Monday and this is well overdue – a bit like taking the axe to the BBC License fee! Over to you…
OPEN THREAD…
Bookmark the permalink.
Search Biased BBC
Recent Comments
- StewGreen April 24, 2024 at 9:42 pm on Midweek 24th April 2024Bylines Times is a crank conspiracy website for Guardianland people It's biased as hell I looked up their latest YouTube...
- Philip_2 April 24, 2024 at 9:39 pm on Midweek 24th April 2024Reading this from 2012. I was wondering what had changed since.(dated;3 April 2012) The secret report at heart of BBCâs...
- tomo April 24, 2024 at 9:20 pm on Midweek 24th April 2024Ms Maher is going to show up on the BBC, isn't she? https://x.com/realchrisrufo/status/1783224397635133537
- tomo April 24, 2024 at 8:43 pm on Midweek 24th April 2024and then there's Mitch McConnell... https://twitter.com/banthebbc/status/1783208476598005943
- Fedup2 April 24, 2024 at 8:36 pm on Midweek 24th April 2024Maybe it might find a more suitable country rather than being a parasite on a culture - country - for...
- Flotsam April 24, 2024 at 8:21 pm on Midweek 24th April 2024The Japanese population are very much more widely educated in Science and Engineering, technology literate. They know unscientific Green non...
- Mustapha Sheikup al-Beebi April 24, 2024 at 8:15 pm on Midweek 24th April 2024"Dr" Shula Moss-ShagmyEmu [Sorry! I overindulged yesterday!] should know that the St George flag is that of England, not Britain...
- Fedup2 April 24, 2024 at 7:51 pm on Midweek 24th April 2024Tomo - you really really shouldnât have ⌠I wonder if anyone really taught them to March âŚ.? But A...
- Fedup2 April 24, 2024 at 7:48 pm on Midweek 24th April 2024That bull ring thing is nice isnât it ?
- Fedup2 April 24, 2024 at 7:41 pm on Midweek 24th April 2024From the DT - quite an entertaining piece STARTS The head of ITV has said the BBC cannot keep âbleatingâ...
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
May I commend…
http://www.maxfarquar.com/2012/03/free-speech-bbc-three-live-debate/
The irony factor is laready beyond 11.
Has anyone else noticed how little of the ‘Syrian side’ we’re getting in the current conflict? When those nasty Joowz are attacking those poor Palestinians we get endless bollocks from the BBC about being balanced.
Also, the BBC seem to be reciting the ‘claims’ of the Syrian ‘freedom fighters’ that they are slaughtering men and boys, yet on the news last night there appeared to be plenty of men and boys around.
But what is interesting is if you remember when the Muslims attacked the school (Beslan) in Russia a few years back the BBC were VERY KEEN not to paint the Muslim terrorists as extremists at the time.
One from the ‘two wrongs make a BBC lack of irony’ files…
Media Guardian @mediaguardian BBC boss says Sky does not give CBBC and CBeebies prominence on EPG gu.com/p/36xjt/tf
Ello, ello, ello…
BBCwaste @BBCwaste
@liarpoliticians BBC trying to erase record of Miliband trainwreak? Surprise surprise.
What’s all this then? Watertight overisght kicking in again? What possibly could be the reason?
LOL even the BBC cannot polish a turd. Ed Milliband on Vicky D.
Ed Miliband, the gargling gargoyle with the slippery banana-ridden brother. What a pair – if you didn’t laugh, you’d cry. With the Balls character, they’d make a Cray-like team, worthy of apprehension by “Nipper” Read.
Red Ed was just awful really really awful. I almost felt sorry for him. Almost.
Still waiting for the BBC to put this up on iPlayer…think theyr`re probably frantically editing it as I write.
I imagine a few hapless interns on the filter system for incoming calls won`t be getting a lift home tonight will they?
Chukka Ummuna will be shoehorned into the liebor top job shortly
Yes, they have been bigging him up for a while, also David Miliband it ubiquitous in the media and when he is on gets the “God” treatment. I suspect a Milimajor/Ummuna ‘dream ticket’ will be revealed a year before a general election.
I notice the BBC lot don’t seem that happy over the proposed mansion tax.
Could it be because beeboids can dodge the 50p tax by working for their own company but most of them probably live in 2 million plus houses in Islington and Hampstead.
I note that our beloved state broadcaster is missing ONE THING about why Nissan are building more cars here.
NO STRIKES
Toyota and Nissan are located in probably some of the most ‘militant’ areas of the 70’s, yet now are the most productive.
The workers are not dragged by the nose by halfwitted moroic thick union bosses who are only interested in “getting the Tory scum out”
I’m sure the BBC will point that out at some time won’t they?
Evan Davis on Today at 2hrs 54mins 50secs in, http://www.bbc.co.uk/iplayer/console/b01cvpyv
promoting a personal agenda again when asking a question about prosecution guidance for dealing with protestors who maybe commit a minor offence. He asks whether it crosses the line if someone at a protest perhaps gets a little bit drunk…after “having some drinks or even drugs and in a wild moment throws a stone or something.”
So there you have Davis, when talking about prosecutable criminal offences, putting the taking of drugs in with having some drinks, as if they are the same. They are not. Taking some drinks is not illegal. Taking drugs is.
Why is he allowed to get away with using the public broadcaster to promote his pet causes and talk about illegal activity as if it isn’t?
Today looks more and more like Davis’s playpen these days.
“Yesterday”, a Freeview channel recycling old bbc programmes, got my blood boiling just now (12.10 am). Peter Snow said the Falklands were originally settled by Argentina (and of course, that Thatcher only went to war for electoral reasons). But even left-inclined wikipedia has this to say about the islands, meaning that they were never owned by the Argies –
“In 1774, economic pressures leading up to the American Revolutionary War forced Great Britain to withdraw from many overseas settlements.[20][21] Upon withdrawal the British left behind a plaque asserting her continued claim. Spain maintained its governor until 1806 who, on his departure, left behind a plaque asserting Spanish claims.”
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Falkland_Islands
Argentina was only invented in 1810.
Indeed, if the UK are to have any talks (they shouldn’t even think about it) it needs to be with France and/or Spain.
Ian,
“Peter Snow said the Falklands were originally settled by Argentina”
No he didn’t.
From the programme; “the Argentinians did control the islands for nearly a decade until 1833“.
Ya big dummy.
‘Ya big dummy.’
Dez, as you are here again assisting Dr. G etc in their flounce and bale high ground securing in future on the basis f what othere folk write being enough to reason to not play any more with those who simply ask polite questions, any thoughts from your archive on the BBC’s current coverage of various celebs in light of this, from the Graun (noting the highest rated comments):
http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2012/mar/06/no-one-listen-falkland-islanders?CMP=twt_gu
My Site,
and again in English?
Dez,
‘and again in English?’
As you did not ask nicely, and no translation program exists to get English into whatever it is you and your fellow travellers selectively process, I cheerfully decline.
But again, thanks for the sterling job proving folks’ points in your own, unique, eloquent, if self-defeatingly obnoxious way.
Oh My Site please accept my apologies, pretty, pretty please đ
It’s just that; “again assisting Dr. G etc in their flounce and bale high ground securing in future on the basis of what other folk write being enough to reason to not play any more with those who simply ask polite questions” is kind of difficult to understand
Accepted.
And in the spirit of concession, it is indeed not my finest para. No excuse; simply poor proofing (how that word could have gone awry, too).
But speaking of seeking not to get the right end of the stick by default, I’d have to agree ‘kind of difficult’, but not impossible, as you appeared to claim the first attempt.
So things are moving along well in other areas with your comprehension abilities.
And you can also add grammar guru to spelling bee-plus in the section ‘blog debate attributes not really getting around only sniping and failing to answer questions, and hence of zero value’.
So again, guessing your colleagues who come here with fair arguments and make them politely will be very grateful for the petty pedantry and inability to resist blowing raspberries when making otherwise reasonable points.
Because when they say “you can’t be mean to me, because XX is a rude whateverophobe and I lump you all together”, a ‘two-wrongs’ precedent has already been set.
There was no need for the name calling. That’s acting like an anti-social kid who goes around shouting insults at the neighbours.
Dez, that YouTube video was of a different programme. Wanker.
“20th Century Battlefields, Episode 7: 1982 Falklands”. Thats what was on “Yesterday” when you made your comment.
What was the name of the programme with Peter Snow about the Falklands that you were watching?
Always willing to welcome sceptics. So “Hello Dez.”
Whitehall department savings scheme overspent by £500m, says report – http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-17276978
You couldn’t make it up! LOL!
Jeff
Council bans daughter contact over child images – http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-humber-17274848
I wonder if there’s more to this story than the BBC are telling us…
Jeff
“BBC expenses: Radio 2 boss billed for toast to cost-cutters”
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/culture/tvandradio/bbc/9126618/BBC-expenses-Radio-2-boss-billed-for-toast-to-cost-cutters.html
The article refers to INBBC radio station ‘Asian’ Network.
Of course, Director General, Mark THOMPSON, initially announced that the ‘Asian’ Network was closing; but, due to political pressure from the ‘Asian’ political network at the apartheid radio station (which we finance), Thompson has reneged on that.
Non-alcoholic drinks all round.
My appeal letter to the BBC and their reply are now available on my blog for all to see: http://lunchtimeloather.blogspot.com/2012/03/my-appeal-letter-to-bbc-trust.html
Beyond an expanding collection of ever more senior, overpaid and pompus Beeboids becoming ‘content’ with the clearly incoherent actions of their colleagues and blowing off factual inaccuracies that don’t suit, which renders the whole process a joke anyway, I note this as well:
‘The majority of your complaints concerned the editorial choice of subjects and the treatment of them on the Jeremy Vine Show, and it is clear from the BBC’s guidelines that this is a matter for the BBC and its creative teams.’
Beyond blatant factual inaccuracy, which of course they do manage, what… on earth else would the majority of editorial complaints be about???
Editorial is what is selected to go in, or out, and manipulated to fit. That is pretty much ALL they do, and are as bent as a nine bob note doing it.
And to legitimate questions on this, they are bascially saying it is only a matter for them, rendering even the pretence of holding such abuse of power to account moot.
As to the breezy Twitter dismissal, like Al Capone’s taxes, I think this will be what nails ’em in the end. You cannot claim to be one thing, and then push it to a personal limit and beyond, under a corporate banner, and then play favourites or deny responsibility when the sh*t hits the fan.
Thanks MS … much appreciated!
It was back in March last year that the BBC Complaints Department told me “our audience feedback shows that their editorial team’s story selection is not of huge concern to the vast majority of Jeremy Vine listeners”.
Really? How do they know? And what is the point of a programme where the listeners couldn’t care less about what they listen to?
I can only assume that they think their listeners are idiots, and I have heard phone-in evidence to support that assumption!
I am definitely not going to pull any punches on the Twitter thing. They are using double-standards all the way!
BTW, this is the script picture that JV posted on Twitter for all to see:
Ah. So it’s the number of complaints that count, not the substance of the complaint.
‘this is the script picture that JV posted on Twitter for all to see’
Careful, as I have currently ongoing, you’ll end up with a ‘this cannot exist because we say it cannot’ reply to savour soon!
And they talk of ‘bad faith’.
ps: RD – I don’t think the BBC has done substance, other than in abuse, for a while. For the box tickers, by the box tickers, of the box tickers.
Nicky Campbell’s morning goon show is driving me crazy. As adverts for BBC Sport Relief implore me to ‘vote for my favourite presenter’ we hear little of substance save that something they call American ‘social conservatism’ is a very very bad thing. Oh and the girls are concerned about what they say about tennis – in case they don’t get their ‘tickets’ for Wimbledon.
File this under ‘Only on the BBC’: a six minute report on the Today program about the vital issue of lack of female representation in movie trailer voiceovers.
I understand that on the Clapham Omnibus they talk of little else.
Of course, this also suggest the BBC thinks their fellow luvvies in Hollyweird are sexist bigots and therefore in no position to lecture the rest of us, but they didn’t take this thought to its illogical conclusion.
More to the point, in the BBC’s Bubbleworld there was apparently no one around to point out that this is a perfect example of the feminist’s Apex Fallacy. Yes, the preference for people with voices deeper than Richard Burton after a night on the pop does exclude women, but it also excludes 99.99% of men too. It’s called reality, and what sort of equality is it where Bob can be given the bullet for his squeakey Evan Davis voice but Bethany has to be guaranteed work even though she sounds like Hillary Clinton?
Anyone heasr the item on Toady this morning about the voice-overs for film trailers?
For a long time, these have been driving me MAD, especially on Channel 4.
Why the stupid, growly voice? Why can’t they speak normally? And why do they include daft statements like “Funniest/saddest/crappiest/longest/loudest film of the year, grrrrr”, when it’s only the fucking beginning of March?
These trailers leave me cold, and not being one to visit the cinema very often anyway, I find that they are an utter turn off. If the rapid-fire snippets of dialogue and “action” are anything to go by, you can sum the context (and content) up in the few seconds that the trailer runs, and thus make an informed decision not to bother to go and see it. And it’s all fucking exlosions, guns, and shrieking and shouting, tarty slappers and luvvies. Is that what people pay to go and see these days? God forbid, you can stick it where the lion roars.
Hi Natsman, the late Don LaFontaine is the man responsible for the new style in movie trailers.
Before Don, movie trailers were like this:
I agree that nothing is so off-putting as a bad trail – and some of the wanna-be Don LaFontaines on British TV are the worst.
I think that’s because they are aimed at young men, the primary target audience. Bound to have less appeal to anyone else.
Nothing to do with BBC bias but I have been unable to log in here with my Google account – has anyone else had the same problem? In the end I have created a Twitter account but with both have seemed to have to be careful (I think) that all my e-mail addresses and photos didn’t become instantly available to the rest of the world.
At least you still have a name… I share MS(cte) with at least one other:)
I’ve always found this site a bugger to comment on – I have a Google account,, but registering comments often takes an age, and two or three attempts before it registers.
Yes, that has happened to me on a number of occasions. I’ve had to keep trying and somehow get back in eventually. Now, if only we had vBulletin…
Yes Deborah.
I can’t get the option of my Google account either.
I’ve created an account with Yahoo, but it became very difficult when my grandaughter left me half-way through as she had to leave and go start on her homework.
Enjoy (I have):
http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/culture/allanmassie/100061232/the-bbc-is-talking-nonsense-everyone-knew-smoking-was-bad-for-you-in-1962-we-just-didnt-care/
On any given day about 20% of the BBC’s output can be summed as ‘Britain’s Past is Horrible’. The BBC doesn’t want to get all judgemental about the whole ‘honour killing’ thing, but the fact British people in the past lived in ways the BBC does not approve of means they were clearly knuckle-dragging savages.
The shopping centre said it asked all customers to remove hoods.
I’d put good money that not all customers receive that treatment on the headgear-wearing front. And that if they did, the BBC report might not be so measured.
It’s interesting to compare how the BBC is reporting the closure of the Remploy factories NOW under the evil Tories as to when Liebore closed a load back in 2008.
Here’s a BBC link to 2008
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/6965756.stm
Note that the Liebore Government is not exactly ‘blamed’ for the closures and there is no slot in the article for a Tory response (which Grayling gave at the time)
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/wales/7012002.stm
In tihs report Peter Hain is even seen as a hero by the BBC
“…I feel very strongly in sympathy and support for them and I wasn’t happy about the position we’d got to…”
Now skip to the BBC’s latest story involving the evil Tories
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-17288762
Not only does the BBC NOt mention the closures under Liebore but it even gives Liebore a free reply (Lyam Byrne gets the whole bottom of the article to attack the Tories). There are several other links to Reploy closures in 2008 and most of them don’t seem to have any Tory comment (the only opposition quoted comes from the Unions)
<img src=”http://newsimg.bbc.co.uk/nol/shared/img/v3/end_quote_rb.gif” border=”0″/>
Martin
At that time those who are now occupying Nos 10 and 11 Downing Street were still intent on emulating Labour economic policies with the intent of “sharing growth” (created by the genius of Brown) with the taxpayer. It was only in 2009 that the “Conservatives” jettisoned their unrequited love for Labour economics. Had the BBC bothered to consult Osborne at the time of the original Remploy closures, they would have got the same guff as they got from Hain. So they didn’t bother. Of course, I suspect that had the Conservatives been led by a Conservative they wouldn’t have bothered anyway but that’s a different story.
As I’ve commented before: Labour are crap and their policies are crap but at least they’re in opposition to oppose and by doing so they’re representing their supporters (ie those on benefits and those pretending to work in the public sector). Under Cameron, not only were the Conservatives not in opposition when they were officially so described, even now they have more or less adopted the social policies and, to a great extent, the economics of those they’ve replaced.
I wasn’t specifically commenting on the Remploy closures just the way the BBC treated the closures under Liebore and now under the Tories.
I suspect the reason the Tories are doing it is the massive increase in disabled servicemen because of the pointless slaughter in Afghanistan and Iraq.
They want to put more of these guys back into the workforce and need money and the best way to get it is by closing Remploy.
Afghanistan should shame this Country, we were taken into a war we didn’t need to get involved with. What turned from hunting down Bin Laden and putting a bullet up his arse suddenly (cheerled by the media) turned into some lefty bollocks about educating Muslim girls. Like I give a shit if some female rag head can count or not.
The entire female Muslim population isn’t worth 1 British soldiers life and never will be.
This government like the last has hidden the number of disabled soldiers (for every fatality there are probably 3 or 4 amputation injuries) that are being brought back into society and they have to be paid for.
We’re digging a bigger hole every day in Afghanistan and should have left a long time ago, but the Government is going to have to spend a lot more than £350 million it spends now.
Funny as well I wonder how many disabled servicemen the BBC employs?
I can field that one. Not one.
Cameron I can accept is a wet tool, but Osborne has disappointed me, where are the proper cuts? The Government is borrowing even more than the last lot, the ‘Tory cuts’ the BBC keep wanking on about are nothing of the sort, all that’s happening is spending is being pegged back a ‘little’
I want proper cuts and proper tax cuts not rises, if i wanted more public spending and more tax hikes I’d have voted for the one eyed snot eater from Fife.
commenting here is always interesting, sometimes I use Google, sometime blogger. Sometimes I have my correct image, sometimes not, sometimes nothing!
NaS
Yes, something seems to have got worse in the last 24 hours.
I use Yahoo but sometimes posts seem to get duplicated (or occasionally vanish only ot reappear later for some reason) or sometimes the site stalls out when trying to post.
LIBYA.
Presumably INBBC censors out this further anti-British activity because it doesn’t fit with INBBC’s pro-Islam propaganda:
More gratitude: Libya rules out visit by British police to investigate Lockerbie bombing
Of course the BBC are on the case giving over space for this study đ
Or maybe not eh? Black will not be handed this study by his greenpiss/fiends of the earth/world wild lies foundation. Of far more importance is the tragic and awful news that grass has been found on Islands to the North of Antarctica, its a planetary emergency folks, its the day of the triffids come to life.
Cooling forecast for the Arctic
Anything connected with the Arctic seems to give Warmists erections so something deflationary about the Arctic should be of particular interest. And note that this forecast is based on actual trends, not on models with all sorts of speculative input.
Situated at 78 degrees North, Longyearbyen is a Norwegian town well inside the Arctic circle (66 degrees North)
Solar activity and Svalbard temperatures
By Jan-Erik Solheim et al.
Abstract
The long temperature series at Svalbard (Longyearbyen) show large variations, and a positive trend since its start in 1912. During this period solar activity has increased, as indicated by shorter solar cycles. The temperature at Svalbard is negatively correlated with the length of the solar cycle. The strongest negative correlation is found with lags 10-12 years. The relations between the length of a solar cycle and the mean temperature in the following cycle, is used to model Svalbard annual mean temperature, and seasonal temperature variations. Residuals from the annual and winter models show no autocorrelations on the 5 per cent level, which indicates that no additional parameters are needed to explain the temperature variations with 95 per cent significance. These models show that 60 per cent of the annual and winter temperature variations are explained by solar activity. For the spring, summer and fall temperatures autocorrelations in the residuals exists, and additional variables may contribute to the variations. These models can be applied as forecasting models. We predict an annual mean temperature decrease for Svalbard of 3.5±2 oC from solar cycle 23 to solar cycle 24 (2009–?20) and a decrease in the winter temperature of ~6 oC.
To be published in a Special Issue of “Advances in Meteorology” on Svalbard Meteorology in March 15