Britannia Radio

Biased BBC

Saturday, January 24, 2009 Natalie # Meanwhile, back at the batcave ... ... Peter Rippon, editor ofNewsnight, has responded to the complaints about how an audio clip of President Obama's inaugural speech was spliced, had its order altered, and then was rejoined to make a new sentence never actually spoken by Obama. The original post in Harmless Sky can be read here. My B-BBC post on the subject is here. Mr Rippon writes, We did edit sections of the speech to reflect the elements in it that referred to Science. The aim was to give people an impression or montage of what Obama said about science in his inauguration speech. This was signposted to audiences with fades between each point. It in no way altered the meaning or misrepresented what the President was saying. I don't think Mr Rippon's response answers the objections raised. Point one: fades, what fades? Listening to the audio clip there is a change in the quality of the background sound at the first splice point, which I initially heard as a faint sound but now think is just a discontinuity. No one who was not listening specifically for the break point would ever think it was anything other than a continuous flow of speech. Fades are meant to, you know, fade. Point two: there is not even that at the second break point - it runs smoothly on. Point three: what about the alteration of the order? Someone just offering up a montage of phrases doesn't mess with the order such that a new, coherent (but never actually spoken) sentence is created. Point four: the meaning was altered and TonyN's original post in Harmless Sky explained very clearly why. He wrote, "Paragraph 16 does not refer to climate change in any way, but to economic and infrastructure problems. The reference to harnessing the sun, wind and soil could as easily refer to energy security as global warming." But in the BBC version it does appear to refer to global warming. I would add that in the original sentence as spoken by Obama, "We will restore science to its rightful place, and wield technology’s wonders to raise health care’s quality and lower its cost", the fact that science being restored to its rightful place is immediately followed by a reference to healthcare gives me the strong impression that it was meant to refer to lifting restrictions on the federal funding of research into embryonic stem cells. The BBC version, "We will restore science to its rightful place - roll back the spectre of a warming planet", makes it sound as if the restoration of science to its rightful place refers to President Bush's alleged scepticism over global warming. This interpretation is reinforced by the whole tone of Susan Watts' blog post and video essay: "But in climate change and other key challenges of science, Bush wouldn't listen to the scientists. He didn't like their view of the world, and he didn't like what they were saying." Blimey, that sounds like something aimed at ten-year olds. I am not Obama's biggest fan, but at least when speaking in his own words he sounds like he is addressing adults. Comments: 28 (unread) - Biased BBC Home David Vance # ANY QUESTIONS? It would take a braver man than me to tune in to this week's Any Questions! The panel consists of Ben Bradshaw, Minister of State for Health, Andrew Lansley, Shadow Health Secretary, Don Foster, Liberal Democrat spokesman on Culture, Media and Sport and Dame Suzi Leather: Chair of Charity Commission. Anybody tune in? Have you recovered? Comments: 18 (unread) - Biased BBC Home David Vance # WOSSY BACK. Well, I sure as heck did not tune in to watch the return of Jonathan Ross to his BBC1 Prime-time Friday night slot. Did you? I read reports that it was his usual combination of vulgarity and narcissism. The thing that gets me is that this vulgarian is paid an absolute fortune care of YOU and ME - the license tax payer - to engage in a weekly exhibition that degrades any sense of standards that the BBC may once have had. Ross is a superb example of all that is wrong with the BBC - but just like his employer Ross does not see that there is even a problem. Comments: 22 (unread) - Biased BBC Home David Vance # BBC IMPARTIALITY UNDER THREAT? I'm hugely entertained by the faux media storm that the BBC is bravely resisting efforts by Government and others to broadcast a charity appeal for schools in Hamastan! International Development Secretary Wee Dougie Alexander has moaned that it was not too late for a reversal to recognise the "immense human suffering". (Forget about that suffering including that of Israelis, they don't even count as humans in wee Dougie's world-view) A protest is to be held outside Broadcasting House in London after the BBC declined to broadcast appeals by the Disasters Emergency Committee. (aka Save Hamas Now) Now then, given that the BBC has spent three weeks faithfully propagating every blood libel possible against Israel, the notion that it is somehow defiantly holding out to maintain it's impartiality is a joke. The BBC has no right to be carrying any ads for Hamastan and this is making a virtue out of not doing something it should not be doing anyway! That said, I wonder will it be able to resist the cries of all the Jew-haters out there? Comments: 73 (unread) - Biased BBC Home Friday, January 23, 2009 David Vance # PAYDAY FOR MURDERERS. Here's pause for thought. The government has created a little quango here in Northern Ireland with the Orwellian title of "The Consultative Group on the Past" and the bottom line is it suggests that government should cough up £12,000 to the families of all those killed during the Troubles - including members of paramilitary groups.The families of paramilitary victims, members of the security forces and civilians who were killed will all be entitled to the same amount. BBC journalist Mark Simpson, on the Ten News, has just given this story the usual BBC spin, managing to find a victim of IRA terrorism whose main anxiety was that 12k was not enough. Over on my own blog, A Tangled Web, where I have also overed this story, the daughter of a lady killed by the IRA at the cenotaph in Enniskillen on Remembrance Sunday has expressed her view, which resonates entirely with mine and I suggest the vast majority of decent people; this is an obscene suggestion and it is aiming at equating the killers with those they killed. But the rancid BBC is quite happy to present this grotesquerie as if it were really all quite reasonable. God they revolt me! Comments: 33 (unread) - Biased BBC Home