"As a biased broadcaster ..."

"As a biased broadcaster ..."

Nick Cohen in Standpoint Magazine :

A while ago, a BBC producer phoned to tell me I had written a "controversial" book. I knew that already, and gathered from the teeth-sucking sound coming down the line that she did not approve.

"So," she continued, "we've lined up four guests to argue against you." 

I told her to go away — maybe I used a stronger term — and then thought about her predicament. As a biased broadcaster, she wanted to hear my book denounced, but she could not risk organising a one-on-one debate. Maybe I would have come out on top. More probably, some listeners would have agreed with me, others with my opponent, as is the normal way of things. By arranging her show to make it four against one, however, she could maintain the illusion of impartiality while creating the impression in listeners' mind that the consensus was overwhelmingly against arguments she found uncomfortable. In the interests of "balance" and of letting "everyone have their say", she would fill 80 per cent of the airtime with advocates of her own political position. I have watched out for rigged debates ever since. They are the surest signal the BBC dares send that an idea does not deserve a hearing in polite society.

I'm a bit busy today, and haven't time to give chapter and verse from the B-BBC archives. Let Mr Cohen give us the latest example :

Ophelia Benson did not quite get the four-on-one treatment when she appeared on Radio 3's cultural talk show Nightwaves to discuss a"controversial" book she has co-authored with Jeremy Stangroom. They gave her a mere two opponents, and the presenter tried to be fair. Still, when one adversary stopped disparaging her, the other started, as the BBC flashed warning signs to listeners to ignore her.

(The book, called "Does God Hate Women ?", is 'controversial' in that it does not restrict its targets to Bible-bashing rednecks in the United States. Had it done so, I'd probably be hearing readings on 'Woman Sour' this morning !)

ARTIFICIAL TREES

Another day on the BBC and another example of eco-wackery. This time, ladies and gentlemen, I offer you artificial trees. The underlying premise, of course, is that mankind is to blame for "climate change" - that is settled science, right? Listening to Professor Hoskins is really quite frightening and yet this is what the Royal Society is thinking. I wish they didn't bother.

SAM'S BARRED?

How DARE British security services keep an eye on Communist sympathisers back in the 1950's? Have a listen to this paean to Sam Wanamaker. There's nothing the BBC likes better than a Commie lover.

FUEL UP, COULD BE WORSE

Hope all you motorists out there enjoy filling up this morning at the higher pump price care of Mr Brown and his pals. Watched the BBC news cover this topic last night and they helpfully showed us that fuel prices were even higher in France and Germany so it could be worse, right? In the BBC world, the motorist can never be punished enough for having the temerity not to use "public transport" and attempts are made all the time to justify punitive government action against the road user. If only we would all work for the government and travel at assignated times in State provided transport...sigh....

The Holocaust Tool

>> MONDAY, AUGUST 31, 2009

This is not straightforward bias, but an example of painfully elaborate impartiality. AKA tolerance of the intolerant, or the other one: 'there is nothing so unequal as the equal treatment of unequals’. The BBC has been announcing in its hourly news bulletins, that Hamas has “slammed” its friend and supporter UNWRA (United Nations Relief and Works Agency) for having the audacity to suggest the Jewish Holocaust might be included in the curriculum of the schools they run in Gaza. The BBC reports this in the simplified manner they deem appropriate for their simpleminded readers. But although they have omitted to add the usual scare quotes or indeed “Israel says” to the penultimate paragraph, - ‘During the Holocaust, Nazi Germany murdered some six million Jews’ - the last paragraph goes some way to counterbalance the omission. “However, the event's significance is often disputed in parts of the Middle East where Israel is seen as the enemy and the Holocaust is seen as a tool used by Israel to justify its actions.” Contrast this with the other report, from a Chinese news agency. This report, written for adults, includes some rather revealing quotes from one Husam Ahmed, including this one about the material in question: “".....was formed in a way that shows sympathy with the Jews." He warned of having an attitude "to construct a generation that supports the Jews and the Holocaust" in the Palestinian territories.  The article takes care to show that the thing Hamas fears most about teaching the Holocaust is that it might spark sympathetic feelings in the children, and they might stop hating Jews and striving to eliminate the Zionist entity. Less danger of that sentiment coming through in the BBC’s report; they must at all times be careful to avoid any traces of partiality.