Sunday, 25 September 2016

#408w - Bias staff at the bias BBC.

Have you ever known a BBC broadcaster sacked for bias?

No - me neither!

So Spring Watch co-host Chris Packman gets away with bias because, and wait for this great excuse, he is NOT a regular presenter!!!

So you be the judge of what this apparently part-time presenter said which was that he branded all hunters and shooters as the 'nasty brigade'.

Personally I've never seen anyone less tolerant than the supposed 'Green brigade' but then what do I know as a white middle class male with right of centre views. I'm an endangered species which the BBC does everything in its power to destroy.

The real irony in all this is that most of the BBC management are white middle class males and yes females, paid handsomely from the  compulsory licensee tax we all have to pay, who all live comfortable urban lives and couldn't tell the difference between a stoat, mink, ferret or weasel!


Friday, 16 September 2016

#407w - It's time David Dimbleby retired.

Question Time last night was a classic case of BBC basis.

1. The panel of five contained only one person, in Quentin Letts, who supported Brexit. Balance, and a reflection that the Leavers WON, should have had three Leavers to two Remainers.

2. The audience from Salisbury appeared to be 2 thirds from the Left and only a third from the Right and this in a Conservative seat.

3. Dimbleby allowed Campbell and MacDonald far too much of the time to slug it out over the current issues in the Labour party. At times allowing the rants to go on unchecked. 

4. Unusually, entirely due to his increasingly poor chairmanship, he only had time for 3 questions.

Dimbleby in terms of chairing QT is past his Best Before Date.


Wednesday, 14 September 2016

#406w - Those 'Controversial' boundary changes.

On the six and 10 o'clock news yesterday the BBC described the boundary changes as 'controversial' but controversial to who I ask?

The changes which as I understand it have been drawn up by the Electoral Commission aim to make all constituencies of equal size (as the chartists first demanded) and reduce the number of MPs from 650 to 600.

I doubt the public find these proposals 'controversial' and while some MPs might, especially the ones losing their seats, the left leaning BBC does who of course love to bash the Conservatives at any opportunity. However as I say above these changes have come from the EC and not the government but no mention of that from the BBC is of course all the government's fault.

During the interview with Labour's Tristram Hunt, he was allowed to claim without interruption or follow up question, that these changes were 'unfair' and 'undemocratic' when the truth is that the existing system, as most honest pundits will admit, is heavily skewed in Labour's favour.

The bias in the, still unreformed, BBC knows no bounds.

Friday, 9 September 2016

#405w - BBC and grammer schools.

The BBC once again reverts to type over the PM's decision to allow the creation of new Grammar schools aimed at selecting pupils on intellectual merit.

During the news tonight on BBC 1 at six and 10 the  first item dealt with Grammar school issue and contained three vox pops who were all against the idea.

Are the BBC really trying to tell me that for balance they could not have found somebody who stood up for the principles of Grammar schools.

The BBC's DNA contains huge swathes of anti elitist thinking and this from an organisation that is actually elitist to its core.

Sunday, 28 August 2016

# 404w - Today programme alters history to suit its agenda.


 The BBC still cannot believe 'they' lost the referendum as is evident from their continuing stories on an increase in racist attacks post Brexit and doom and gloom over our future.

When they do cover the continued problems of the EU they alter history to eradicate any unpleasant truths as covered in this blog post:-

http://www.eureferendum.com/blogview.aspx?blogno=86195

I addition to the above on the evening news last night, on an item covering Theresa May's call for a 'Race Audit', they did not cover one opposing point view with all, around, five vox pox interviewees saying that this country was racist.  



Monday, 11 July 2016

#403w - The BBC is trying to make the news and not just reporting it.

With my knowledge of the BBC's reporting over the years this is a tactic that has been going on for a while - here are two post Brexit examples.

1. Racism - The BBC has been full of stories, since we voted to leave the EU, that there has been an increase in racists attacks. This even permeated to the One Show one evening last week where various interviewees claimed to have been the subject of racist abuse. One black youth, who said he had received racist abuse, was asked by the reporter if he knew that was a hate crime and should be reported to the police.

2. Tory leadership contest - One clearly senses that the BBC are keen to find any Tory, who voted Leave, who is upset that their party is going to be lead by a Remainer. This was very clear today on the six o'clock news when the reporter in Harrogate, Yorkshire, sought out Tories who were unhappy with Thersa May. The reporter did try and balance the three or four who said they were unhappy with one man who wasn't that concerned.

Both these are examples, as I put in my title, that show the BBC trying to make the news and not just reporting it.

PS. My other half has just informed me that on the One Show tonight they interviewed a woman in her refuge home who thought she would be unable to vote in the referendum  because women in refuge centres don't give out addresses in case their exes track them down and so having no address they cannot vote. Anyway this individual did manage to vote (not quite certain how she managed it but that isn't the point as you shall see) and she was so excited because she now had a stake in the country's future.

Now here is a question - Which way did this woman vote?

Was it remain or leave?

Remain of course if that wasn't practically guaranteed.

 

Sunday, 26 June 2016

#402w - BBC back to its old tricks.

I haven't posted for some time as I was pleasantly surprised by the credible attempt the BBC made to be balanced during the referendum campaign.

However since the result they have returned to their old bad habits.

Take two examples one specific and the other general.

1. At 6am on Friday on their news bulletin they falsely and dangerously claimed that the pound had collapsed following the result.

2. In the same vein all the vox pops at the time of this entry have contained doom mongers predicting the end of the world as we know it. My belief is that the BBC have deliberately sought out these people who I would suspect would not have been that easy to find.

So I believe BBC bias is now back and I will again record examples on here as and when I can.


Tuesday, 26 April 2016

#401w - Huw Edwards interviews Obama on the EU.

This interview on 24th April was as soft as they get with Huw Edwards asking no difficult questions and allowing Obama all time in the world to say exactly what he wanted to say about his belief that the UK would be better off in the EU.

Why wasn't this point put to Obama?

http://eureferendum.com/blogview.aspx?blogno=86034




#400w - The BBC protects it own.

On or around the 7th April in the morning on Radio 4 they had a long interview with a Mr Henderson who was a lawyer who had supplied his partner Mr Jimenez with a 'chemsex' drug which killed him. However missing from the report was the FACT that Mr Henderson had brought the drugs from a BBC executive producer Alexander Parkin.

I wonder why the bias BBC failed to mention this fact?!


Thursday, 31 March 2016

# 399 - war - Can we still trust the BBC?

I have just finished an excellent book by Robin Aitken called ' Can we still trust the BBC?'

On the back cover of the book it says:-

"Robin Aitken is a former BBC correspondent who spent 25 years at the Corporation. Starting in local radio he worked across a range of BBC radio and television programmes ending his career on the Today programme. He has an intimate understanding of the BBC and brings unique insight into its workings."

I highly recommend that anyone interested in the issue of whether the BBC is bias reads this very easy to read 242 page book.

Robin Aitken hopes that there are some recent signs that some things have improved but to
my mind there is absolutely no doubt, with what I already know and the evidence he presents, that the answer to the question posed in the title of his book is a resounding - NO.