Unity at Last, Rejoice!
>> FRIDAY, MARCH 18, 2011
Compare these reports. The BBC website is upbeat about the Palestinians’ latest measures to heal the feud between Hamas and Fatah. Mahmoud Abbas is ready to go to Gaza, and Hamas has welcomed the move. Hoorah! The second paragraph reads:
“Both parties seem to be responding to the recent demonstrations that were inspired by the uprisings elsewhere in the Middle East, reports the BBC's Jon Donnison from Ramallah.”Then why is it under the jarring sub heading “AIRSTRIKE” ? Oh. The article suddenly veers off topic, skidding onto a path well-worn by the BBC.
“Meanwhile, doctors in Gaza said at least two Palestinians were killed in an Israeli airstrike in the central Gaza Strip. The Israeli army confirmed the attack, saying it was responding to rockets fired from Gaza.”The BBC is barely interested in silly old rockets fired from Gaza, it wouldn’t have mentioned them at all had two Palestinians not been killed.
“Israel says militants have sent dozens of rockets into Israeli territory since the start of the year.”‘Doctors in Gaza’ said the interesting thing; disembodied ‘Israel’ says the barely interesting, dodgy-looking thing.
“Before Wednesday's incident, UN figures showed at least eight Palestinians had been killed by Israeli military action in Gaza in 2011.” No reason given.Another report is discussed here.
“the Palestinian news agency Ma’an reported that Gaza demonstrators in favour of reconciliation between Hamas and Fatah were violently dispersed by the Islamist group: ‘They beat people with batons and set fire to tents that were set up by the demonstrators, according to activists in Gaza City.’So, not all sweetness and light inspired by the glorious Arab uprising then, BBC? And what’s all this?
"on a day ostensibly devoted to Palestinian unity, police brutally attacked photographers and cameramen, beating the, breaking equipment and confiscating photos and video footage. This is the latest in a string of chilling attacks on reporters in Gaza." But the West sits silent.Well, not completely silent. They did mention the airstrike. I do hope Jon Donnison gets well soon. I’m assuming he was knocked unconscious in the fracas. That must be it.
Hillary Clinton Proves Mark Mardell Wrong
Hillary Clinton told CNN the other day that she won't be working for the President if there is a second term in 2012. Not just that she doesn't want to be Sec. of State again, but wants no position at all in His Administration. She told Wolf Blitzer that she doesn't want to be Sec. of State again because she has the best job in the world right now.
Because I have the best job I could ever have. This is a moment in history where it is almost hard to catch your breath. There are both the tragedies and disasters that we have seen from Haiti to Japan and there are the extraordinary opportunities and challenges that we see right here in Egypt and in the rest of the region. So I want to be part of helping to represent the United States at this critical moment in time, to do everything I can in support of the president and our government and the people of our country to stand for our values and our ideals, to stand up for our security, which has to remain first and foremost in my mind and to advance America's interests. And there isn't anything that I can imagine doing after this that would be as demanding, as challenging or rewarding.Er, and it wouldn't be in a second term? That doesn't add up. So why is she going to walk away after next year? No prizes for guessing what her staff is saying:
“Obviously, she’s not happy with dealing with a president who can’t decide if today is Tuesday or Wednesday, who can’t make his mind up,” a Clinton insider told The Daily. “She’s exhausted, tired.” He went on, “If you take a look at what’s on her plate as compared with what’s on the plates of previous Secretary of States — there’s more going on now at this particular moment, and it’s like playing sports with a bunch of amateurs. And she doesn’t have any power. She’s trying to do what she can to keep things from imploding.”Hang on, Mark Mardell has been telling us that The Obamessiah has been thoughtfully "deliberating". So will he now claim that Hillary Clinton is wrong to think He's been dithering because she's "unfamiliar" with the concept? Or does she know better than the BBC North America editor because she's, you know, on the inside actually dealing with reality and not making uninformed judgments from on high with a perfumed handkerchief held to the nose?
Clinton is said to be especially peeved with the president’s waffling over how to encourage the kinds of Arab uprisings that have recently toppled regimes in Egypt and Tunisia, and in particular his refusal to back a no-fly zone over Libya.Waffling? I guess she just can't grasp the nuance of His finely tuned brain. What will the BBC have to say about this? Or this: Bill Clinton: We shouldn't be letting the Libyan protesters "twist in the wind" Will Mardell now dismiss the former two-term Democrat President of the United States and the current Democrat Secretary of State as people who are "obsessed with the notion of American decline" or gung-ho cowboys who want an "unapologetically aggressive America storming ahead"? Clinton's announcement was not only on CNN but also mentioned on theHuffingtonPost, so we know the Beeboids are aware of it, and can't pretend it's not an important enough story for them to mention. So far, though, they've censored this news. In sum, Hillary Clinton just proved that the BBC North America editor's interpretation of US news has been completely wrong. Why trust him ever again?
WISCONSIN
This is an update to earlier blogposts by David Preiser about BBC coverage of the troubled passage of deficit reduction legislation in Wisconsin (seehere, here, here). Media double-standards over Wisconsin have become so blatant that even a left-leaning blogger on Huffington Post, Lee Stranahan, has expressed his distaste:
Why isn't the mainstream media talking about the death threats against Republican politicians in Wisconsin? …Ignoring the story of these threats is deeply, fundamentally wrong.It's bad, biased journalism that will lead to no possible good outcome and progressives should be leading the charge against it. Just before writing this article, I did a Google search and it's stunning to find out that the right wing media really isn't exaggerating -- proven death threats against politicians are being ignored by the supposedly honest media. If you've never agreed with a single thing that Limbaugh, Bill O'Reilly et al have said about anything, you can't in any good conscience say that they don't have a point here. Death threats are wrong and if a story like Wisconsin is national news for days, then so are death threats.Quite so. If Tea Party followers had made death threats against Democrat politicians, and had gone to their homes to terrify their children, we can be sure that the BBC would've been all over it, ramping up the coverage with every fresh act of intimidation. I know this, readers of this blog know it, and BBC journalists, if they're honest with themselves, must know it too. And we're talking actual death threats here, not some vague perceived potential for violence of the sort imagined by BBC correspondents when reporting on the Tea Party movement. The reason for this is simple enough. "It's bad, biased journalism", as Stranahan says. The BBC's highly partisan coverage of American politics reflects the political leanings of its staff. As such, negative stories about Democrats and their supporters are either ignored or downplayed. This is in sharp contrast to the eager reporting of similar or less significant events which are used to bash the American right. If any BBC journos disagree with my conclusion I'd be happy to read an alternative explanation for their news blackout over the Wisconsin death threats. Comment, email, blog, tweet. Anything.
LIVE LONG AND PROSPER
I chuckled at this interview on the BBC this morning. You can feel BBC outrage at the fact that more and more Brits are living longer than ever despite our obesity/unhealthy eating/incorrect drinking/you name it. It's so unfair that people thrive despite the Nanny State the BBC would impose on us all!
SELECTIVE REPORTNG
The BBC's ability to wilfully miss the parts of news stories that do not fit in with "the narrative" is always amusing. A Biased BBC reader notes;
"We have headline stories of government cuts damaging Britain's education by limiting foreign students ...Mark Easton labelling it a 'scathing critique' and another story about the 'doubling' of student debt....and another about teenagers getting lessons in how to get a good night's sleep...and 'university funding falling by 12%'.....cuts, cuts, cuts. ....but nowhere can I find a report on the assessment by the OECD that Labour failed miserably to raise educational standards despite pumping in billions of pounds...and in fact conspired to hide the truth by 'dumbing down' exams to boost results and that it is the poorest who are suffering ever more. ...actually I nearly missed it, they do mention the OECD's thoughts on UK education telling us the OECD said.....'Education, too, should be reformed, to focus resources more on disadvantaged children.' And that's it as far as I can see. ....nowhere is there a full report on the OECD's assessment of Osborne's austerity programme....'the respected international thinktank backed the Chancellor George Osborne's approach to tackling the deficit.' The OECD says the UK plans "strike the right balance" between tackling the deficit and supporting "short-term growth"....and encouraged the UK to "stay the course" on its £81 Billion austerity programme. The BBC does tell us that the OECD says: 'The government's cuts are "ambitious and necessary".'and then happily quotes Ed Balls...'However Labour's Shadow Chancellor Ed Balls said he thought the OECD report was further evidence that government economic policy was on the wrong track. "In the real world the evidence is mounting that his reckless plan to cut deeper and faster than any other major economy in the world isn't working,"' Certainly listening to the radio in the past few days you would be forgiven for being entirely ignorant of these views by the OECD which to my knowledge have been kept off the airwaves entirely. And here we have a BBC reporter asking what's the point of the Coalition....and a none too subtle call for fewer cuts? Interesting how the BBC reporters always hang on every word one of the two Eds mutter about the economy as if Gospel.... 'Hello, I'm Patrick Burns, the BBC's Political Editor in the Midlands. If we are to preserve what remains of our manufacturing base then we cannot afford the worrying evidence of a slow-down at the turn of the year to put our fragile recovery into reverse. That's exactly what Labour say is made more likely by the Government's economic policies, "cutting too far and too fast". Ed Miliband told me during a recent visit to Wolverhampton that Mr Osborne was taking more money out of the economy than was good for private, as well as public sector employers. And he was scathing about ministers' decision to scrap the Future Jobs Fund which he said would leave too many young people unemployed and claiming benefit instead in work and paying taxes. The only way George Osborne can prove his critics wrong is by delivering Growth. He wants that 'G-word' to redefine the political agenda... Growth, Growth, Growth not Cuts, Cuts Cuts. ....it's Growth or Bust: if the economy doesn't deliver the goods, more and more sceptics inside Parliament as well as outside it will be left wondering what's been the point of this Coalition.' Many more will wonder what is the point of the BBC! |
OBAMA TRIUMPHS...
Now that the..ahem... "world's highest moral authority" the UN has finally gotten around to authorising "all necessary measures" - short of soldiers going in - the BBC has instantly responded in tried and tested manner. Mark Mardell was on Today just after 7am telling us that thanks to Obama's decision not to show leadership, this has enabled the UN to show leadership. However whilst the BBC pays tribute to Obama the do-nothing, it is quick to posit all kinds of troubles for David Cameron. Noticed thee BBC suggested that this is a 50/50 Coalition Government we had. Really - I seem to recall the Lib-Dem's getting a fraction of the Conservative vote?
Posts
