ALL OVER BAR THE SHOUTING...
>> WEDNESDAY, SEPTEMBER 30, 2009
I watched the interview on BBC1 breakfast this morning with McDoom and it really is all over for him. His staggering lack of charisma, his odd joker-like smile, his bumbling grasp of the economic realities, all too much for even the BBC to sanitise. Or so I thought. But up pops Nick Robinson to try and rally the troops for McCavity. Did you see it?
BBC IGNORES CLIMATE CHANGE FRAUD
>> TUESDAY, SEPTEMBER 29, 2009
For years, the respected Climate Audit site has been warning that the famous "Hockey Stick" - a graph based on tree ring proxies used by the IPCC and Al Gore to "prove" their AGW propaganda - is inaccurate. Over the past few days, he has published conclusive evidence that it it is. The compiler simply took the most dramatic tree ring data and ignored the rest. The true picture is that surface temperatures have actually gone down. This was scientific fraud on a massive scale, and you can read about it here or here. The "hockey stick" graph was pivotal in the attempts to persuade the public to panic about AGW.
Chances of reading about this on the BBC? Absolutely nil. Today's lead climate story is the Met Office warning that temperatures are going to rise by 4C by 2050. That, from a body that cannot even predict what will happen five days away.
EU VOTE: BIAS BY OMISSION
One of the biggest failings of the BBC is bias by omission. That is, they conveniently ignore the issues that really matter because they don't accord with the BBC mindset. An organisation that spends £800m a year on newsgathering - probably the biggest operation of its kind anywhere in the world - fritters the money away.
Take coverage of the EU, for example. Five years ago, the Wilson report damned the corporation's analysis of EU affairs as narrow, boring annd unchallenging. The BBC responded by saying - as it always does when criticised - that it's coverage was actually OK, but even so it would do better.
Spool forward to today. The Lisbon Treaty remains a matter of massive controversy which millions of people in England - as the recent EU poll showed - think is a major step towards a tyranny that they don't want. So how does the BBC cover steps towards its ratification? By providing measured, in depth debate, as it promised? Not a bit of it.
On BBC1 Breakfast Time this morning an item on the Irish vote on Lisbon was sandwiched between coverage of the cervical cancer scare and - far more important - a lengthy item on the importance of dog-tagging. The Irish piece boiled down to a soundbite from a fish and chip shop owner who was intending to vote 'yes' and a fisherman who would say'no'. In between, a bland BBC reporter told us that the reason that Ireland was voting yes was because of the recession. And that was it.
Nothing about the implications of the vote, the claims of vote-rigging by Brussels, or the lies being told about the Treaty. No attempt to show the importance to people's lives, or to do anything but the bare minimum.
This is what the BBC's £800m news operation now routinely does. Items of major importance are reduced to their lowest, most simplistic, denomininator, while other matters its judges closer to people's lives (like dog-tagging) are elevated to inflated over-importance. The BBC sold its soul to the EU years ago, and while Britain moves inexorably towards being a satellite vassal state of Brussels, its journalists sit on their hands refusing to analyse the issues that matter. "Bias by ommission" indeed.
OBAMAWORSHIP
I know I go on about Thought for the Day but it really is like the five minute hate. Take this morning. Rev Joel Edwards popped up to tell us all about the wonders of Obama ( "400% increase in death threats than George W Bush", he repeated) and suggested that perhaps Jimmy Carter was right that those who opposed The One are indeed racists. Edwards is entitled to his opinions, of course, but isn't it surprising how frequently the content of TFTD dovetails into the broader BBC narrative?
Posts
