Saturday, 6 February 2010


DOG'S BREAKFAST...

>> SATURDAY, FEBRUARY 06, 2010

The BBC very belatedly and no doubt even more begrudgingly has commissioned a poll probing views about global warming. Despite the years of BBC propaganda to the opposite, a total of 73% are not convinced that climate change has anything to do with humans; only 26% believe it is man-made, a drop from 42% a year ago when the Times newspaper conducted a similar poll. So who does the BBC turn for comment about the results? Why, of course, a spoksman from DEFRA, who professes himself "very disappointed". What? - that the British people don't accept being mugged by a battery of government climate change taxes? 

It comes as no surprise that there is nothing at all in the report from the 'sceptics'. And David Shukman, who reported the poll on BBC News 24 in funereal tones last night, blathered on about how people's views went against what he said was unquestionably "mainstream science". 

Meanwhile, the Today programme this morning continued on its warming mission by bringing on a Green Party candidate and a carbon-obsessed academicto discuss how CO2 taxes must be introduced on everyone who owns a cat or a dog. I kid you not. It would be funny if it weren't so tragic that the BBC's editorial values have been traduced in this way.

All Quiet on the Wilders front

>> FRIDAY, FEBRUARY 05, 2010

Although there was plenty of news on the BBC about Geert Wilders last year when he was banned from entering the UK, now that he’s on trial in the Netherlands, the BBC has gone quiet.

One would have thought there would be much material to interest the world’s foremost news organ in this story. For a start the 15 defence witnesses that the court has disallowed, leaving only three, and causing Mr Wilders’s supporters to wonder whether the trial can have a fair outcome.

Those of us who are hurt, offended or frightened by anti-Semitism should always apply a test whenever negative feelings about Islam overcome us.

We have to ask ourselves whether our negative thought is rational and based on a genuine concern, or just a phobia-like distaste, a tarring with the same brush, a generalisation based on myth and mystery as per anti-Semitism. 

While we mustn’t scapegoat groups of people, dehumanise them or blame them for all the evils in the world, surely we can criticise what needs criticising, and not be afraid to make value judgments when necessary.

At the time of writing, most references to Geert Wilders on the BBC website are dated last year; one by Mark Mardell actually puts his case in a reasonably evenhanded manner.
Many people distance themselves from Geert Wilders’s campaign, but there is considerable and undeniable logic in what he is saying, which should be reported and given a fair hearing. So for that reason I think the BBC should not only be reporting the trial, but also discussing the issues it brings up.

BBC STILL DEFENDS 'CONSENSUS'

Here's a letter a colleague has just received from the BBC's complaints unit. I reproduce it in all its glory so it can be fully savoured: 

I understand you're unhappy with the BBC's reporting of climate change as you feel we've been biased towards the AGW's point of view. The BBC is committed to impartial and balanced coverage when it comes to this issue. There is broad scientific agreement on the issue of climate change and we reflect this accordingly; however, we do aim to ensure that we also offer time to the dissenting voices.

Flagship BBC programmes such as Newsnight, Today and our network news bulletins on BBC One have all included contributions from those who challenge the general scientific consensus recently and we will continue to offer time to such views on occasion. You might be interested in the views of former Newsnight editor, Peter Barron, who explored this issue in an online posting at our Editors' Blog and explained some of the editorial issues it throws up. 

I can assure you that we're committed to honest, unbiased reporting and are determined to remain free from influence by outside parties, whether political or lobbyists. Our Charter and Agreement allows us independence from political pressure and the licence fee gives us independence from advertising, shareholder or other commercial interests. Impartiality forms the cornerstone of BBC News and Current Affairs and we've nothing to gain by weighting our coverage in political terms or by allowing influence from any other outside body. 

I appreciate you may still believe the BBC is biased with regards the climate change argument and so I've registered your comment on our audience log. This is a daily report of audience feedback that's circulated to many BBC staff, including members of the BBC Executive Board, channel controllers and other senior managers. The audience logs are seen as important documents that can help shape decisions about future programming and content. Thanks again for taking the time to contact us.

Regards

Joe O'Brien
BBC Complaints

Thrown up yet? Note that the official line is still that there is a consensus. Laughable, if it wasn't so serious a subject. Meanwhile, the Spectator has a cracking piece which shows how totally cuplable the MSM have been in not reporting 'climate change' - and ends on a note that the BBC should be responding to.