BBC DG: Olympic Coverage Is Too Patriotic, Must Now Support Other Nations

This was brought up in comments thread of  the “Nearly Back” post by Number 7, but I think it’s worthy of a full post itself and deserves discussion.

We are too focused on Team GB: Astonishing memo from ‘increasingly unhappy’ BBC boss over patriotic tone of news coverage

BBC chiefs have ordered their news teams to stop focusing so much on Team GB’s stunning Olympics success.

Director general Mark Thompson is said to be ‘increasingly unhappy’ with the patriotic tone of the news coverage of the Games.


TV and radio newsroom staff were astonished by an email sent yesterday, which told them to focus on the achievements of other nations as well as our own.

In the message, titled ‘An order from the DG’, director of news Helen Boaden wrote: ‘Mark Thompson is increasingly unhappy that we are focusing far too much on Team GB’s performance to the exclusion of all else.

‘This is also becoming a theme within the Press.

‘As editor in chief, he has issued a directive that this needs to change from today. So you need to get cracking on making that shift.’

What, no hugs? Seems like a strange directive for the national broadcaster of the United Kingdom. Especially considering the bit in the Charter about “bringing the UK to the world”. Assuming that the following bit about “bringing the world to the UK” is about news reporting and not jingoism in sports, that is. Even so, this raises some serious questions.

1. Does Thompson believe that in reality there are enough immigrants or communities of immigrant origin in the UK who would prefer to hear about their own country’s success that he is seriously directing staff to pay more attention to other countries? If so, doesn’t that betray the entire concept of a nation united by values and that the much-vaunted concept of multiculturalism is in fact divisive balkanization? Not enough British people living in Britain, then?

2. Is this revealing of a certain embarrassment at the top levels of the BBC about openly supporting British success in the face of non-white nations? I’m pretty sure Thompson isn’t concerned about so much attention being lavished on Usain Bolt for his two brief events rather than on US athlete Ashton Easton for winning gold and setting a world record in the decathlon, which used to bestow upon the winner the title, “World’s Greatest Athlete”. Nor is Thompson talking about giving more credit to the French.

3. Has the BBC’s lust for evil profits, global reach and dominance caused Mark Thompson to subsume the BBC’s ultimate remit – providing public service broadcasting for the license fee payers in the UK as the official State broadcaster – in favor of pandering to audiences in other nations where the BBC reaps or stands to gain commercial revenue?

4. Is Thompson simply the Panderer General?

5. What does this tell us about the line of defense we’re always fed that there is no top-down editorial directive at the BBC, that there are no memos handed down from on high giving editorial directions, that the BBC is too large and too disorganized for there to be an institutional bias of this kind? According a BBC insider the Mail quotes, this never happens:

‘We never get direct orders like this.

Except, we know they do. Maybe it’s just that there’s been no serious objection before when orders come down from on high about Global Warming or Islam, for example.

6. Does the shock amongst regular BBC staff signal at least some hope for the reformation of the BBC after all?

‘It is only natural that our viewers and listeners want to hear about Team GB’s successes. All the other countries celebrate their own medal winners.

‘It would be a shame if we had to water down our coverage to satisfy an abstract notion of fairness.’

Do they not feel, as Thompson seems to, that a significant amount of their audience in the UK is not British or proud of British achievement? Presumably it’s more than just the one or two disgruntled assistant producers who leaked this to the Mail. Or will this current patriotism vanish next week and it’ll be back to business as usual because the only time Beeboids approve of patriotism or nationalism by the English, British, or certain other countries is during sports tournaments?

As an outsider living in a country where the BBC is most definitely trying to increase influence, audience share, and evil profits, I find this very amusing as well as important.


It grates on the BBC that Northern Ireland is still British so it never misses the opportunity to pretend otherwise; A Biased BBC reader points out that they have watched a BBC programme entitled “Timothy Spall:Back at Sea.” Spall is travelling by barge all over the U.K and in the episode screened on 24th August on BBC 4 he sails from the Isle of Man into Bangor Marina. Bangor is located on the eastern coast of Northern Ireland. The BBC play “If you’re Irish, come into the parlour” as the theme, show a map of the island of Ireland with no border between ourselves and the republic and show the Irish Tricolour as the flag just below Bangor. You can see it for yourself on BBC iplayer, 17mins 40secs into episode 3. This is the sort of nonchalent anti-British bias the BBC delights in – casually thrown into a programme for no other reason but to suggest that we are Irish, not British.


More insidious historical anti-British revisionism from the rancid BBC, this time from that cesspit of leftwing bias known as “From Our Own Correspondent”.

“The FOOC programmecontinues on its extraordinary way from supporting Maoist terrorists in Indiato now rewriting Angolan history. In a report on the Benguela Railway Justin Rowlatt tells us the ImperialistBritish exploited and robbed Angola of its natural resources using slave labourin essence…how unlike the new Chinese activities who operate in a much morebeneficial way towards Angolans.

What’s wrong with this? Angola was a Portugese colony not British, the Portugese took the enormous wealth generated there. It was the Portugese who started the railway and then contracted a British company to finish building and running the tracks. Rowlatt’s claim that it was Britain robbing the Angolans because we ran the railway is like suggesting Germany is really running this country because it builds and provides us with a transport system in the shape of cars from BMW, VW and Porsche. But not a mention of Portugal in the report. Guess accuracy and accountability aren’t that important to the BBC after all.”

Of course not. Accuracy and accountability are diversions from the main thrust of BBC output which is all about making the UK look  as bad as possible to fit in with BBC narrative.   

Hat-tip to the B-BBC reader who send me this.


You can always rely on the rancid BBC to try and undermine the glorious achievements of our past – and the Battle of Britain was always going to be in their sights. On Today at 8.31am (no link yet)

“It is the 70th anniversary of Winston Churchill’s speech praising “the few” of the Battle of Britain. History professor Norman Davies and author James Holland discuss whether we in fact mis-remember this hugely significant moment in the nation’s history.”

Was this REALLY a pivotal moment in the war? Was it REALLY a “David and Goliath” moment? Next week, were the Nazis REALLY that bad, perhaps we misremember that also? Why do we put up with this incessant anti-British chatter from the BBC?

The BBC used the 1pm news programme on Radio 4 to interview  lady who had played a key part in the preparations for the Battle of Britain and beyond. It finished by her deep regret that Hiroshima was bombed and the assertion “Never Again”. So, even on this day, BBC advanced pacifist agenda. 


The BBC is quite outrageous in the way IT is trying to keep the row over David Cameron’s comments about elements with the Pakistani establishment “looking both ways” when it comes to the war on terror. Each morning, they are running stories to imply that everyone (mostly them and a few Labour Asian MP’s) is enraged at Cameron’s “insult”to Pakistan. It’s remarkable to see the BBC acting as chief cheer-leader for anyone in Pakistan (or Labour) who wants to attack Cameron for simply stating the truth. There is plenty that Cameron says I take issue with (not least on Gaza) but the BBC is turning these Pakistan comments into a running soap-opera in an attempt to damage the Conservative leader.

Meanwhile, the BBC is also giving lots of coverage to the disastrous floods in northwest Pakistan. Had to laugh at our old friend Aleem Maqbool’s interview here with a guy who just complained and would not stop, even after the interview had finished. Thank goodness the UK has coughed up £10m to help the nuclear power Pakistan deal with this humanitarian crisis.


I caught Kwame Kwei-Armah being interviewed on the BBC this morning concerning his documentary “On Tour with the Queen. The former Casualty actor and much loved neo political commentator was able to tell us that Australia did not want Her Majesty as Head of State, and it showed a clip of him being interviewed on Jamaican radio laughing uproariously at the suggestion by a caller that Independence has been a disaster for Jamaica and it would be much better off as a British dependency. The hosts on the BBC joined in the chuckling. You can tell why the BBC loves Kwame.


In essence, the BBC meme is that in the aftermath of Islamistan murdering THOUSANDS of people in the USA, British security and intelligence services should have realised that their immediate priority was to ensure the UK did..not get involved in rendition or become complicit in any way with the “torture” of alleged Jihadists. They’ve been dragging this theme out all morning, culminating in Universal Shami getting a canter through the whingfest just after 8am. The image of BBC icon, Binyam Mohammad, graces the Today programme for additional emphasis.

What really irritates me is not just the BBC’s relentless undermining of the work undertaken by our Intelligence Services but the fact that ever since 9/11, the State Broadcaster has chosen to operate as a propaganda channel for every piece of Jihadist trash that has gotten as far as a microphone. (Am I allowed to “Jihadist trash”? – probably not on the BBC, as it might offend you know who) It has continuously maligned the motives and actions of our Armed Forces and also of our Intelligence services whilst simultaneously portraying those captured followers of the religion of peace as kindly folk who only want to be our friend. (Maybe they’ll give Binyam his own TV Show, maybe call it “Britain’s got Jihad” or “Dancing on lies”? )

I often wonder how our nation could have successfully prosecuted WW2 had the BBC as much influence then as it does now? The constant BBC drip drip drip that erodes our National confidence in those who try to defend us from the ever present threat of more Islamic terror is a malignancy that we just cannot continue to finance. Don’t you think?


Had to laugh at this pathetic bit of reporting from the BBC on the topic of the National ID card unveiled by Alan “Postie” Johnson today. Buried away in the linked BBC report (scan down to 11th paragraph) is the Home Office line that the absence of the Union Flag from the National ID card has nothing to do with offending Northern Ireland’s nationalist minority community. That’s not what is reported elsewhere….

“A Home Office statement said the ID card scheme must work in a way that “fully
recognises the identity rights of the people of Northern Ireland as laid out in
the Belfast Agreement”. The Government went on to say it had “sought to
design features which can reflect all parts of the United Kingdom, such as the
inclusion of the shamrock to represent Ireland within the tactile feature, and
we have sought to avoid symbols such as flags”.

But “the people of Northern Ireland” are British! So what’s the problem, Postie and why is the BBC not sharing the reason for the lack of our National Flag from the National ID card? The reality is that this government, and the BBC, are ashamed of our British identity and any chance to ditch it is grasped with eagerness.

"a city they had recently tried to wipe off the map"

Isn’t life strange ? One day you’re trying to erase Berlin, another you’re trying to save its people.

North by Northwest on this Dan Bell report. I can see what Mr Bell is trying to do – the human side and all that. But a little context would be in order – maybe a little about why Stalin was trying to “expel the Western powers from the city” – aka “starving its inhabitants”. Maybe the words “Communist” or “Union of Soviet Socialist Republics” might put in an appearance here and there.

(Surprisingly for the PC BBC, Mr Bell’s cheery account of Hamburg brothels, black markets and the ‘hedonistic post-war atmosphere‘ misses out the important contributing fact that, while historians differ over the degree of starvation and the number of deaths incurred, it is accepted that post-war Germany was extremely short of food and fuel – a condition exacerbated by the harsh winter of 1946-47.)

NNW asks – and rightly so – what effect this lack of context, repeated again and again, does to a British people with a dumbed-down history curriculum, and overseas readers for whom the BBC is their window on British culture :

“… think how this is being read in Islamabad and Cairo, in Ankara and Nigeria, in the Caribbean and in mill-workers’ cottages in Leeds and Burnley where 1066 is never mentioned, and in Halifax, West Yorkshire and in curry houses in downtown Halifax Nova Scotia. What impression will this give to people who don’t grow up with the perspective and (limited) historical knowledge that The Great Escape and Tora Tora Tora and Kelly’s Heroes and Schindler’s List provide ?”


Am I the ONLY person in the United Kingdom who gets annoyed that the BBC gives maximum publicity to the claims of Ethiopian illegal immigrant aka Cockney Geezer Binyam Muhamed concerning the “crimes” allegedly committed by our security services against him yet NEVER once  enquires as to the serious crimes of which Bambi himself stands accused by the US government? It seems to me that the BBC is very quick to embrace the claims of an illegal immigrant but also quick to dismiss the detailed allegations of the US Government. Al Queda  must give thanks every day for the wilful complicity of the BBC in going alone with the “torture” claims of every Gitmo resident.  I bet they will all get stuck into this one on QT tonight – including the Tories – with Britain in the dock instead of the Jihadi vermin that were rightly interned in Guantanamo. Our military and our intelligence do all they can to try and keep us safe and yet time after time they are portrayed by the BBC as the bad guys whilst Islamic terrorists are presented as benevolent kind-hearts. It sickens me.

Careful what you Wish For

Tonight’s Panorama is going to tackle two issues troubling the government. First, terrorism and violence. They Don’t like it.

Second, the new one they they’ve just noticed. In a slight shift from the diversity agenda where ‘there’s no right or wrong, only different’ – now they’ve noticed that preaching against western values is not such a good idea either.

Even our good friend Lord Ahmed is on board. In a sudden reversal of policy he now says:
“We need to empower the mainstream Muslim leadership and the scholars so they can actually hold the arguments and debates within the Muslim society.”

Just keep Geert Wilders out of the way, though, eh.

As per interview on Today it seems new Muslim thinking is: Good Muslims oppose terrorism. Although they believe man-made laws cannot be supreme, they must put immutable words of the Koran on one side and disregard God’s law while living in countries that practice man’s law. I assume they must just be content to introduce Koranic ideologies gradually, by democratic means, such as those of great philosopher Sheikh Khalid Yassin

“If you prefer the clothing of the Kaffirs [non-believers] other than the clothing of the Muslims – most of those names on most of that clothing is faggots, homosexuals and lesbians.”

Watch out Beeboids!

Oh yes, and don’t forget, it’s all because of Gaza, and this country’s foreign policy.

“Rejoice ! Rejoice !”

Even if we no longer expect the BBC to have any role in – or indeed concept of – supporting the British national interest, you’d think they might take a more … er, neutral tone in reporting the sale of a major UK strategic asset to a foreign government.

“EDF agrees to buy British Energy”

Gosh. Decent of them, taking it off our hands like that.

Of course the BBC could have used a headline like “Control of Britain’s nuclear industry passes to French government”, but that, while true, would have overtones of xenophobia, wouldn’t it ? Isn’t the French state just as valid as the British one ? And besides, as current BE boss Adrian Montague said in a Today interview (Ed Stourton, I think it was, well out of his depth – Montague often ignored his questions and answered ones he hadn’t asked), “historically the UK has been extremely open to foreign investment“.

“Historically” as in “crime is historically low” – i.e the last twenty-odd years. Prior to that, UK energy generation was UK-controlled and for 50-odd years it was a state utility. No matter.

Economics editor Robert Peston, whose BBC blog has some of the best and most insightful credit-crunch coverage, toed the party line as well.

“EDF’s acquisition of our nuclear power industry can be seen as a powerful message of hope … it’s a spectacular vote of confidence from La Republique no less that the United Kingdom is anything but bust.”

Bust ? I thought tractor production was going up every year !

UPDATE – commenter NotASheep points out that the UK director of communications at EDF, one Andrew Brown, is by strange chance a former BBC reporter and Newsnight editor. He’s also, by an even stranger chance, the brother of the Prime Minister.


Tuning in to Today on Radio 4 always requires a strong stomach although I normally steel myself and do it to keep an eye on what the BBC gets up to but even I was left queasy at an item ran around 6.50am on the poetry of Osama Bin Laden. Some left wing US academic was invited on to read out an example of the ramblings of the Al Queda leader to which James Naughtie intoned “powerful stuff”. Yeah. This was a mutual love-in about the alleged poetical skills of the world’s most evil terrorist. However don’t despair because just before 7am the BBC ran a trailer for a programme it is running next week entitled “Is Al Queda winning”?

I know we go on about it day in day out here but really when you stop and just reflect, the problem with this State Broadcaster is enormous. It’s not just the left wing bias it exudes at every opportunity but it is more to do with the systemic undermining of just about every value we hold dear via the BBC 24/7 news cycle. Just imagine you are the family of a British soldier in Iraq or Afghanistan and you hit the dial only to have the BBC churn out programmes extolling the merits of Bin Laden and the success of Al Queda. What does this do for your moral? The drip drip drip of poison from the BBC is killing our country. Clearly the removal of the license tax is vital since that will at least take away the financial backing required for 24/7 broadcasting toxicity but in the meantime we do provide an important function here trying to document and then hold the rotten BBC to account. During WW2, do you think they would have ran an item on the literary skills of Hitler. After all, he loved animals, was vegetarian and despised Christianity so he really was their kind of guy back then…but they held back. Now, they just can’t resist hailing our enemies. Scum.