In today’s (friday) Telegraph, tree version only, Neil Midgley has an article entitled “BBC’s £1/4m to keep Israel report secret.” 24 hours a day, the BBC keep pumping out their toxic mix of facts and myths, half-truths and lies. Consider; Like Pounce, (Open Thread yesterday 23:41) I was at the keyboard when the strains of Barack Obama addressing the UN wafted in from the TV in other room. "Those who want to see an independent Palestine rise," I heard, "must stop trying to tear Israel down" I rushed in just in in time to see Obama saying: With the Coalition now moving to axe at least some of the more than 1100Quangos that infest this country, the BBC was not going to let them away with that so cue Today and cue sycophantic interview with former Quango queen Baroness Deetch. Give it a listen. At the end you can almost hear Humphrys smirking with satisfaction having "proven" what great value quangos really are. Many people are following Andrew Gilligan's reports in the Telegraph concerning the mayoral elections in Tower Hamlets....all except the BBC who have overlooked this scandal completely. Why might that be? Is it because Lutfur Rahman, Labour's candidate, is a Muslim closely connected to extremists and that he was likely to win and take control of the £1bn budget? Does this not play to the BBC message that the small number of extremists represent no danger and that there is no realistic chance of them taking any power? Lutfur Rahman has now been reported to the police for election irregularities and Labour have removed him as their candidate. (By contrast the BBC are quite happy to report on an American Republican 5000 miles away who says she used to "dabble" in witchcraft.) Financial irregularities, vote rigging, police action and removal as a candidate. And yet still the BBC do not report this story, on our own doorstep, not even in the London page of their website. I have to say that I found this a fascinating insight into the language of bias employed by the BBC when discussing ...Islam. Here's Roger Bolton from the BBC College of Journalism.. "Journalists tend to be sceptical of religion and those for whom spirituality is important. That's understandable to an extent. Journalists work with evidence; they want proof; want to see things with their own eyes. Faith and belief are the antithesis of that mindset. Some journalists take this further and find those who live their lives and make their decisions on the basis of their religious beliefs incomprehensible. Or they're contemptuous of those of sincere spiritual conviction.' BBC's description of Islamic words in its college of journalism... Kufr: 'Non-belief in Islam.' (No 'best not use'...no description of it as derogatory or emotive?) Islamophobia...Hatred and fear of Islam and Muslims. (No 'irrational' hatred of Islam?) Islamist...A difficult term which, like 'fundamentalist', is best avoided... despite the fact that it has a perfectly respectable meaning. Used now pejoratively to refer to politically radical fundamentalist Muslims seeking to achieve political ends for their faith. (Islam is not political, nor fundamental, nor radical to a secular West?) More insidious historical anti-British revisionism from the rancid BBC, this time from that cesspit of leftwing bias known as "From Our Own Correspondent". Couple of great examples of BBC bias on "The World Tonight" last night... "In the first, an Indian journalist was asked for his views on the preparations for the Commonwealth Games. Presumably, nobody had read out to him the Beeb's ground-rules, as he trenchantly observed that the defects in the preparations typified the corruption, incompetence and cronyism of the Indian public sector. He contrasted the efficiency of the Indian private sector, pointing out that the new airport at New Delhi was put out to private contract and is up and running, in fine working order, in contrast to the sports facilities and the athletes' village (which might seem, to the casual observer, rather lesser undertakings). In the news headlines at 11 P.M., his words were quoted, but with no acknowledgement of the distinction he had drawn between the virtuous private sector and the venal, child-labour-exploiting public sector." "Later on in the same broadcast of "The World Tonight", the last item was a discussion of the UN's report on the "Mavi Marmara". Predictably, the fundamental assumption of the article was that the objectivity of the UN could be taken for granted. The "expert" interviewed was the lawyer representing the British "humanitarians for Hamas pyschopaths" who accompanied in the flotilla. No-one was invited to defend Israel, or dispute the findings, or the motives, of the UN "investigation". Why would they - to the BBC Israel is always in the wrong, that's the rule." Hat-tip to the eagle eared B-BBC reader! 
Are You Being Served?
>> FRIDAY, SEPTEMBER 24, 2010
“The BBC spent more than £270,000 on legal fees to keep a report on its coverage of the I/P conflict out of the public eye, it disclosed yesterday. The sum was among nearly £400,000 of spending on outside advice about FOI requests. The 20,000 word internal document was written in 2004 by Malcolm Balen, a senior journalist. Steven Sugar, a solicitor, asked to see it under the FOI act, and sued when the BBC refused. The case went all the way to the House of Lords. The courts eventually found in favour of the BBC and the report was never published. In figures released under the FOI, the BBC has now disclosed that it spent £264,711 on barristers’ fees defending the case and £6,156 on other legal advice. [...]On the Balen report a BBC spokesman said “If we are not able to pursue our journalism freely and have honest debate and analysis over how we are covering important issues, then our ability to serve the public effectively will be diminished.” Mark Thompson, the D.G. complained last month about the burden of spurious FOI requests. He said questions had included the number of lavatories in Television Centre and the policy on biscuits. However, requests have also elicited less trivial facts, such as information about executive pay.”
About pursuing your journalism freely and having honest debate and serving us effectively. When can you start?ISLAM - NOT BBC!
Yet another great catch by a B-BBC reader. Wonder do they have prayer mats at BBC HQ?BBC Radio 4 news briefing, 'On this Day' spot - 5:40 (ish) am 24 /09/10
"This spot features brief reminders of historical anniversaries, things that happened 'on this day'.This morning, together with the creation of the George Cross medal, the removal of 'the prophet Mohammed' from Mecca to Medina featured, as a comparable historical fact. Now there are loads of things wrong with this even from a Muslim point of view - but the most egregious is the conflation of a tradition that is disputed with verifiable incidents in recent history. The date of Mohammed's (if he even existed) alleged flight from Mecca is not known, it may be commemorated on this day (Some years, the islamic calender not being the same) for all I know but that lesser claim was not made. Would the BBC be caught saying 'on this day 4000(?) years ago Moses parted the Red Sea? 1977 years ago J! esus Christ entered Jerusalem? was crucified?!
Cherry Ripe
“After thousands of years, Jews and Arabs are not strangers in a strange land. And after sixty years in the community of nations, Israel's existence must not be a subject for debate. Israel is a sovereign state, and the historic homeland of the Jewish people. It should be clear to all that efforts to chip away at Israel's legitimacy will only be met by the unshakeable opposition of the United States. And efforts to threaten or kill Israelis will do nothing to help the Palestinian people - the slaughter of innocent Israelis is not resistance, it is injustice. Make no mistake: the courage of a man like President Abbas - who stands up for his people in front of the world - is far greater than those who fire rockets at innocent women and children.”
“Oh!” I thought, “I wonder how the BBC will like that?” Imagine my surprise (not really) when I heard the BBC’s summary of President Obama’s speech on the BBC news this morning. Apparently he focused on Israeli settlements, borders, and the Palestinians’ right of return! That would have summed up last year’s speech, surely, when he did focus on all that, to rapturous applause from the Palestinian supporting UN. (About 20:40 in ) This is what the BBC website makes of the above excerpt from yesterday's speech.: “There was advice too for those Arab states who back a comprehensive peace in the region. Mr Obama urged them to take tangible steps towards normalisation with Israel” It’s as though they could hardly bear to repeat any of it. Back in their comfort zone, the website continues: “With Israel's deadline to end its partial moratorium on settlement building in the West Bank looming in a few days time, President Obama inevitably focused on the Middle East [.......] That reference to the "hard realities of demography" represents a clear warning to Israel to acknowledge that trends in the region are not in their favour and to act on the consequences. He called for the moratorium on settlement construction to be extended.”
I say potayto, you say potahto. But I’m allowed to cherry pick and the BBC is not.OPEN THREAD...
Orwell had them sussed. So have we. Here's a new Open Thread to take us into the weekend. Thanks for all your great comments during this week and also for the many mails that come my way full of further instances of bias!BONFIRE OF THE QUANGOS...
NOT ALL SCANDALS WORTH REPORTING?
BIASED VOCABULARY....
OFF THE RAILS
"The FOOC programme continues on its extraordinary way from supporting Maoist terrorists in India to now rewriting Angolan history. In a report on the Benguela Railway Justin Rowlatt tells us the Imperialist British exploited and robbed Angola of its natural resources using slave labour in essence...how unlike the new Chinese activities who operate in a much more beneficial 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.THE BIAS TONIGHT
Saturday, 25 September 2010
Dhimmi...Best not used because it can be emotive. It is sometimes used to refer to non-Muslims living under restrictions in Muslim countries. The use of the word is often intended to criticise Muslims. (ah so don't use it because it puts Muslims in a bad light) Fundamentalist...Fundamentalists believe their faith rests on the highest religious authority - scripture or God or a prophet. This is a very difficult word to use and is best avoided. Its association with terrorism has become so strong that its original meaning is almost lost. Madrassa...A term often used - almost always incorrectly - to imply an institution where anti-Western sentiment is taught. Wahhabi...The state religion in Saudi Arabia - puritanical and against innovations in Islam. Favours Islamic government. (so 'Fundamentalists'/'Puritans'...those who follow the 'real' religion, not those who 'pervert' Islam?) The wailing/western wall...The only remaining part of the Jewish Temple in Jerusalem. It is an important place of prayer and pilgrimage for Jews. Do not refer to it as the 'Wailing Wall'. (Why not 'wailing'?...possibly people may then ask why the Jews 'wail'...This description stemmed from the Jewish practice of coming to the site to mourn and bemoan the destruction of the Jewish Temple that was on the site before Islam conquered the land.) Islam. .The word 'Islam' means 'submission to the will of God'. ...(not 'peace' then?)
Posts
