On Radio 4 this morning we had a classic example of subtle bias which can be worse than blatant bias if repeated often enough - as it is.
The topic was about the homeless and the reporter asked the homeless person a question in this way :-
" People believe that homelessness is caused mainly by drugs and alcoholic dependency but THAT ISN'T TRUE IS IT?
This allowed, the no doubt handpicked, homeless person to reply :-
" No it is not I was just made redundant...........etc"
So far you may not see the above example as bias but when I ask you to consider if a reporter would EVER ask a Conservative MP the question below you may understand where I'm coming from.
" People believe the Conservatives are still the nasty party but THAT ISN'T TRUE IS IT?"
Exactly - I rest my case.
Wednesday, 23 December 2015
Monday, 21 December 2015
# 379 - war - The BBC and country matters.
Real country folk who understand and work in the countryside can see that the BBC's coverage of this subject concentrates on programmes 'about' the countryside and not 'for' the people in it. The BBC's take on country matters are slanted by their metropolitan editors who make their programmes for metropolitan viewers.
An interesting article by Tim Bonner, who is Chief Executive of The Countryside Alliance (CLA) takes the BBC presenter Chris Packham to tasks for his high profile engagement with the political animal rights campaigns on social media and in an article in the BBC's Wildlife magazine.
BBC reporters are not allowed to express controversial views on the BBC or even in print something Chris Packman has ignored with his overt criticism of fox hunting, game shooters, The National Trust, Wildlife Trusts and even the RSPB of which he is vice-President.
The CLA has complained to the BBC but only received the usual list of standard excuses that Chris Packman is a contract employee, BBC magazines being a separate division and that he is not actually presenting 'at the moment'.
Interestingly when Rod Liddle, while working for the BBC, wrote in a national newspaper about "belch-filled dining rooms" of countryside supporters it was one of the things that eventually lead to him resigning after he was told that was "not acceptable " and "did not square with the BBC's obligation to be impartial or seen to be impartial." Clearly there was one rule for Rod Liddle and is another for Chris Packham.
So here again we have the clear double standards of an organisation that is far too large, too big for its boots, is out of control and with very poor weak leadership.
The BBC is oblivious and immune to criticism and is thus able to ' get away with murder.'
An interesting article by Tim Bonner, who is Chief Executive of The Countryside Alliance (CLA) takes the BBC presenter Chris Packham to tasks for his high profile engagement with the political animal rights campaigns on social media and in an article in the BBC's Wildlife magazine.
BBC reporters are not allowed to express controversial views on the BBC or even in print something Chris Packman has ignored with his overt criticism of fox hunting, game shooters, The National Trust, Wildlife Trusts and even the RSPB of which he is vice-President.
The CLA has complained to the BBC but only received the usual list of standard excuses that Chris Packman is a contract employee, BBC magazines being a separate division and that he is not actually presenting 'at the moment'.
Interestingly when Rod Liddle, while working for the BBC, wrote in a national newspaper about "belch-filled dining rooms" of countryside supporters it was one of the things that eventually lead to him resigning after he was told that was "not acceptable " and "did not square with the BBC's obligation to be impartial or seen to be impartial." Clearly there was one rule for Rod Liddle and is another for Chris Packham.
So here again we have the clear double standards of an organisation that is far too large, too big for its boots, is out of control and with very poor weak leadership.
The BBC is oblivious and immune to criticism and is thus able to ' get away with murder.'
# 378 - war - I've just seen a pig fly by!
The BBC say that the soft loans from the EU won't prejudice their reporting of matters EU - and I 've just seen squadron of pigs fly by!
https://www.rt.com/uk/326561-bbc-eu-referendum-bias/
https://www.rt.com/uk/326561-bbc-eu-referendum-bias/
Monday, 14 December 2015
# 377 - war - How 'balanced' reporting should work.
The BBC should report on all stories in a balanced way as set out in their Royal Charter and this should be especially the case on controversial high profile issues.
In an ideal world each report, on a given subject, should contain equal time airing both sides of the argument.
In reality this seldom if ever happens and the BBC rely on stating, when I have complained about bias over the last 25 years, that over the course of time their reporting balances out as they do cover both sides of a story. This from my experience is simple NOT true and in any case is very difficult to prove unless one listens and watches all the BBC's output armed with a stop watch.
Recently Quentin Letts broadcast on Radio 4 a series under the title 'What is the point of the.' His first one, which I heard, took a light hearted look at the Met Office which rightly came in for some stick about getting so many weather forecasts wrong over the years and of course that they unquestioningly supported Climate Change.
Well the 'Green Blob' took exception to this programme and lobbied the BBC that it should be removed from the I-player and after a couple of weeks it duly was. This programme was but ONE giving an opposing view on Climate Change, and as I say in a light hearted way, and yet the BBC took it down as if it had never existed. This is censorship of the most invidious kind.
Quentin Letts wrote a full page article about this saga in Saturday's Daily Mail and is well worth a read just to see how the BBC really works.
It is pretty clear to me that the BBC regularly breaks its Royal Charter and does NOT report in a balanced way at or even over time.
In an ideal world each report, on a given subject, should contain equal time airing both sides of the argument.
In reality this seldom if ever happens and the BBC rely on stating, when I have complained about bias over the last 25 years, that over the course of time their reporting balances out as they do cover both sides of a story. This from my experience is simple NOT true and in any case is very difficult to prove unless one listens and watches all the BBC's output armed with a stop watch.
Recently Quentin Letts broadcast on Radio 4 a series under the title 'What is the point of the.' His first one, which I heard, took a light hearted look at the Met Office which rightly came in for some stick about getting so many weather forecasts wrong over the years and of course that they unquestioningly supported Climate Change.
Well the 'Green Blob' took exception to this programme and lobbied the BBC that it should be removed from the I-player and after a couple of weeks it duly was. This programme was but ONE giving an opposing view on Climate Change, and as I say in a light hearted way, and yet the BBC took it down as if it had never existed. This is censorship of the most invidious kind.
Quentin Letts wrote a full page article about this saga in Saturday's Daily Mail and is well worth a read just to see how the BBC really works.
It is pretty clear to me that the BBC regularly breaks its Royal Charter and does NOT report in a balanced way at or even over time.
Saturday, 12 December 2015
# 376 - war - BBC bias against Trump.
I think Trump shot himself in the foot about six times over his totally impractical suggestion that all Muslims should be barred from entering the USA until " we can work out what the hell is going on".
Even so if you want the BBC's bias summed up in a statistic here it is.
After Trump's comments two petitions were launched in Britain one asked if Trump should be barred form the UK with the vote currently standing at 548,363 and the other asked if we should close our borders until ISIS is defeated now stands at 452,110.
I'll give you one guess which poll the BBC extensively covered and which one they have thus far ignored.
Yup you guessed it the one that asked if Trump should be barred.
Well done go to the top of the class!
Even so if you want the BBC's bias summed up in a statistic here it is.
After Trump's comments two petitions were launched in Britain one asked if Trump should be barred form the UK with the vote currently standing at 548,363 and the other asked if we should close our borders until ISIS is defeated now stands at 452,110.
I'll give you one guess which poll the BBC extensively covered and which one they have thus far ignored.
Yup you guessed it the one that asked if Trump should be barred.
Well done go to the top of the class!
Tuesday, 8 December 2015
# 375 - war - More Climate Change and the BBC.
As covered in the last post the BBC is bias in its reporting of climate change. Another example was on the 10 O'clock news tonight on BBC1. We had the usual dried up reservoir in Namibia but there was NO mention that Namibia is the driest country in Sub-Saharan Africa. We naturally had a mention that if the planet warmed things would get worse but as I explain below the climate has NOT warmed in the last 20 years.
Also in Paris today a report was released that show that CO2 emissions may be down by as much as 1.6% after decades of increases. So why was this 'good news' not mentioned on the news tonight?
The reason is very simple it doesn't fit in with the BBC's promotion of climate change (at least they don't say Global Warming anymore!) in which they push that rises in CO2 are leading to the planet warming.
As you can see from the above the BBC's reporting is extremely selective.
The BBC's reports on climate change are wilfully bias.
Also in Paris today a report was released that show that CO2 emissions may be down by as much as 1.6% after decades of increases. So why was this 'good news' not mentioned on the news tonight?
The reason is very simple it doesn't fit in with the BBC's promotion of climate change (at least they don't say Global Warming anymore!) in which they push that rises in CO2 are leading to the planet warming.
As you can see from the above the BBC's reporting is extremely selective.
The BBC's reports on climate change are wilfully bias.
Sunday, 6 December 2015
# 374 - war - The BBC and the Paris climate conference.
In the Spectator this week, under an article titled 'COOLER HEADS - The age of climate realism is upon us' by Benny Peiser, he mentions how the global surface temperatures have failed to adhere to the predictions of climate modellers. Rather than rapid warming, as the IPCC has predicted, the temperature rise has been barely discernable, standing nearly still for most of the last 20 years. This FACT is known to us climate sceptics or as the climate zealots like to brand us climate deniers.
However this is a FACT and of course completely discredits the theory that a rise in CO2 emissions leads to our planet warming. The world's CO2 emissions are increasing and yet the temperature hasn't gone up.
So the BIG question is why has the BBC made NO reference to this startling FACT on its coverage of the Paris climate change conference?
The answer is of course that the BBC is completely one sided and bias on its coverage of climate change and all its staff have been instructed that there is no debate on this subject and they must push the line that 'we' are damaging our planet and only by following a strict 'Green Agenda' can we be saved.
Even if the our climate was warming the facts are that up to around an increase of 3.5C we would all benefit and this would NOT lead to any serious damage. What damage, if any, that did occur could easily be managed.
Personally I wear the badge of climate sceptic with great pride.
However this is a FACT and of course completely discredits the theory that a rise in CO2 emissions leads to our planet warming. The world's CO2 emissions are increasing and yet the temperature hasn't gone up.
So the BIG question is why has the BBC made NO reference to this startling FACT on its coverage of the Paris climate change conference?
The answer is of course that the BBC is completely one sided and bias on its coverage of climate change and all its staff have been instructed that there is no debate on this subject and they must push the line that 'we' are damaging our planet and only by following a strict 'Green Agenda' can we be saved.
Even if the our climate was warming the facts are that up to around an increase of 3.5C we would all benefit and this would NOT lead to any serious damage. What damage, if any, that did occur could easily be managed.
Personally I wear the badge of climate sceptic with great pride.
# 373 - war - Peter Hitchen on the BBC and their support for cannabis.
Those in the SW1 bubble use recreation cannabis 'sensibly' and don't see why they should have to break the law to do so. As a result they selfishly want the use of cannabis legalised but completely ignore the long term risks of using the drug and more importantly the harm it does to those who lead less fortunate lives than themselves.
As Peter Hitchens says there is no 'War on Drugs' which may be alright for them but is most definitely not alright for those caught up in the harmful use of drugs in many of our inner cities.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/debate/article-3347826/PETER-HITCHENS-boasting-BBC-cannabis-abuser-just-proves-war-drugs-bogus.html
As Peter Hitchens says there is no 'War on Drugs' which may be alright for them but is most definitely not alright for those caught up in the harmful use of drugs in many of our inner cities.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/debate/article-3347826/PETER-HITCHENS-boasting-BBC-cannabis-abuser-just-proves-war-drugs-bogus.html
Monday, 30 November 2015
# 372 - war - More on Jeremy Clarkson.
I read in the papers today that the BBC are to screen a two-part special tribute to Jeremy Clarkson over Christmas - and this about a man they sacked a few months ago for hitting a fellow employee.
This is a glaring example of the BBC having it both ways and resurrects another example of this when the BBC broadcast a tribute to Jimmy Savile, after he died, having started (and then shelved)a Newsnight investigation into his sexual depravity.
The BBC is far too big for its boots, is very poorly led and operates as a law unto itself.
"Who will rid us of this troublesome corporation?"
This is a glaring example of the BBC having it both ways and resurrects another example of this when the BBC broadcast a tribute to Jimmy Savile, after he died, having started (and then shelved)a Newsnight investigation into his sexual depravity.
The BBC is far too big for its boots, is very poorly led and operates as a law unto itself.
"Who will rid us of this troublesome corporation?"
# 371 - war - BBC's coverage of the Paris bombing.
As Rod Liddle, former editor of BBC Radio 4's Today programme, says in this weeks Spectator " the BBC's coverage throughout (the Paris bombings) was appalling in its cringeing, politically correct, liberal bias."
Well he should know!
Well he should know!
Wednesday, 11 November 2015
# 370 - war - The Daily Mail and it's 'Fat Cat' stories.
Over the last few days the Daily Mail has run and investigative story, with the help of the Taxpayers Alliance, on public service 'Fat Cat' salaries and expenses.
This is without doubt a story of public interest but as yet the BBC has given this no coverage. I would suggest this is because the topic is too close to comfort for the 'Fat Cats' in the BBC and of course they hate the Daily Mail with a vengeance.
This is without doubt a story of public interest but as yet the BBC has given this no coverage. I would suggest this is because the topic is too close to comfort for the 'Fat Cats' in the BBC and of course they hate the Daily Mail with a vengeance.
# 369 - WAR - The BBC views public-service broadcasting as optional.
A snippet I picked up from the Daily Telegraph made by Charles Moore is very true.
Concerning the recent spat between the ITN and BBC news at Ten, concerning Huw Edwards and Tom Bradby, he points out that if the BBC is now facing competition it only has itself to blame. This is because the BBC took a wrong turn in 2000 when they got rid of the Nine O'clock News to seek higher ratings for its non-news programmes.
Charles Moore points out that this decision was proof that, with the coming of the 21st century, the BBC saw public service broadcasting as an optional, rather than central. Now it is paying the price.
Concerning the recent spat between the ITN and BBC news at Ten, concerning Huw Edwards and Tom Bradby, he points out that if the BBC is now facing competition it only has itself to blame. This is because the BBC took a wrong turn in 2000 when they got rid of the Nine O'clock News to seek higher ratings for its non-news programmes.
Charles Moore points out that this decision was proof that, with the coming of the 21st century, the BBC saw public service broadcasting as an optional, rather than central. Now it is paying the price.
Wednesday, 21 October 2015
# 368 - WAR - The liberal luvies of the BBC are generally anti the monarchy.
Peter Hunt the BBC's Royal correspondent on Radio 4's Today Programme made a barbed comparison between the 'unelected' Queen and the Chinese president.
He said " The president of a single party state which shed its Imperial past more than a century ago was taking up temporary residence in the palace home of an unelected monarch".
And this from a journalist from the UNELECTED and bias BBC!!!!
He said " The president of a single party state which shed its Imperial past more than a century ago was taking up temporary residence in the palace home of an unelected monarch".
And this from a journalist from the UNELECTED and bias BBC!!!!
Saturday, 17 October 2015
# 367 - WAR - The EU versus Europe.
Most of the BBC's out put at the moment is NOT differentiating between the EU and Europe choosing to allow people to get away with saying we need to stay in Europe rather than the more toxic EU.
This is bias.
We are in Europe but do not have to be part of the EU. As the car sticker I once saw said " I love Europe but hate the EU!"
The main action is increasingly at the global top table and we are represented by an EU official. If we were free of the EU we could better represent ourselves.
The BBC's DNA is pro EU so they need to be watched VERY carefully over the next two years.
This is bias.
We are in Europe but do not have to be part of the EU. As the car sticker I once saw said " I love Europe but hate the EU!"
The main action is increasingly at the global top table and we are represented by an EU official. If we were free of the EU we could better represent ourselves.
The BBC's DNA is pro EU so they need to be watched VERY carefully over the next two years.
Thursday, 1 October 2015
# 366 - WAR - Update on my TV licence - Part four.
This is this my final update on my protest to not pay my TV licence, which I have not done since 2008 due to the BBC's bias.
After my house was searched, under a warrant, on the 28th May I knew that I would be taken to court as TV licencing had finally proved I did have a live TV. My aim, from then on in, was to try and reduce my fine to the absolute minimum.
My court appearance was at the North Somerset Magistrates court on 29th September where I pleaded guilty and submitted my 'Plea in Mitigation below'.
The three magistrates completely ignored my plea for a conditional discharge and fined me £805.
However as I had not paid my licence since 2008 I had saved over £1000 so on that basis it was a relatively happy ending.
Sadly the BBC's output is still bias and unless or until there is a MASS refusal to not pay the licence fee, including some high profile people, then individual protestors will be picked off by the Establishment and the 'System'.
As to hoping that there is even one MP with the guts to lead this campaign I suggest you don't hold your breath.
After my house was searched, under a warrant, on the 28th May I knew that I would be taken to court as TV licencing had finally proved I did have a live TV. My aim, from then on in, was to try and reduce my fine to the absolute minimum.
My court appearance was at the North Somerset Magistrates court on 29th September where I pleaded guilty and submitted my 'Plea in Mitigation below'.
The three magistrates completely ignored my plea for a conditional discharge and fined me £805.
However as I had not paid my licence since 2008 I had saved over £1000 so on that basis it was a relatively happy ending.
Sadly the BBC's output is still bias and unless or until there is a MASS refusal to not pay the licence fee, including some high profile people, then individual protestors will be picked off by the Establishment and the 'System'.
As to hoping that there is even one MP with the guts to lead this campaign I suggest you don't hold your breath.
Statement of Mitigation
First I would like to point out that
I now own a TV licence, having brought one on line on the 30th May,
copy attached, and I have done so as I intend to continue my protest in other
directions.
Second and importantly, I would like
to ask you to remember how much the public are reliant on you and our court
system, in general, to protect them from the over mighty ‘Establishment’ and
‘State’ to ensure they both do not abuse their power and privileges to the
detriment of us the people.
So I am here accused of not paying
my TV licence. This stance is a political protest because as a ‘customer’ of
the BBC I am not, nor are the rest of the public, receiving the un-biased
‘service’, we should get, as laid down in the Royal Charter of the BBC. In any
other walk of life the ‘customer’ is rightly protected by the law against
faulty goods or services and I contend the same should apply to the BBC. How
can I be charged for breaking the law when the BBC breaks its supply contract
with apparent impunity, broadcasting in a biased manner on a daily basis, which
is against its Royal Charter? That the non payment of my TV licence has been a
political protest is acknowledged by the attached letter of support from my
Member of Parliament.
That the BBC’s output is biased is
now increasingly an established fact and most recently endorsed by Roger Mosey,
in June this year, former head of BBC news adding to the long list of past BBC journalists
and officials, MPs ,official reports and the public who can all see the BBC is
bias.
Over the last 25 years I have been
noting, complaining and recording the BBC’s bias in three specific areas where
they clearly and provably do not report in a balanced way. These are their
reports that are pro climate change, pro the EU, form who they have received
millions of pounds in soft loans, and pro the left of British politics. My
analysis and records show that the BBC is institutionally bias.
The idea of being fined for a
genuine political protest is uncomfortable to me as a decent hard working
member of society who otherwise is of good character. Furthermore the idea that
the State enforces TV licensing as a criminal offence is also uncomfortable as
it criminalizes me an otherwise decent person. Also here in England we face the unfairness, of the recently
reported disparity, between the more lenient sentencing for this offence in Scotland
I purchased my licence through
gritted teeth despite the injustice and I hope you will consider this is a case
that you could seriously consider for a conditional discharge.
Thank you for listening and for your
consideration to my plea in mitigation.
T.N.Warry
Friday, 25 September 2015
# 365 - WAR - The BBC and VW.
Personally I don't believe in the whole hyped up scenario concerning vehicle pollution when one major volcanic eruption puts more CO2 in the air than from all the cars ever made! Mind you I'm not a believer in the dogma of manmade climate change either.
Next you need to know that the increased use of diesel came about from 'Green' lobby groups who pushed for it as it produced less CO2 and they turned a blind eye to the fact that it was a dirtier fuel.
This is not the first time that 'Green' lobbyists have got things wrong as they were also largely responsible for the switch form leaded to unleaded fuel despite the fact unleaded fuel releases far more CO2 into the atmosphere than the old leaded!!
Anyway back to VW and the BBC and it pretty clear to me that the BBC is showing bias in its reporting.
On the six O'clock news on BBC 1 today they ended the item on VW by interviewing a commuter who drove from Cardiff to Bristol every day and owned a VW of course. He said that due to the current situation he would think twice before buying another VW.
This interview was clearly biased as there was NO attempt to achieve a balance as they only interviewed one person. Personally I have yet to speak to a person who rates car emissions as a factor in buying a new car.
As to the BBC holding the 'Greens' to account for getting the whole lead/unleaded and petrol/diesel arguments wrong don't hold your breath.
Next you need to know that the increased use of diesel came about from 'Green' lobby groups who pushed for it as it produced less CO2 and they turned a blind eye to the fact that it was a dirtier fuel.
This is not the first time that 'Green' lobbyists have got things wrong as they were also largely responsible for the switch form leaded to unleaded fuel despite the fact unleaded fuel releases far more CO2 into the atmosphere than the old leaded!!
Anyway back to VW and the BBC and it pretty clear to me that the BBC is showing bias in its reporting.
On the six O'clock news on BBC 1 today they ended the item on VW by interviewing a commuter who drove from Cardiff to Bristol every day and owned a VW of course. He said that due to the current situation he would think twice before buying another VW.
This interview was clearly biased as there was NO attempt to achieve a balance as they only interviewed one person. Personally I have yet to speak to a person who rates car emissions as a factor in buying a new car.
As to the BBC holding the 'Greens' to account for getting the whole lead/unleaded and petrol/diesel arguments wrong don't hold your breath.
Saturday, 19 September 2015
# 364 - WAR - Rob Liddle tells it how it is!
Rod Liddle former editor of BBC Radio Four's Today programme says this in this weeks Spectator under the heading:-
Why emote about migrants during a concert?
" Listen, BBC. You've at last got rid of Clarkson, which is what you wanted all along. No more of that laddish and un-PC Top Gear. You parachute your most expensive presenters in for half an hour to the safe bits of Syria or Hungary or Serbia in order to let them emote for a couple of minutes and convince us we should open our doors to unlimited number of what you call refugees. You've got a big four-part special on BBC 3 about how appallingly racist white Britain is today. On Radio 4 your presenters react with out rage when accused of being biased in favour of the EU ( despite the welter of evidence to support that point). You have your middle-class liberal agenda - fine, OK, we know all that and while it galls from time to time, we'll rub along. All we ask is that you let us have the Last Night of the Proms; pomp, circumstance and patriotism, unleavened by your usual bien-pensant ill-thought-out sentiments. can't we just have that? No mention of refuges, vibrant diversity, vulnerable people etc?
Nope. The BBC hates the Last Night of the Proms. It hates it as much as it hates Jeremy Clarkson. so they brought in a foreign lesbian feminist and told her to stick it to the audience - the BBC's licence-fee payers. Next year, if it's still running, the conductor will either be Jihadi John or Jeremy Corbyn."
Says it all really!
Why emote about migrants during a concert?
" Listen, BBC. You've at last got rid of Clarkson, which is what you wanted all along. No more of that laddish and un-PC Top Gear. You parachute your most expensive presenters in for half an hour to the safe bits of Syria or Hungary or Serbia in order to let them emote for a couple of minutes and convince us we should open our doors to unlimited number of what you call refugees. You've got a big four-part special on BBC 3 about how appallingly racist white Britain is today. On Radio 4 your presenters react with out rage when accused of being biased in favour of the EU ( despite the welter of evidence to support that point). You have your middle-class liberal agenda - fine, OK, we know all that and while it galls from time to time, we'll rub along. All we ask is that you let us have the Last Night of the Proms; pomp, circumstance and patriotism, unleavened by your usual bien-pensant ill-thought-out sentiments. can't we just have that? No mention of refuges, vibrant diversity, vulnerable people etc?
Nope. The BBC hates the Last Night of the Proms. It hates it as much as it hates Jeremy Clarkson. so they brought in a foreign lesbian feminist and told her to stick it to the audience - the BBC's licence-fee payers. Next year, if it's still running, the conductor will either be Jihadi John or Jeremy Corbyn."
Says it all really!
Wednesday, 16 September 2015
# 363 - WAR - Danny Cohen and his wife Noreena Hertz.
Recently 29 'Luvvie Stars' wrote a letter to the government saying that its review of the licence fee would damage Britain.
This idea which it is rumoured came from Noreena was supported by Danny, Director of BBC TV, who is said to have put them up for it.
The trouble is a couple of the signatories had not even read the letter before it was sent.
At the culture, media and sport select committee the chair MP Jesse Norman pointed out to Lord Hall that this whole incident had broken the BBC's guidelines for impartiality.
Lord Hall said that influencing lobbying was not the same as influencing broadcasts but the BBC's Royal Charter is quite clear as it says:-
" The BBC must remain independent and distanced from government initiatives, campaigns, charities and their agendas, no matter how apparently worthy the cause or how much their message appears to be accepted or uncontroversial."
Jesse Norma asked why the BBC had not held an inquiry - WHY INDEED?
This idea which it is rumoured came from Noreena was supported by Danny, Director of BBC TV, who is said to have put them up for it.
The trouble is a couple of the signatories had not even read the letter before it was sent.
At the culture, media and sport select committee the chair MP Jesse Norman pointed out to Lord Hall that this whole incident had broken the BBC's guidelines for impartiality.
Lord Hall said that influencing lobbying was not the same as influencing broadcasts but the BBC's Royal Charter is quite clear as it says:-
" The BBC must remain independent and distanced from government initiatives, campaigns, charities and their agendas, no matter how apparently worthy the cause or how much their message appears to be accepted or uncontroversial."
Jesse Norma asked why the BBC had not held an inquiry - WHY INDEED?
# 362 - WAR - 'Fantasy land' salaries.
The BBC has missed its target to reduced the number of managers earning over £150,000 by a fifth.
This target was set in 2009 and was to be delivered by 2013 and then extended to 2015.
In fact the number earning over £160,00 rose from 66 to 74 in the last 12 months!!
The above was confirmed by Anne Bulford, the BBC's managing director of finance and operations, to the culture, media and sports select committee.
This target was set in 2009 and was to be delivered by 2013 and then extended to 2015.
In fact the number earning over £160,00 rose from 66 to 74 in the last 12 months!!
The above was confirmed by Anne Bulford, the BBC's managing director of finance and operations, to the culture, media and sports select committee.
Monday, 14 September 2015
# 361 - WAR - Games anyone can play!
The BBC is so 'Institutionally Bias' that any day of the week you can play any number of games to confirm their bias.
Dominic Lawson is the latest I've spotted playing one of these games which involved monitoring Andrew Marr's press reviewers. Yesterday he noticed that he had the Tory hating Polly Toynbee and the editor of the Communist Morning Star as two of it's three reviewers. while he thought this just may have been justified given the lead story was Jeremy Corbyn's election as Labour leader he decided to check back the paper reviewers over the previous three months.
What he found was only ONE could be described as from the right that being the historian Andrew Roberts. Of the three MPs since June 14th two were form Labour and one from the Scottish National Party.
This is bias and against their Royal Charter.
Here is another game to play involving any news story which includes seeking the views of the public. The two things to monitor is how many views they canvass are from the Left or Right and importantly which view is the last to be played. Typically you will find out of three interviewees two are Left and one is Right with a Left finishing the news item thus leaving the Left wing view lingering on in the public's mind.
There is NO hope to reform the BBC until the cosy consensus of our current 'Establishment' becomes answerable to the people of this country over and above the five yearly ritual farce called a General Election!
The Harrogate Agenda provides the answer which just happens to be another cause dear to my heart!
http://harrogateagenda.org.uk/
Dominic Lawson is the latest I've spotted playing one of these games which involved monitoring Andrew Marr's press reviewers. Yesterday he noticed that he had the Tory hating Polly Toynbee and the editor of the Communist Morning Star as two of it's three reviewers. while he thought this just may have been justified given the lead story was Jeremy Corbyn's election as Labour leader he decided to check back the paper reviewers over the previous three months.
What he found was only ONE could be described as from the right that being the historian Andrew Roberts. Of the three MPs since June 14th two were form Labour and one from the Scottish National Party.
This is bias and against their Royal Charter.
Here is another game to play involving any news story which includes seeking the views of the public. The two things to monitor is how many views they canvass are from the Left or Right and importantly which view is the last to be played. Typically you will find out of three interviewees two are Left and one is Right with a Left finishing the news item thus leaving the Left wing view lingering on in the public's mind.
There is NO hope to reform the BBC until the cosy consensus of our current 'Establishment' becomes answerable to the people of this country over and above the five yearly ritual farce called a General Election!
The Harrogate Agenda provides the answer which just happens to be another cause dear to my heart!
http://harrogateagenda.org.uk/
Saturday, 29 August 2015
# 360 - WAR - Alan Yentob.
Alan Yentob, the BBC's Creative Director on £180,000 a year, is a classic BBC official and so long as his ilk are at the top of the BBC there is NO hope that it will be reformed and report in a balanced way.
The problem is Alan Yentob is also the Chairman of Kids Co and has used his position and influence in the BBC to attempt to protect Miss Batmanghelidih from the current claims of financial mismanagement.
Also we learn that back in 2010 he presented a show called 'Art is Child's Play' which involved promoting Kids Co during an interview with its founder.
BBC guidelines are quite clear and state:-
"There must never be any suggestion that commercial , financial or other interests have influenced editorial judgements. Those involved in the production of BBC content must have no significant connection with products, businesses or other organisations featured in that content."
That Yentob and others at the BBC are able to flout these rules shows you all that wrong with the BBC and how truly pathetic our politicians are in getting to grips with reforming the BBC.
So long as the likes of Alan Yentob, who is a good friend of Lord Hall, run the BBC it will remain the bloated, corrupt and bias organisation that it is.
The problem is Alan Yentob is also the Chairman of Kids Co and has used his position and influence in the BBC to attempt to protect Miss Batmanghelidih from the current claims of financial mismanagement.
Also we learn that back in 2010 he presented a show called 'Art is Child's Play' which involved promoting Kids Co during an interview with its founder.
BBC guidelines are quite clear and state:-
"There must never be any suggestion that commercial , financial or other interests have influenced editorial judgements. Those involved in the production of BBC content must have no significant connection with products, businesses or other organisations featured in that content."
That Yentob and others at the BBC are able to flout these rules shows you all that wrong with the BBC and how truly pathetic our politicians are in getting to grips with reforming the BBC.
So long as the likes of Alan Yentob, who is a good friend of Lord Hall, run the BBC it will remain the bloated, corrupt and bias organisation that it is.
Tuesday, 25 August 2015
# 359 - WAR - BBC to end the contract with the Met Office.
Apparently the BBC pay the Met Office £30 million a year which seems an awful lot for getting the weather wrong so often! However, that aside, what the BBC loves about the Met Office is that it has clearly brought into the whole climate change industry, which presents climate change as an established fact.
Even so, no doubt looking to save much needed money, the BBC are ending the contract next year and looking to a company based in New Zealand for their weather reports.
The BBC bias over climate change is clear in that they seldom if ever report any balance on such a controversial issue. However three weeks ago, on Radio 4, Quentin Letts broadcast a half hour programme under the title " What is the point of the Met Office?" On it he showed how clearly over the years they have got the weather wrong, have become far too political, overly keen on presentation over substance and of course pushing a green, climate change agenda.
As a result of this programme Letts was subjected to untold abuse from the twittersphere lead by the BBC's own climate change correspondent Roger Harrabin. Some of the internet reaction was 'foul' with one even suggesting he should be shot twice (to ensure he was dead) and 'End the man' wrote another contributor.
In order to realise just how bias the BBC currently is on climate change you need to read some if not all the following:-
The Skeptical environmentalist - Lomborg
Heaven and Earth( global warming the missing science) - Ian Plimer
The real global warming disaster - Christopher Booker
Watermelons - James Delingpole
Silent spring at 50 (the false crisis of Racheal Carson) - Meiners, Desrochers and Morris.
Climates change that is true, as of course they do four times a year with the seasons, but it is far from an established fact that any climate change or adverse weather conditions are 'man' made. Instead we should be considering, the many unreported factors such as, the natural changing cycles caused over many thousand if not millions of years by such things as sun spot activity.
Even so, no doubt looking to save much needed money, the BBC are ending the contract next year and looking to a company based in New Zealand for their weather reports.
The BBC bias over climate change is clear in that they seldom if ever report any balance on such a controversial issue. However three weeks ago, on Radio 4, Quentin Letts broadcast a half hour programme under the title " What is the point of the Met Office?" On it he showed how clearly over the years they have got the weather wrong, have become far too political, overly keen on presentation over substance and of course pushing a green, climate change agenda.
As a result of this programme Letts was subjected to untold abuse from the twittersphere lead by the BBC's own climate change correspondent Roger Harrabin. Some of the internet reaction was 'foul' with one even suggesting he should be shot twice (to ensure he was dead) and 'End the man' wrote another contributor.
In order to realise just how bias the BBC currently is on climate change you need to read some if not all the following:-
The Skeptical environmentalist - Lomborg
Heaven and Earth( global warming the missing science) - Ian Plimer
The real global warming disaster - Christopher Booker
Watermelons - James Delingpole
Silent spring at 50 (the false crisis of Racheal Carson) - Meiners, Desrochers and Morris.
Climates change that is true, as of course they do four times a year with the seasons, but it is far from an established fact that any climate change or adverse weather conditions are 'man' made. Instead we should be considering, the many unreported factors such as, the natural changing cycles caused over many thousand if not millions of years by such things as sun spot activity.
Thursday, 23 July 2015
# 358 - WAR - Lords Communications Committee.
I do despair that the BBC is extremely unlikely to change so long as the 'Establishment' are involved who clearly lack the inclination or will power to make the radical changes necessary.
Here for example are the members of the Lords Communications Committee:-
First do the maths - there are 4 Conservatives to 9 others and here are few details for some of the others:-
Floella Benjamin - former BBC Play School presenter.
Michael Dobbs - House of Cards author.
Lady Bonham -Carter - Broadcast journalist and whose daughter works for the BBC on Newsnight.
Lady Kidron - Greenham peace camp expert whose father was a Marxist economist.
This committee is more biased than the BBC!!!!
Here for example are the members of the Lords Communications Committee:-
| Lord Best (Chairman) | Crossbench |
| Earl of Arran | Conservative |
| Baroness Benjamin | Liberal Democrat |
| Baroness Bonham-Carter of Yarnbury | Liberal Democrat |
| Bishop of Chelmsford | Bishops |
| Lord Dobbs | Conservative |
| Baroness Hanham | Conservative |
| Lord Hart of Chilton | Labour |
| Baroness Healy of Primrose Hill | Labour |
| Baroness Jay of Paddington | Labour |
| Baroness Kidron | Crossbench |
| Baroness Scotland of Asthal | Labour |
| Lord Sherbourne of Didsbury | Conservative |
First do the maths - there are 4 Conservatives to 9 others and here are few details for some of the others:-
Floella Benjamin - former BBC Play School presenter.
Michael Dobbs - House of Cards author.
Lady Bonham -Carter - Broadcast journalist and whose daughter works for the BBC on Newsnight.
Lady Kidron - Greenham peace camp expert whose father was a Marxist economist.
This committee is more biased than the BBC!!!!
Tuesday, 7 July 2015
# 357 - WAR - Question :- When is a reporter 'vexatious'?
Answer:- When the BBC says so especially when the reporter is a MoS investigative journalist asking , through FoI requests, about Lord Hall's expenses.
So let's be clear what 'vexatious' means - 'annoying, frustrating or worrying' well I guess it might be to the BBC who like most large bureaucratic organisations, don't like the spotlight shining into too many corners which reveal the way they run their empire.
The MoS won and the Information Commissioner ordered that the information be released - so watch this space for what is revealed.
Don't forget other FoI requests in the past revealed:-
In 2007 that Terry Wogan was paid £10,000 to front Children in Need and the ONLY one to receive payment. Also that Alan Yentob received £27,000 in expenses over three years.
In 2009 that the BBC spend £3million on art for their new HQ.
And in April this year it was revealed that £50,000 was spent on renting out rooms because it ran out of space in its new HQ which was opened in 2013 at the cost of £1billion!
This example, of an out of control BBC, fits in well with what George Osborne said on Sunday, on the Andrew Marr show, that the BBC operates in an 'Imperial' way to the detriment of local democracy as their ever expanding website is one of the main causes for the closure of some 200 local papers.
The BBC must be CUT down to a size that means it concentrates on making good programmes and to me, just for starters, that means cutting every local radio station in the country and leaving that area to local commercial stations.
So let's be clear what 'vexatious' means - 'annoying, frustrating or worrying' well I guess it might be to the BBC who like most large bureaucratic organisations, don't like the spotlight shining into too many corners which reveal the way they run their empire.
The MoS won and the Information Commissioner ordered that the information be released - so watch this space for what is revealed.
Don't forget other FoI requests in the past revealed:-
In 2007 that Terry Wogan was paid £10,000 to front Children in Need and the ONLY one to receive payment. Also that Alan Yentob received £27,000 in expenses over three years.
In 2009 that the BBC spend £3million on art for their new HQ.
And in April this year it was revealed that £50,000 was spent on renting out rooms because it ran out of space in its new HQ which was opened in 2013 at the cost of £1billion!
This example, of an out of control BBC, fits in well with what George Osborne said on Sunday, on the Andrew Marr show, that the BBC operates in an 'Imperial' way to the detriment of local democracy as their ever expanding website is one of the main causes for the closure of some 200 local papers.
The BBC must be CUT down to a size that means it concentrates on making good programmes and to me, just for starters, that means cutting every local radio station in the country and leaving that area to local commercial stations.
Saturday, 4 July 2015
# 356 - WAR - BBC cuts 1,000 jobs.
This is caused by a drop in revenue of £150million as more people watch their TV on line......so there is food for thought!!
The cuts are aimed at reducing the management layers from 10 to seven - that must be the joke of the century!!!!
However the BBC still employ 18,000 people and spend under half their budget on programming so they still don't really get it.
The BBC is sick and needs to be put down!
The cuts are aimed at reducing the management layers from 10 to seven - that must be the joke of the century!!!!
However the BBC still employ 18,000 people and spend under half their budget on programming so they still don't really get it.
The BBC is sick and needs to be put down!
# 355 - WAR - Rod Liddle knows the BBC is bias.
Rod Liddle - As the former editor of Radio 4's Today programme he should know a thing or two about the BBC. Here is part of his Wiki entry:-
While working for Today, Liddle also wrote a column for the Guardian. On 25 September 2002, referring to a march organised by the Countryside Alliance in defence of fox hunting, Liddle wrote that readers may have forgotten why they voted Labour in 1997, but would remember once they saw the people campaigning to save hunting. His column led The Daily Telegraph to accuse Liddle of bias and of endangering democracy.The BBC concluded that Liddle's comments breached his commitment to impartiality as a BBC programme editor, and gave him an ultimatum to stop writing his column or resign from his position on Today. He resigned on 30 September 2002. He said later that when he was editor he was ordered by BBC management to sack Frederick Forsyth from the show, and speculated that it was because of Forsyth's right wing political views.The BBC replied that the decision was made for editorial reasons.While the staff on Today found Liddle an "inspired editor", the rest of the BBC believed he was "a stroppy, trouble-making loose cannon".
Last week in the Spectator he said this :-
"The corporation's coverage of the asylum seekers floating around the Med has been unashamedly biased in favour of the policy of diverting as much manpower and money as possible to rescuing them, regardless of the wider consequences. It was biased and almost hilariously gullible about the Arab Spring uprisings which have brought so much more democracy and freedom to the world , inshallah. it is biased in its news reports of eastern European people coming here for work, regardless again of the consequences for indigenous people. it treats with hostility and contempt any individual or organisation who might dare to suggest that diversity is anything other than a bloody good thing. Its attacks on Ukip during the election - no other party warranted such treatment, remember- were an utter disgrace and, I would suggest, in breach of its charter. There was not even a genuflection towards even-handedness. The line was simple;these bastards are racist, and we're going to nail them."
What more can I say other than I agree!
While working for Today, Liddle also wrote a column for the Guardian. On 25 September 2002, referring to a march organised by the Countryside Alliance in defence of fox hunting, Liddle wrote that readers may have forgotten why they voted Labour in 1997, but would remember once they saw the people campaigning to save hunting. His column led The Daily Telegraph to accuse Liddle of bias and of endangering democracy.The BBC concluded that Liddle's comments breached his commitment to impartiality as a BBC programme editor, and gave him an ultimatum to stop writing his column or resign from his position on Today. He resigned on 30 September 2002. He said later that when he was editor he was ordered by BBC management to sack Frederick Forsyth from the show, and speculated that it was because of Forsyth's right wing political views.The BBC replied that the decision was made for editorial reasons.While the staff on Today found Liddle an "inspired editor", the rest of the BBC believed he was "a stroppy, trouble-making loose cannon".
Last week in the Spectator he said this :-
"The corporation's coverage of the asylum seekers floating around the Med has been unashamedly biased in favour of the policy of diverting as much manpower and money as possible to rescuing them, regardless of the wider consequences. It was biased and almost hilariously gullible about the Arab Spring uprisings which have brought so much more democracy and freedom to the world , inshallah. it is biased in its news reports of eastern European people coming here for work, regardless again of the consequences for indigenous people. it treats with hostility and contempt any individual or organisation who might dare to suggest that diversity is anything other than a bloody good thing. Its attacks on Ukip during the election - no other party warranted such treatment, remember- were an utter disgrace and, I would suggest, in breach of its charter. There was not even a genuflection towards even-handedness. The line was simple;these bastards are racist, and we're going to nail them."
What more can I say other than I agree!
Wednesday, 24 June 2015
# 354 - WAR - Is the BBC bias? Is the Pope Catholic?!
Those who watch and monitor the BBC's bias must, like me, want to rip your hair out at times!!
If you can believe it those IN the BBC currently think because the Conservatives won the General Election that proves they are NOT bias!!!
Trouble is the bias has for so long been ingrained it has become INSTITUTIONALISED and the last people who will see this are those working for and in the BBC.
Fortunately for us the odd person breaks free form the BBC bubble, usually when they retire, and spectacularly spill the beans and the latest is Roger Mosey who was former head of BBC news and Second-in Command to the Director General. Roger has just written a book called "Getting Out Alive" and one review says this:-
Delinquent presenters, controversial executive pay-offs, the Jimmy Savile scandal… The BBC is one of the most successful broadcasters in the world, but its programme triumphs are often accompanied by management crises and high-profile resignations.
One of the most respected figures in the broadcasting industry, Roger Mosey has taken senior roles at the BBC for more than twenty years, including as editor of Radio 4’s Today programme, head of television news and director of the London 2012 Olympic coverage.
Now, in Getting Out Alive, Mosey reveals the hidden underbelly of the BBC, lifting the lid on the angry tirades from politicians and spin doctors, the swirling accusations of bias from left and right alike, and the perils of provoking Margaret Thatcher.
Along the way, this remarkable memoir charts the pleasures and pitfalls of life at the top of an organisation that is variously held up as a treasured British institution and cast down as a lumbering, out-of-control behemoth.
Engaging, candid and very funny, Getting Out Alive is a true insider account of how the BBC works, why it succeeds and where it falls down.
I haven't read it yet but I've read in the papers that he brilliantly exposes the subtle way the BBC can often be bias in their vox pop broadcasts. This is where members of the public are interviewed to add some authenticity to a report. The trouble is the members of the public in say matters of immigration are often fairly strident in their views and far too right wing for the leftie/PC BBC and so if they broadcast a vox pop on immigration it is invariably someone saying they are happy and support immigration.
This 'News manipulation' is of course PURE propaganda and far from being innocent is actually stoking up trouble as the BBC refuses to give a voice to what the public really think on sensitive issues like immigration, home grown terrorism, sex abuse and much more.
In comparison to the above the following observations of bias, waste and political correctness are just your usual daily diet of what goes on at the BBC.
1. Political Correctness - Clare Balding, who admits to being use too much, is to replace John Inverdale, to cover Wimbledon, apparently because of his sexist remarks last year.
2. Waste - The BBC only spends £2.4 of its £5.1billion budget on programming, which is less then half. Also their new Broadcasting House cost £1billion was 4 years late and £107million over budget.
3. Corruption - £369 million in pay offs to staff over eight years.
4. Hypocrisy - Despite frequents laments and government bashing over the NHS 364 top BBC executives enjoy private health care costing £700,000 a year.
5. Arrogance - Danny Cohen, Director of Television recently warned that he would have to cut entire services if non payment of the TV licence was non criminalised. How about cutting waste first!
6. Question Time - a couple of weeks ago the audience was, more than usual, clearly left of centre given the applause for all the left wing comments and near silence for any mildly right wing views expressed by the panel or audience.
Still this is the Institutionally bias BBC we are talking about but then don't forget they are not really bias as the Conservatives won the election!! And speaking of the election I still remember the look of shock on the faces of the likes of Dimbleby when the Exit Poll was announced on the night - Most BBC journalists' looked as if they had taken a large bite out of a lemon - absolutely priceless!!
If you can believe it those IN the BBC currently think because the Conservatives won the General Election that proves they are NOT bias!!!
Trouble is the bias has for so long been ingrained it has become INSTITUTIONALISED and the last people who will see this are those working for and in the BBC.
Fortunately for us the odd person breaks free form the BBC bubble, usually when they retire, and spectacularly spill the beans and the latest is Roger Mosey who was former head of BBC news and Second-in Command to the Director General. Roger has just written a book called "Getting Out Alive" and one review says this:-
Delinquent presenters, controversial executive pay-offs, the Jimmy Savile scandal… The BBC is one of the most successful broadcasters in the world, but its programme triumphs are often accompanied by management crises and high-profile resignations.
One of the most respected figures in the broadcasting industry, Roger Mosey has taken senior roles at the BBC for more than twenty years, including as editor of Radio 4’s Today programme, head of television news and director of the London 2012 Olympic coverage.
Now, in Getting Out Alive, Mosey reveals the hidden underbelly of the BBC, lifting the lid on the angry tirades from politicians and spin doctors, the swirling accusations of bias from left and right alike, and the perils of provoking Margaret Thatcher.
Along the way, this remarkable memoir charts the pleasures and pitfalls of life at the top of an organisation that is variously held up as a treasured British institution and cast down as a lumbering, out-of-control behemoth.
Engaging, candid and very funny, Getting Out Alive is a true insider account of how the BBC works, why it succeeds and where it falls down.
I haven't read it yet but I've read in the papers that he brilliantly exposes the subtle way the BBC can often be bias in their vox pop broadcasts. This is where members of the public are interviewed to add some authenticity to a report. The trouble is the members of the public in say matters of immigration are often fairly strident in their views and far too right wing for the leftie/PC BBC and so if they broadcast a vox pop on immigration it is invariably someone saying they are happy and support immigration.
This 'News manipulation' is of course PURE propaganda and far from being innocent is actually stoking up trouble as the BBC refuses to give a voice to what the public really think on sensitive issues like immigration, home grown terrorism, sex abuse and much more.
In comparison to the above the following observations of bias, waste and political correctness are just your usual daily diet of what goes on at the BBC.
1. Political Correctness - Clare Balding, who admits to being use too much, is to replace John Inverdale, to cover Wimbledon, apparently because of his sexist remarks last year.
2. Waste - The BBC only spends £2.4 of its £5.1billion budget on programming, which is less then half. Also their new Broadcasting House cost £1billion was 4 years late and £107million over budget.
3. Corruption - £369 million in pay offs to staff over eight years.
4. Hypocrisy - Despite frequents laments and government bashing over the NHS 364 top BBC executives enjoy private health care costing £700,000 a year.
5. Arrogance - Danny Cohen, Director of Television recently warned that he would have to cut entire services if non payment of the TV licence was non criminalised. How about cutting waste first!
6. Question Time - a couple of weeks ago the audience was, more than usual, clearly left of centre given the applause for all the left wing comments and near silence for any mildly right wing views expressed by the panel or audience.
Still this is the Institutionally bias BBC we are talking about but then don't forget they are not really bias as the Conservatives won the election!! And speaking of the election I still remember the look of shock on the faces of the likes of Dimbleby when the Exit Poll was announced on the night - Most BBC journalists' looked as if they had taken a large bite out of a lemon - absolutely priceless!!
# 353 - WAR - Update on myTV Licence - Part three
Well a Clare Buck, Court Administrator, from TV licensing has just written to me stating :-
"We operate the TV Licensing system in accordance with the legislation passed by Parliament and under those laws may take proceedings against people using television equipment without the appropriate TV licence.
A summons will shortly be issued by the local Magistrates Court and you will have an opportunity to explain your circumstances/mitigation to the court accordingly."
And that folks is exactly what I will be doing and I'll let you know the date when known and will post a copy of my plea in mitigation when appropriate.
"We operate the TV Licensing system in accordance with the legislation passed by Parliament and under those laws may take proceedings against people using television equipment without the appropriate TV licence.
A summons will shortly be issued by the local Magistrates Court and you will have an opportunity to explain your circumstances/mitigation to the court accordingly."
And that folks is exactly what I will be doing and I'll let you know the date when known and will post a copy of my plea in mitigation when appropriate.
Tuesday, 16 June 2015
# 352 - WAR - Update on my TV licence - Part two.
Following on from post #348, against all expectations to the contrary, I did have a Search Warrant issued on me by TWO TV Licence Inspectors accompanied by TWO Police Officers to ensure I did not cause a breach of the peace!
The four of them were with me for about 40 mins, all very affable and friendly, during which time they established that I had a TV able to receive 'LIVE' broadcasts, filled in a form, left me a copy and then departed. My parting shot to the four was that I had considered going to prison over this issue but had absolutely no desire, as in Shawshank Redemption, of being buggered which made the two Police Officers smile!!
While I am now awaiting a court case in the magistrates court I have, after seeking legal advice, done everything in my power to reduce the potential fine and leave me to carry on my protest in other ways.
My protest was always based on the assumption that I would never have a Search Warrant served on me and would therefore still be able to get away with NOT paying my licence fee and keep my protest, about their bias, rolling on and on!
However after the Search Warrant was served I sought advice and thought about what I would actually achieve by continuing to protest and my conclusion was that I had far more to lose than gain. As a result I decided that a tactical withdrawal, in the face of over whelming superior forces in the form of the BBC and 'Establishment', was the most sensible course of action. So like every good terrorist, when faced with being overpowered, they 'shoot and scoot' to return at a time of their choosing to fight another day.
I actually sought the advice of a criminal lawyer for an hour and the key factors that assisted my decision to tactically withdrawal were :-
1. To get to a Crown court, where political issues can receive a better hearing, I would need to plead not guilty in the Magistrates court but in any event this category of crime would not be heard before a jury but before 'Establishment' judges who would view the issue as a simple non payment of a legal obligation.
2. The amount of time one could reasonably expect in a Crown court would be the absolute maximum of one day which would not really give sufficient time to explore 25 years of bias and prove the point conclusively.
3. My projected cost for pleading guilty in the Magistrates court (which least we forget I am) were around £1000 rising to around £10,000 + in a Crown Court.
4. Any media publicity I was luckily enough to receive would be short lived and soon forgotten.
On this basis, and with the single aim of reducing my fine to the absolute minimum, I bowed to the inevitable and brought a TV licence on-line and wrote to TV licencing to explain my protest was over and asked them to consider not taking me to court.
If TV licencing accept my position I will have saved my self a court appearance and I will give you and update when I next hear from TV licencing or the court as could still be the case.
My monitoring of the BBC's bias of course goes on with also an attempt to develop an active Twitter account under bias_bbc but this is very much work in progress and I don't yet understand exactly how to get the best out of Twitter - if anyone actually does!!!???
I will of course let you know the final outcome.
The four of them were with me for about 40 mins, all very affable and friendly, during which time they established that I had a TV able to receive 'LIVE' broadcasts, filled in a form, left me a copy and then departed. My parting shot to the four was that I had considered going to prison over this issue but had absolutely no desire, as in Shawshank Redemption, of being buggered which made the two Police Officers smile!!
While I am now awaiting a court case in the magistrates court I have, after seeking legal advice, done everything in my power to reduce the potential fine and leave me to carry on my protest in other ways.
My protest was always based on the assumption that I would never have a Search Warrant served on me and would therefore still be able to get away with NOT paying my licence fee and keep my protest, about their bias, rolling on and on!
However after the Search Warrant was served I sought advice and thought about what I would actually achieve by continuing to protest and my conclusion was that I had far more to lose than gain. As a result I decided that a tactical withdrawal, in the face of over whelming superior forces in the form of the BBC and 'Establishment', was the most sensible course of action. So like every good terrorist, when faced with being overpowered, they 'shoot and scoot' to return at a time of their choosing to fight another day.
I actually sought the advice of a criminal lawyer for an hour and the key factors that assisted my decision to tactically withdrawal were :-
1. To get to a Crown court, where political issues can receive a better hearing, I would need to plead not guilty in the Magistrates court but in any event this category of crime would not be heard before a jury but before 'Establishment' judges who would view the issue as a simple non payment of a legal obligation.
2. The amount of time one could reasonably expect in a Crown court would be the absolute maximum of one day which would not really give sufficient time to explore 25 years of bias and prove the point conclusively.
3. My projected cost for pleading guilty in the Magistrates court (which least we forget I am) were around £1000 rising to around £10,000 + in a Crown Court.
4. Any media publicity I was luckily enough to receive would be short lived and soon forgotten.
On this basis, and with the single aim of reducing my fine to the absolute minimum, I bowed to the inevitable and brought a TV licence on-line and wrote to TV licencing to explain my protest was over and asked them to consider not taking me to court.
If TV licencing accept my position I will have saved my self a court appearance and I will give you and update when I next hear from TV licencing or the court as could still be the case.
My monitoring of the BBC's bias of course goes on with also an attempt to develop an active Twitter account under bias_bbc but this is very much work in progress and I don't yet understand exactly how to get the best out of Twitter - if anyone actually does!!!???
I will of course let you know the final outcome.
Friday, 15 May 2015
# 351 - WAR - Common Purpose and the BBC.
As I was already aware the below link confirms that the BBC uses our money to send their staff to be 'brainwashed' by the sinister left wing indoctrination body called Common Purpose which surprisingly passes itself off as a charity.
http://raedwald.blogspot.co.uk/2015/05/bbc-funds-common-purpose-indoctrination.html
Its not as though the BBC wasn't bias enough with its mainly Guardian reading staff but they also get them 'trained' to be better left of centre citizens!
http://raedwald.blogspot.co.uk/2015/05/bbc-funds-common-purpose-indoctrination.html
Its not as though the BBC wasn't bias enough with its mainly Guardian reading staff but they also get them 'trained' to be better left of centre citizens!
Monday, 11 May 2015
# 350 - WAR - Bias coverage of the General Election.
Just before I comment on the election there is one piece of bias I must record which occurred when Andrew Marr interviewed the PM before the election and virtually accused him of being pro fox hunting. Andrew Marr later admitted that his implication was completely wrong and apologised but of course the damage by then had been done.
Now onto the election and most of you cannot have failed to note that there have been a number of comments in the press about the BBC bias election coverage, that is unless you are a left wing Guardian reading luvie!
I'm not going to go into their bias in any great detail but suffice to say this:-
1. Before the election there was no detailed analysis of possible outcomes as they followed the herd that a coalition was most likely. They was also little analysis of Ed Miliband moving New Labour back to Old Labour to keep his Union sponsors happy.
2.During the election results coverage, after the exit poll, there was little analysis of the Tory's success as they concentrated in the main on the SNP gains and Labour and Liberal Democrat losses.
3. After the election the coverage has again concentrated on the SNP and the trouble they may cause ( actually they have no power to change anything!) and the potential trouble in the Tory ranks over the EU referendum also of course a fair smattering of naval gazing about the troubles in the Labour Party. Missing has been any serious discussion as to the success of the Conservatives which is a news story worth covering in detail.
Now wait, watch and listen to the endless coverage of Conservative splits over Europe as the bloated BBC continues its bias outpourings.
Now onto the election and most of you cannot have failed to note that there have been a number of comments in the press about the BBC bias election coverage, that is unless you are a left wing Guardian reading luvie!
I'm not going to go into their bias in any great detail but suffice to say this:-
1. Before the election there was no detailed analysis of possible outcomes as they followed the herd that a coalition was most likely. They was also little analysis of Ed Miliband moving New Labour back to Old Labour to keep his Union sponsors happy.
2.During the election results coverage, after the exit poll, there was little analysis of the Tory's success as they concentrated in the main on the SNP gains and Labour and Liberal Democrat losses.
3. After the election the coverage has again concentrated on the SNP and the trouble they may cause ( actually they have no power to change anything!) and the potential trouble in the Tory ranks over the EU referendum also of course a fair smattering of naval gazing about the troubles in the Labour Party. Missing has been any serious discussion as to the success of the Conservatives which is a news story worth covering in detail.
Now wait, watch and listen to the endless coverage of Conservative splits over Europe as the bloated BBC continues its bias outpourings.
Wednesday, 8 April 2015
# 349 - WAR - Bias by omission.
Last week the BBC happily reported that Edward Snowden's laptop, on which his stolen file had been stored by the Guardian, was going on show in the Victoria and Albert museum. The BBC also devoted some airtime to Snowden's unsurprising 'news' that Britain spied on Argentina after the Falklands war.
However on the far more news worthy story that Snowden had NOT read many of the files he carelessly released, an act which put peoples lives at risk, the BBC did not mention this or have it on it's website.
But then it is hardly surprising as the BBC buys more copies of the Guardian than any other newspaper.
The BBC of course has a build in left-wing metropolitan bias.
However on the far more news worthy story that Snowden had NOT read many of the files he carelessly released, an act which put peoples lives at risk, the BBC did not mention this or have it on it's website.
But then it is hardly surprising as the BBC buys more copies of the Guardian than any other newspaper.
The BBC of course has a build in left-wing metropolitan bias.
Monday, 30 March 2015
# 348 - WAR - Update on my TV licence - Part One.
In 2006 I stopped paying my TV licence due to their bias reporting which I had been monitoring and complaining about for around 15 years. After the usual letters I received a visit from an inspector who I let in because he said if I didn't he would get a Search Warrant. As he had come a long way I let him in and offered him a cup of tea and he was able to see my TV but I didn't answer any of his questions and off he went.
I was finally taken to court in 2007 for not paying my TV licence and was given a conditional discharge and asked to pay £60 towards the court costs.
After the court case I received the usual letter from TV licencing and replied that I had already been taken to court and given a conditional discharge and would continued to not pay my TV licence as the BBC was still bias finally adding I would file all future correspondence from them on this matter as harassment.
I then moved house in 2008 and in 2011 received a visit from a TV licence inspector who I didn't let in. After the usual letter, which I informed them I would file as evidence of their harassment, I heard no more.
In 2014 a Daily Mail reporter, who was considering writing an article on BBC bias, with my permission, contacted TV licencing and was told I didn't need a licence as I was a business. Where this came from I have no idea but that is what he was told.
Then two weeks ago, out of the blue, I had another visit form TV licencing, who I didn't let in and have now received a follow up letter asking to see my TV licence or quote:-
" The legislation authorises an application to be made to a Magistrate' Court for a 'Search Warrant' to enter and search your premises."
Apparently to my knowledge nobody, who refuses to pay their TV licence because of the BBC's bias, has ever had their home Searched as a result of a Search Warrant being issued.
I am now awaiting developments and if necessary will go to court again - I'll keep you posted on what happens.
I was finally taken to court in 2007 for not paying my TV licence and was given a conditional discharge and asked to pay £60 towards the court costs.
After the court case I received the usual letter from TV licencing and replied that I had already been taken to court and given a conditional discharge and would continued to not pay my TV licence as the BBC was still bias finally adding I would file all future correspondence from them on this matter as harassment.
I then moved house in 2008 and in 2011 received a visit from a TV licence inspector who I didn't let in. After the usual letter, which I informed them I would file as evidence of their harassment, I heard no more.
In 2014 a Daily Mail reporter, who was considering writing an article on BBC bias, with my permission, contacted TV licencing and was told I didn't need a licence as I was a business. Where this came from I have no idea but that is what he was told.
Then two weeks ago, out of the blue, I had another visit form TV licencing, who I didn't let in and have now received a follow up letter asking to see my TV licence or quote:-
" The legislation authorises an application to be made to a Magistrate' Court for a 'Search Warrant' to enter and search your premises."
Apparently to my knowledge nobody, who refuses to pay their TV licence because of the BBC's bias, has ever had their home Searched as a result of a Search Warrant being issued.
I am now awaiting developments and if necessary will go to court again - I'll keep you posted on what happens.
# 347 - WAR - MP report confirms BBC bias.
On March the 25th The European Scrutiny Committee says the BBC does not give enough airtime to those who believe Britain should leave the EU or that there should be a referendum on membership.
Director General Lord Hall, who earns £450,000 a year of licence fee payers' money, only agreed to attend the committee when he was issues a 'formal summons'.
The findings of this committee will come as no surprise to follows of this blog and is why I still don't pay my TV licence.
Director General Lord Hall, who earns £450,000 a year of licence fee payers' money, only agreed to attend the committee when he was issues a 'formal summons'.
The findings of this committee will come as no surprise to follows of this blog and is why I still don't pay my TV licence.
Sunday, 8 March 2015
# 346 - WAR - BBC’s climate change stance in brazen defiance of the law.
This is why I don't pay my TV licence as if the BBC can break the law then so can I.
Christopher Booker in the Sunday Telegraph today.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/comment/11456612/BBCs-climate-change-stance-in-brazen-defiance-of-the-law.html
Christopher Booker in the Sunday Telegraph today.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/comment/11456612/BBCs-climate-change-stance-in-brazen-defiance-of-the-law.html
Tuesday, 3 March 2015
# 345 - WAR - 'The Great European Disaster Movie'
On Sunday night BBC4 screened a 75 - minute film presenting an apocalyptic vision of what would happen if the EU broke apart and warned that it would have 'catastrophic consequences for all of us.'
As I've mentioned before the BBC gets soft loans from the EU which I read recently stands at around £22 million and so is NOT impartial in matters EU which of course this film proved.
Bias is institutional at the BBC.
As I've mentioned before the BBC gets soft loans from the EU which I read recently stands at around £22 million and so is NOT impartial in matters EU which of course this film proved.
Bias is institutional at the BBC.
Sunday, 1 March 2015
# 344 WAR - Arrogance of the BBC.
Lord Dobbs, author of 'House of Cards' that was turned into the TV series for the BBC, has accused the BBC of organisational and intellectual arrogance and said it has sometimes ' seemed more like a private fiefdom than a public service.'
He went on ' there is a real danger of the BBC being brought low by a hundred headlines, a thousand unnecessary taxi rides and millions that have been spent on redundancies and failures.'
He also accused the BBC, during the Royal Television Society's Huw Wheldon Memorial Lecture, of left-wing bias in some of its reporting.
IMO the BBC is bias in not some but most of it's reporting which I why I still don't pay my TV licence.
He went on ' there is a real danger of the BBC being brought low by a hundred headlines, a thousand unnecessary taxi rides and millions that have been spent on redundancies and failures.'
He also accused the BBC, during the Royal Television Society's Huw Wheldon Memorial Lecture, of left-wing bias in some of its reporting.
IMO the BBC is bias in not some but most of it's reporting which I why I still don't pay my TV licence.
Thursday, 26 February 2015
# 343 - WAR - And there's more.
Three more stories today:-
1. MPs report -A 166 page report by MPs on the future of the BBC says "the corporation has squandered hundreds of million pounds, handing out sky-high pay-offs to sacked staff and wasting massive sums on vanity projects."
Of course we all knew that already it's only OUR money after all.
2. BBC commissioned survey - Yesterday a BBC commissioned survey found that the overwhelming majority of British Muslims oppose violence against people who publish images depicting the Prophet Muhammad. Something of course the typically pro multicultural and PC BBC did not seriously cover was that the same survey revealed that 27% of Muslims questioned said they had some sympathy for the recent attacks on the satirical magazine Charles Hebdo in Paris, in which 11 people died.
3. Jimmy Saville - How convenient for the BBC today to major on the scandal of Jimmy Saville in NHS hospitals without one mention that they were as culpable in NOT bringing him to justice.
And as Richard Littlejohn might say "and I still don't pay my TV licence!"
1. MPs report -A 166 page report by MPs on the future of the BBC says "the corporation has squandered hundreds of million pounds, handing out sky-high pay-offs to sacked staff and wasting massive sums on vanity projects."
Of course we all knew that already it's only OUR money after all.
2. BBC commissioned survey - Yesterday a BBC commissioned survey found that the overwhelming majority of British Muslims oppose violence against people who publish images depicting the Prophet Muhammad. Something of course the typically pro multicultural and PC BBC did not seriously cover was that the same survey revealed that 27% of Muslims questioned said they had some sympathy for the recent attacks on the satirical magazine Charles Hebdo in Paris, in which 11 people died.
3. Jimmy Saville - How convenient for the BBC today to major on the scandal of Jimmy Saville in NHS hospitals without one mention that they were as culpable in NOT bringing him to justice.
And as Richard Littlejohn might say "and I still don't pay my TV licence!"
Tuesday, 24 February 2015
# 342 - WAR - When will the BBC 'Get it' ?
The answer to the question in the title is NEVER so long as they have the licence fee which enables them to lead a lavish style at our expense.
Just in the last few days we have the following stories from the press:-
1. Taxis - In the year 2013-14 they spent 11.9 million on taxis up 1.2 million over the last two years.
2. Swearing - Wolf Hall contained the C word in the last episode.
3. Sir Cliff Richards - An independent report by former Chief Constable Andy Trotter concludes that Sir Cliff had his privacy violated after a secret deal between the police and the BBC to film a raid on is house over the alleged assault on a minor back in 1985. Sir Cliff denies the charge.
4. Country file - Christopher Booker today writes in the Daily Mail on the bias of the BBC's flagship programme country file. He cites two CLASSIC examples.
a. Decline in farmland birds - They will ONLY talk about the loss of habitat and the use of chemicals on the land but skirt over and avoid ANY mention on the far bigger problem of an increase in predators such as magpies, sparrowhawks and buzzards but just as significantly foxes, mink and badgers.
b. Growth of windfarms - The programme and its main reporter on this subject Tom Heap are clearly pro windfarms seldom if EVER mentioning the key issue that when the wind doesn't blow no electricity is generated and that they kill numerous birds and bats.
The BBC provides a platform for the likes of the now totally PC RSPB and RSPCA and other like minded green pressure groups. Christopher Booker concludes 'In reality, nature and the countryside are far more complicated, But the fluffy-headed environmentalists in charge of Countryfile never want to tell us that. They have found that the secret to bumper viewing figures is to sell us a pleasingly make-believe image which in many respects is no more than a beguiling but, in fact, rather nasty fake.'
The BBC don't live in the real world but in a highly privileged position, using our money, in which they promote their 'Guardian' agenda on the rest of us and ignore any pleas to change their ways.
Just in the last few days we have the following stories from the press:-
1. Taxis - In the year 2013-14 they spent 11.9 million on taxis up 1.2 million over the last two years.
2. Swearing - Wolf Hall contained the C word in the last episode.
3. Sir Cliff Richards - An independent report by former Chief Constable Andy Trotter concludes that Sir Cliff had his privacy violated after a secret deal between the police and the BBC to film a raid on is house over the alleged assault on a minor back in 1985. Sir Cliff denies the charge.
4. Country file - Christopher Booker today writes in the Daily Mail on the bias of the BBC's flagship programme country file. He cites two CLASSIC examples.
a. Decline in farmland birds - They will ONLY talk about the loss of habitat and the use of chemicals on the land but skirt over and avoid ANY mention on the far bigger problem of an increase in predators such as magpies, sparrowhawks and buzzards but just as significantly foxes, mink and badgers.
b. Growth of windfarms - The programme and its main reporter on this subject Tom Heap are clearly pro windfarms seldom if EVER mentioning the key issue that when the wind doesn't blow no electricity is generated and that they kill numerous birds and bats.
The BBC provides a platform for the likes of the now totally PC RSPB and RSPCA and other like minded green pressure groups. Christopher Booker concludes 'In reality, nature and the countryside are far more complicated, But the fluffy-headed environmentalists in charge of Countryfile never want to tell us that. They have found that the secret to bumper viewing figures is to sell us a pleasingly make-believe image which in many respects is no more than a beguiling but, in fact, rather nasty fake.'
The BBC don't live in the real world but in a highly privileged position, using our money, in which they promote their 'Guardian' agenda on the rest of us and ignore any pleas to change their ways.
Thursday, 12 February 2015
# 341 - WAR - Report say BBC is bias over immigration.
Campaign group Migration Watch has released a report today which outlines that a shortage of resources, was a key reason the Tories had failed to hit their target to cut immigration. The budget of £1.8 billion, to secure our borders, is six times less than the £12 billion budget for overseas aid.
The report also blamed the pressure put on Westminster by liberals to continue the policy of large scale immigration. It went on to say their is a strong bias in the BBC in favour of immigration, combined with a reluctance even to address the case for reducing immigration.
The article ends by reminding us that a string of senior BBC figures including head of radio Helen Boaden, who used to be director of news, have admitted the Corporation held a "deep liberal bias" in its coverage of immigration.
The report also blamed the pressure put on Westminster by liberals to continue the policy of large scale immigration. It went on to say their is a strong bias in the BBC in favour of immigration, combined with a reluctance even to address the case for reducing immigration.
The article ends by reminding us that a string of senior BBC figures including head of radio Helen Boaden, who used to be director of news, have admitted the Corporation held a "deep liberal bias" in its coverage of immigration.
Monday, 2 February 2015
#340 - WAR - The BBC at its best and worst.
On Saturday night at 9 PM on BBC 2 there was an excellent programme on 'The secret world of Lewis Carroll' which studied his life and in particular how he came to write Alice in Wonderland.
The programme lasted an hour but over a third of it explored the case as to whether there was anything 'odd' with his dealings with children - this bit being the BBC at its worse.
Nothing concrete was produced, concerning his relationship with children, other than he was clearly enamoured with the 3 daughters of the Dean at Oxford and in particular of course Alice. The only 'proof,' if you can call it that, that there was anything 'sexual', was the fact that he took photographs of young girls including of course Alice.
However I have discovered that only 50% of his photographic work includes children, some admittedly in naked poses, but this is based on the fact that around 60% of his work is missing. Also, and to be fair it was briefly mentioned, Lewis Carroll lived from 1832 to 1898 when until 1875 the age of consent was 12 then rising to 13 and in 1885 rising to 16.
So why spend over 20 minutes of the programme exploring this 'secret' when it appears, based on the values at the time, nothing was really amiss. Of course the BBC couldn't resist getting Will Self to actually say he must have been a 'repressed paedophile' but none of the other commentators thought so including somebody who had studied him for 40 years.
Perhaps the BBC, after their culpability in the Jimmy Saville saga, reckons its fair game to tar others with the same brush even though in this case we are talking about the mid to late 1800s.
The programme lasted an hour but over a third of it explored the case as to whether there was anything 'odd' with his dealings with children - this bit being the BBC at its worse.
Nothing concrete was produced, concerning his relationship with children, other than he was clearly enamoured with the 3 daughters of the Dean at Oxford and in particular of course Alice. The only 'proof,' if you can call it that, that there was anything 'sexual', was the fact that he took photographs of young girls including of course Alice.
However I have discovered that only 50% of his photographic work includes children, some admittedly in naked poses, but this is based on the fact that around 60% of his work is missing. Also, and to be fair it was briefly mentioned, Lewis Carroll lived from 1832 to 1898 when until 1875 the age of consent was 12 then rising to 13 and in 1885 rising to 16.
So why spend over 20 minutes of the programme exploring this 'secret' when it appears, based on the values at the time, nothing was really amiss. Of course the BBC couldn't resist getting Will Self to actually say he must have been a 'repressed paedophile' but none of the other commentators thought so including somebody who had studied him for 40 years.
Perhaps the BBC, after their culpability in the Jimmy Saville saga, reckons its fair game to tar others with the same brush even though in this case we are talking about the mid to late 1800s.
Thursday, 29 January 2015
# 339 - WAR - When is a 'Terrorist' not a terrorist?
The answer to the above question is when the BBC says so!
"A letter to the Telegraph today by Eric Abraham former producer of BBC Panorama notes that:-
The BBC Arabic Service in line with the BBC World Service policy is that the Charlie Hebdo killers are not 'terrorists' but :-
"Two men who killed 12 people in an attack on the office of a satirical magazine."
What about using 'killers' or 'murderers' or as they inspire terror why not TERRORISTS?"
Eric Abraham finishes by saying " I am shocked at the climate in this country in which the most obvious term is deemed unacceptable through fear or misguided political correctness. Shame on you BBC."
"A letter to the Telegraph today by Eric Abraham former producer of BBC Panorama notes that:-
The BBC Arabic Service in line with the BBC World Service policy is that the Charlie Hebdo killers are not 'terrorists' but :-
"Two men who killed 12 people in an attack on the office of a satirical magazine."
What about using 'killers' or 'murderers' or as they inspire terror why not TERRORISTS?"
Eric Abraham finishes by saying " I am shocked at the climate in this country in which the most obvious term is deemed unacceptable through fear or misguided political correctness. Shame on you BBC."
Friday, 16 January 2015
# 338 - WAR - Older women and the BBC.
The House of Lords has conducted an inquiry into the representation of women in the broadcast media.
Olenka Frenkiel told peers that she feared that her bosses would 'paint her mad' when she challenged the redundancy notice she was served with after entering he mid -50s.
The report published today examined the role of women in news and current affairs and criticised the industry for its sexist attitude and singled out the BBC as having the biggest obligation to improve.
While the report looked at the entire broadcasting industry the BBC was repeated singled out as having a particular responsibility due to it being funded by the £145.5 licence fee.
Well we all knew it and now it is official the BBC is bias in its treatment of older women.
The BBC should be renamed the BIAS Broadcasting Corporation.
Olenka Frenkiel told peers that she feared that her bosses would 'paint her mad' when she challenged the redundancy notice she was served with after entering he mid -50s.
The report published today examined the role of women in news and current affairs and criticised the industry for its sexist attitude and singled out the BBC as having the biggest obligation to improve.
While the report looked at the entire broadcasting industry the BBC was repeated singled out as having a particular responsibility due to it being funded by the £145.5 licence fee.
Well we all knew it and now it is official the BBC is bias in its treatment of older women.
The BBC should be renamed the BIAS Broadcasting Corporation.
Thursday, 8 January 2015
# 337 - WAR - Jim Davidison is of course 100% right!
"If you cut the BBC in half the Guardian newspaper would fall out!" so says Jim Davidson.
http://www.digitalspy.co.uk/showbiz/news/a619900/jim-davidson-blasts-lack-of-working-class-comedy-bbc-are-all-lefties.html#~p0Na5NrFBhCMZL
http://www.digitalspy.co.uk/showbiz/news/a619900/jim-davidson-blasts-lack-of-working-class-comedy-bbc-are-all-lefties.html#~p0Na5NrFBhCMZL
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)