’s name.”
Say, didn’t the BBC used to claim to be shocked – shocked – by this sort of blagging back when the News of the World was doing it? Or is this another ‘unique’ case?
MUST KEEP JOHN PRESCOTT IN THE NEWS, MUST GIVE HIM AIR TIME, MUST SHOW HOW HUMAN AND CARING HE IS.
The puff piece to end all puff pieces from the BBC toady show about how this fat thug has a hard time showing affection for his sons…aaaaah…aint he niiice eh?
As he explains in his own words:
‘aah luvs me sonz ta deff rite but ah cunt cuddle em dya knaw wot I meen like?’
Yeah John we know exactly what you mean mate and the translation goes like this:
‘I am running for office again and I need to keep my name on the air, I need to look lovely and human so the BBC is more than happy to do a human interest puff piece to show how wonderful and just like the public I am’ BTW vote for John Prescott, hes a great bloke you know.
The BBC, always ready and willing to give a labour has been a helping hand to get elected. Obviously the BBC helpfulness will not extend to other candidates, no time you see.
Heard the intro to this…with Jim Naughtie saying the next piece put the Lord Prescotts pearls of love to “some men in the pub…so to speak”.
Well I turned off knowing that those BBC Sound Affects records, as well as extras from Ambridge had earned their storage space for the day.
As if ANYONE up there in thr Today studio could possibly dare find a pub, let alone find a man to speak to them…with the one exception!
But I believe that he`s in a stable relationship anyway…
Cassandra – what a good wheeze to get the “c” word in!
Old Fatty Prescott, the bruiser, kind of cuddly in a lardy sort of way.
Truth be told I really didnt notice until now =-O Im shocked I tells ya
Many and varied appolgies for lowering the tone, forgiveness please.
I nearly gagged when reading this:
British culture may be our new great industry
The whole nauseating piece reads like a BBC propectus.
Truly vomit-inducing. It could just as easily have been penned by the BBC’s ‘other’ Bragg (but with scores of spelling mistakes).
A priceless article from one of the beeboid aristos, one of their grand old onanists. Whenever you read something like ‘intellectual foray of the Who’, you know old Malvinas Bragg has been playing with his pen again. The word ‘pretentious’ can never do him justice. Some of the comments are blistering: ‘You are the King of the Chattering Classes who have sold this country to the EU and to the unbridled immigrants…talentless ****, with what was then a trendy accent, like Bakewell you got on because of your looks and your silly voice…And lots more. Worth a glance. They’ve got old Mel’s card marked, the old Poseur-General. The thing about most ‘national treasures’ is that they should be buried.
Love this comment…
Venom from a Left-wing sorceror lord: “culture is your new food, eat it, work till your organs burst and in return I will give you culture”.
Do not resist his argument in the world of ideas, instead find the receptacle (clue: it’s probably the huge old globe in the photograph) and release his soul. Beheading him might also work, but his blood will spawn quangos, award ceremonies, and charitable organisations as soon as it touches the ground.
Do those of you who no longer pay for the TV licence, declare that you no longer watch TV, or simply stop paying?
I tell them that their Implied Right Of Access is denied to my front door and I dont need a licence . I am not a customer or anybody who has dealings with the BBC and to send their threatening letters is contrary to the UN Declaration 1948 article 12 .
I have informed them I do have a TV, wired up capable of recieving broadcasts if I wish , but I dont wish and it is not prof of me watching live TV and breaking the law . The same as their staff have cars that are capable of breaking the law by speeding .
Theyve left me alone for a number of years now .
I wasn’t aware that Alistair Campbell was a recovering alcoholic.
One would imagine that steps 4, 5, 8 and 9 of the recovery programme would be extremely time consuming for such a man!
They would be time consuming for a person with a consciense. For Alistair, he will just skip past those steps, he’s never done any harm to anyone, only good in partnership with Tony (no surname required, we’re all on first name terms with that regular, decent sort of guy).
You see, if he were a real villain, he wouldn’t be invited regulary onto TV programmes, especially not the nation’s broadcaster, the BBC. He’s also a Labour man, and we all know they never set out to harm anyone, that’s the job of the nasty party.
I will rot in jail before I give the BBC scum a penny 😀
The BBC is a major social force in our lives.
It must be because on Mastermind in the General Knowledge section every contender now gets asked a question about the BBC.
Sorry: Did I say
The BBC is a major social force in our lives.
I of course meant to say.
The BBC is a dog licking it’s won a**e.
My bad.
Anti-SHALE GAS campaigners at BBC-greenie (e.g. R.HARRABIN), won’t like this:
“FrackNation: pay one dollar, become a movie mogul, save the world! ”
By James Delingpole
http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/news/jamesdelingpole/100138480/fracknation-pay-one-dollar-become-a-movie-mogul-save-the-world/
One reminder: this BBC Harrabin-
“BBC’s Mr Climate Change and £15,000 grants from university rocked by global warning scandal”
Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2063737/BBCs-Mr-Climate-Change-15-000-grants-university-rocked-global-warning-scandal.html#ixzz1n12aVK53
BBC-NUJ links with local council in calling English Defence League (EDL) ‘outsiders’, but NOT calling violent ‘Asian’ gang which attacked English white boy ‘outsiders’.
BBC-NUJ does not state that its own official NUJ policy is one of opposing the EDL.
“EDL ‘outsiders should not come to Hyde'”
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-manchester-17107605
Given the BBC-NUJ’s political position (unackowledged by BBC-NUJ here) of opposition to the EDL, and given that the EDL’s own views on why it intends to march are not included, here is a link from the EDL website:
National Demonstration: 25th February 2012, Hyde, Greater Manchester
And… they’re baaaaack….
On 20 Feb 2012, at 15:49, xx wrote:
It is always a pleasure to get a personal reply, and I appreciate the time taken to do so.
However, as somewhat of a veteran now of the BBC complaints process, I am getting more and more intrigued as to the variation that can transpire back in form, quantity and quality vs. the single means of entry the BBC licence fee paying public has to enter the system. Just had a snotty note from ‘Complaints’ on another, saying that I need to quote a code; tricky when these are assigned, or not, on whim.
Also a BBC editor replying on behalf of a BBC editor, to say, in essence, you believe what I have complained about is without foundation because as far as you are concerned all is just fine is, well, rather a waste of everyone’s time and gets us nowhere.
Sadly I don’t find the note on the audience log or ‘word in the market rate talent’s shell-like’ route very credible any more either, as the instances of lapse seem to be getting more frequent and/or egregious.
Clearly Nick Robinson endeavours even when away on holiday to keep across political developments and reports and it’s a reflection of his dedication that he wishes to do so.
He does seem dedicated. Though I fear I must be amongst those who are actually unclear if what he is dedicated to is what might be expected of a experienced, impartial political news editor of any hue, much less one from the public broadcast sector.
On a purely professional basis, I might share from my industry that ‘phoning it in’ when on hols (which he is, a lot) is not viewed positively if it is done poorly and creates more work for those back at the office tidying up , etc, as you are now having to do. Only in the public sector, where such extra costs incurred can be passed to the funders, namely the licence fee-paying public, will this be accepted so phlegmatically, one suspects.
This is worthy of note:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/editorialguidelines/page/guidelines-accuracy-introduction
Feel free to pass it on.
On this occasion, the additional detail he was able to read as the day progressed warranted a further update to his blog. But it clarified and added to rather than contradicted what he’d previously said.
Er.. no. It highlighted editorial by omission and a clear enthusiasm to take what was wanted and spin it into what was, even if that was not the case. If you care to read the actual comments throughout the day on the blog in question, he started badly and went downhill later on, simply digging a further hole. So on top of bias, he tried to cover up by claiming to not have known everything before committing an opinion to print… because he wasn’t there to do a proper a job.
This was not viewed with sympathy; not even by those more prone to allowing him the odd lapse in professional judgement.
7. David M
14TH FEBRUARY 2012 – 9:56
Sorry, but on what planet is the argument possibly moving towards Balls? It’s a wonder the UK still HAS a triple A rating which – frankly – it wouldn’t have if Labour had been able to continue with their incessant spending.
And while the word of one BBC employee about the conduct of another is always noteworthy, if predictable, in comparison I merely look to the highest rated comments on the thread. You are kind of a majority of one (two, including the author). Lucky it got closed, as seems to happen, just shy of another magic century.
So even objectively, it’s hard to credit where you are trying to lead, and possibly terminate this.
But one admires to doggedness of ploughing on in trying to bring it to a conclusion.
Both the chancellor and shadow chancellor, as Nick pointed out, claimed the ratings alert as an endorsement of their position.
That was noted. Factual and hardly a surprise. Thanks for the insight.
The political reality is that most viewers will hear the headline that the AAA rating is potentially under threat and conclude things aren’t going well.
The BBC has now established a poor precedent in ‘speaking for the nation’ (I have an ongoing complaint outstanding regarding Paul Mason doing so, and at odds with clear fact) on ‘reality’, political or otherwise, so forgive me for being less than impressed at any claim to reading ‘most’ of the the viewers’ minds in what they ‘hear’ now.
That’s what the final line of Nick’s original post was alluding to in terms of going Ed Balls’ way.
Might I suggest that professional writers, especially in the febrile world of politics, and more so from a claimed impartial news source, could do well to avoid ‘alluding’ to anything, especially when it seldom goes, or ends well?
But since the Moody’s report warned against any fiscal loosening, he felt it sensible to update in order to flag the extra detail available to him – precisely for reasons of impartiality and clarity.
Well, good for him to discover more, if not an adequate level of ‘sense’ as the day progressed. Rather highlighting the value of waiting a while, and sharing news vs. desires when more certain.
Nevertheless the headline impression point – and original final line – remains a reasonable political assessment for him to have made.
Taken in totality I didn’t think so. Interesting I have had occasion of late to query the headlines (there do seem ‘versions’ depending on medium, from twitter to mobile to online) and the excuse attempted is that in there somewhere is something that may balance out. Or, worse, if what was printed last Thursday is weighed vs. what might be next Monday, all will end up evens. Not convinced.
And after what amounts to a zero factually or in any other way persuasive attempt as above, still am not. More importantly, until point of closing, almost none of Mr. Robinson’s online blog audience seem too convinced either. To repeat, in complaints, BBC employees saying BBC output is fine because BBC employees think so is interesting, but hardly effective in the absence of credible argument why.
So we are back at square one. Don’t worry; it happens a lot. Please now be so kind as to offer the next level to which I can progress my complaint.
There was certainly no question of resorting to “best guesses or bias” as you suggest.
This is why you need to relinquish the task of explanation higher up the chain, as I live in hope of getting to a person who does not simply intone ‘we are right because we are’ and tell me what I suggest is not open to question.
But I genuinely appreciate the feedback and have of course forwarded your complaint on to Nick.
As stated, I do recognise the time committed, but wish it moved things on more. But rest assured in turn it is always of value to get these en route, and I will be sure to share it with those who maintain an interest from this side of the fence too.
{Complaint title:} Ediotorial based on best guesses and bias
{Complaint:} “Update 1.20pm: The detail of what Moody’s are saying is only
just reaching me in the middle of nowhere on my half term break.”
So, the BBC’s senior political editor appears not to have had much clue what
he was writing about before 1.20pm, yet proceeded to commit to a long post
on the subject beforehand anyway.
And his excuse, such as it can be deemed, is that he was away on school
holidays, of which he appears to enjoy an awful lot.
Might I suggest the BBC try and employ professionals who take their jobs
seriously, and are concerned with their credibility in being impartial too.
{URL:} http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-17025472
Brilliant! How have you avoided the dreaded “expedited complaints handling procedure”?
Telling us that most viewers will conclude things aren’t going well because some agency said UK’s rating might be at risk, is another helping of that Ergo school of non sequiturs.
I expect most viewers, properly informed (if not by the Beeboid Corporation) are perfectly capable of holding the view that things are going well but of course other things might blow in at some point. Then again they might not…
driving back this morning
the nikki campo show 5live phone in, utter utter tripe, is Iran dangerous?
redeemed for a very brief couple of minutes, by D Murray …
yep! outdone themselves this morning ,
press tv iran not dangerous …
mehdi hasan iran not dangerous …
a couple of UAF/Soc Worker twats, iran not dangerous …
this intellect insulting drone, nosedives into ….ta ra!
that Israel is the greatest terrorist state????…… OFF SWITCH!
back on … V Drearybyshire even worse, drones on with the religious discrimination patter, trumpeting a group concerned with, and called
“faith matters” … thinly disguised, ought to be called Islam matters …
as they are dredging for anyone to provide material on instances of … surprise surprise 😀 … you guessed it!.
The unicorn of Islamo-FAUX-bia 😀
ie, are there by any chance, any muslims out there, waiting to expand their inbuilt victim mentality eh! …. thats it, for the rest of the day… OFF SWITCH!
“Angry Afghans rally over Quran disposal at US base,” by D Riechmann Associated Press, Feb 21
el beeb goes into full on pantwetting mode highlighting “sincerest apologies”, “afghan koran protests spreading” etc etc
even provides a map of where said burning occurred 😀
Nato apologises for Afghan Koran ‘disposal’
ohhh! brother!
OH, burn the fuclin’ lot of ’em. Sorry, Mr. Muslim, sir, they all fell on the fire. Sorry? What am I thinking…
‘Jihadwatch’:-
Afghanistan: Enraged crowd of 2,000 rallies, shouting “Die, die, foreigners!” over alleged Qur’an desecration at U.S. air base, U.S. General abjectly apologizes, orders investigation
[Excerpt]:
“General Allen clearly has now idea how weak and pusillanimous his repeated apologies in this video will make him appear to many, if not most, of ‘the noble people of Afghanistan.’ He should know enough about Islamic culture to know that it respects strength and sees apologizing and attempts at conciliation as weakness, only to be despised.
“Note also the General’s eager endorsement of Sharia provisions regarding treatment of the Qur’an, and unquestioning acceptance of the fundamental proposition that the burning of these Qur’ans was something heinous and to be apologized for in the first place.”
I don’t suppose there’s been any mention of the way the Saudi government confiscates Bibles from visitors to their country and shreds them by the thousand?
Nothing to see, nothing happening, move on.
AND in a triple whammy of either simpering sycophantism, or deliberate obfuscation today, i put the radio on coming home, to hear 3 MEN (hmmm?) … have appeared in court … uh oh! grooming/raping/abusing young girls … UH! oh! these men all related … UH! OH! … from the same village in Pakistan … HELLO! use the same mosque? etc.
No talk of korans/fawning on about which er religion?… this time though, about how it turns so many of its adherrents,(like its founder) into paedophile rapists, mandated by its ideology ….. funny that
I’m no astrophysicist but surely the illustration leading Distant ‘waterworld’ is confirmed should be labeled artist’s impression? If astronomers had actually photographed a planet orbiting a star other than the Sun wouldn’t that be the scientific news of the year?
Could we have a ‘Stories the BBC forgot to mention’ thread?
I could fill a whole thread myself, but will start the ball rolling with this one:
http://www.european-freedom-initiative.org/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=64%3Ateenagers-kidnapped-and-raped-by-muslim-gang&catid=39%3Aeu-news-england&Itemid=60
Good to see the BBC is maintaining its balanced reporting. Newsnight just appointed a new Political Editor. Surprisingly she is an Ex Guardian journalist. Well that should act as a counter to all those rabid right wingers at the BBC.
Well she certainly wasn’t employed for her oratorical skills. She didn’t manage to string a sentence together last night without stuttering, stammering and constantly falling over her words.
PlaysTheBlues: Surprisingly she is an Ex Guardian journalist.
She was apparently an ex- Beeboid when she was at The Grauniad! Worked as a producer on Newsnight, The Daily Politics, This Week, according to online sources such as wiki.
The bBCs so called defence experts.
Iran says pre-emptive strike on ‘enemies’ possible
An Iranian military commander has said Iran would take pre-emptive action against its enemies if it felt its national interests were endangered.
So reading the above what does the bBC have to say on the matter? Well nothing, just like they remain silent on how 2 Iranian ships are currently unloading weapons in Syria.
So here’s the question that the bBC isn’t asking: Why would Iran attack first.
Its military is third rate compared to the neighbours never mind the West or Israel. So if Iran did attack Western assets first (terrorism?) why would they do so. Could it that if the West retaliated the Iranians could publically declare that in the interests of honour they have decide to develop a Nuclear capability and that in good old bBC fashion here is one they produced earlier???
Instead the bbC’s so called experts .You know those who talk for hours on the wests caperbilities where they are going wrong and how it is all down to global warming sorry Israel. Appear stuck for words here. Must be all those tiny Islamic cock’s they are chewing on ,which has them breathless.
The Paedophile trial in Liverpool is now being reported, we await the BBC’s version
http://uk.news.yahoo.com/men-passed-girls-around-sex-172251234.html
How dare you post this you racist Nazi Fascist! These are the enrichers of our vibrant society!
The victims were only pieces of white working-class scum, nothing to worry about.
Even if you do believe that drugging and raping little kids is wrong, you have to realise that it’s far outweighed by the benefits of ‘diversity’.
Free Gaza!
Vote SWP!
Thanks My site. I am aware of the argument -seen on some posts -that objections to wearing the Burka must carry responsibility. If these children had been wearing Burkas they would not incite men to rape them. So it is correct, far right neo facists who oppose wearing Burkas are to blame
BBC defends Houston TV coverage-
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/entertainment-arts-17114756
I don’t see why the death of a celebrity warrants massive coverage from the BBC.
I’d bet that they gave it far more coverage than they did to the funerals of Edward Heath or Ronald Reagan.
Jeff
Edward Heath, was he a Conservative?
No, he was a Destructive.