I was trying to come up with a witty and apposite acronym for BBC to describe what I have just seen on TV, but all I could manage was Beyond Belief Cunts.
Watching BBC World News here in Accra, I have just seen forty minutes of intense and non-stop Israeli propaganda. A live press conference by Netanyahu and Ehud Barak followed by a long, long interview with Mark Regev in which the most searching BBC question could fairly be paraphrased as “How can you be certain that those dastardly Palestinians will not break the ceasefire and start firing rockets again?”
No attempt whatsoever to give a Palestinian a chance to put over their viewpoint. Now fifty minutes of solid coverage around the ceasefire without a single Palestinian view or pro-Palestinian or pro-peace view. And in that entire fifty minutes not one mention of Palestinian dead.
Beyond Belief Cunts. Actually, it’s not a bad effort.
Adriana 22 Nov, 2012 – 2:51 am
“If it is as biased as many of us think, it would be quantified and the BBC would have to answer for it.”
If only. One quick example: Two studies, one from cardiff university and another from a german research company, researched the bbc output in the run up to the iraq war. They found the bbc output was 93 – 95% pro war. The bbc simply ignored it.
RE my comment above about bbc pre iraq war. Sorry it is not detailed. It is from memory and I don’t have time to dind the details now.
I think the studies looked at bbc tv news output and both came up with pro war arguments at over 90%. I can’t recall the german company name.
Blatant Bullshit Communication? No…they wouldn’t get away with that before the watershed, either. My request for information on Blair’s movements as Quartet representative has not yet been acknowledged. No doubt the staff of TOoTB* are too busy transferring funds between his 6 offshore accounts.
*Tax Obscuration of Tony Bliar
Pilger mentions the above studies here: http://johnpilger.com/articles/the-bbc-is-on-murdoch-s-side
How about British Brainwashing Corporation ?
Good point Glenn UK. That bastard Mark Thompson has gone off with OUR money to New York with his Zionist wife, Jane Blumberg. The non transmission of the DEC appeal was a total disgrace as was the non broadcast of Caryl Churchill’s Seven Children on Radio 4 in 2009. His stooge Caroline Thomson (different surname) conspired in this with him and I was appalled to see that her name was in the hat before that pathetic Entwistle was chosen for the DG job. The latter went off with OUR money too of course. Lord Patten, with his multiple financial interests which necessitate his work at ZBC to be part time, should get the push.
Mark Thompson should be hauled back to the UK to tell all that he knows, which must be considerable, about Savile.
PS It is revealed today that Savile had ‘total’ access to Broadmoor Hospital.
One interest of Patten’s is a place on the advisory board of Bridgepoint Capital. One of their many health sector holdings is Care UK currently one of the major asset strippers of OUR NHS and whose boss is a large donor to the Tories. See The Green Benches website.
http://socialinvestigations.blogspot.co.uk/2012/03/lord-patten-of-barnes-bridgepoint-and.html
A staggeringly long list. And a definite conflict of interest for Patten in view of the exceedingly small amount of information on the implications of the Health and Social Care Act 2012 given to the public by the state broadcaster. Instead we get pap like Stricly Come Dancing to fill the screens.
A Node 22 Nov, 2012 – 3:28 am
“I think they [bbc] answer to no one except there Zionist controllers.”
No, no, no. FFS propaganda exists beyond israel’s behaviour. The world is not controlled by zionists. Zionism is just another part of the problem. Not the problem.
@Vronsky. I don’t watch TV, and when I get hassled by Capita, I write back (to the freepost address, and getting proof of posting) using the most ridiculous assumed name I can think of at the time, telling them
1) I don’t watch TV or have any TV receiving equipment at the property
2) I’m issuing an order removing their ‘implied right’ to walk up my front path or otherwise enter the property
3) if they do come up my front path, I’ll photograph the person and their ID, publish the photos and their identity, and treat them as the trespasser that they are, and
4) if they keep writing to me, I’ll consider issuing proceedings under the Protection from Harassment Act.
That’s always done the trick. They’re all mouth and trousers.
Sorry but anyone who thinks getting specialist analysts to prove on paper that the BBC is biased in favour of the Zionists – i.e. proving the bleeding obvious – will get us much further forward, is deluding themselves about the sheer darkness of the times we live in, and about the utter ruthlessness and hypocrisy of the criminals who rule us.
@Phil – the BBC is obviously controlled by Zionists; that doesn’t mean Beijing is controlled by Zionists.
The form of BBC propaganda was very similar during the Irish Troubles in the 1970s, 80s and 90s.
One of the major features, when discussing bombs and killings etc., was this business of “who started it”.
Thus invariably Republican violence was discussed as if it existed in a vacuum, whilst Loyalist or British violence was always a response to something.
I have to say though that the BBC was a far far better organisation during the 1970s and 80s up to 1987 than it is today.
In 2009 when Israel’s 22-day blitzkrieg was over, nearly 1,400 Palestinians had been wiped off the planet of whom four-fifths were civilians and 350 children, and over 5,000 wounded.
Israel had destroyed or damaged 58,000 homes, 280 schools, 1,500 factories, water and sewage installations and 80 percent of agricultural crops. The cost to Gaza’s civilian infrastructure was estimated at $660 to 900 million while the total economic cost was put at $3 to 3.5 billion.
It was really a non-war, said Norman Finkelstein in his book This Time We Went Too Far, and testimonies of Israeli soldiers included remarks like: “There was nothing there… nothing moved”; “No real resistance”; “Everyone was disappointed about not engaging anyone”.
/..
http://sabbah.biz/mt/archives/2012/11/21/and-after-the-ceasefire/
there is an e-petition to boycott the TV licence because of savile child molesting and possible abduction murder, PressTV was removed from the airwaves, we have “free speech” in the UK how proud we all are. Murdoch/BBC are happy to break the law to find out which celebrity is sleeping with who, but when it comes to paedophiles eyes wide shit, they see nothing and know nothing, can anyone figure this out, the old newspaper maxim “if it bleeds it leads” has to have the phrase “unless it is an arab who bleeds or a child in the UK being brutalized by some new labour pervert councillor” then it must not lead and not be reported.
A week is a long time in Gaza or how the BBC covered 38 consecutive breaking news stories
Analysis by Kevin Williamson
The BBC’s reporting on the current conflict in Gaza has been subject to claim and counter-claim of bias from pro-Palestinian and pro-Israeli camps. Surely they can’t both be right. I decided to take a closer look at the BBC Breaking News twitter feed to try and determine whether there was any substance to the claims.
Over the last seven days @BBCBreaking have flagged up 38 breaking news stories related to the current crisis in Gaza. I’ve made copies of them all and present all of them here, in chronological order, added my own commentary above each one. (The final one is from around 10am this morning). Many of these stories have disappeared now or have been amalgamated into other commentary. The headlines give an insight into how the BBC is weighting its coverage. Feel free to disregard my comments and draw your own conclusions.
http://bellacaledonia.org.uk/2012/11/21/a-week-is-a-long-time-in-gaza-or-how-the-bbc-covered-38-consecutive-breaking-news-stories/
Captain Eytan Buchman of the Israeli Defense Forces’ (IDF) Spokesperson’s Unit speaks. Buchman is the Israeli military’s main representative to the North America press. I wonder who the IDF have allocated to control the output on the UK social media.
http://www.fastcompany.com/3003305/inside-israeli-militarys-social-media-squad
At risk of being roundly abused, can I point out that the BBC is under fire from both sides? Take this for instance:
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/debate/article-2193845/Why-wont-BBC-come-clean-bias-Israel–moral-country-deserves-support.html
Some people are never satisfied.
But an honourable mention for the BBC’s John Donnison, who was reporting from Gaza, and, when he was allowed on-air, did so objectively and at some risk to his life, phoney jump-cuts to sirens in Tel Aviv (inserted editorially) notwithstanding.
Personally I am too enamoured of the female genitals to (fully) appreciate your acronym but for the rest I agree with you wholeheartedly.
However, I still have the inescapable impression that you (all) persist in ignoring the animal in (the middle of) the room, to wit the one with the trunk as represented in your neck of the woods by your choice between the prime minister and the leader of her majesty’s opposition and by the candidates in the last presidential election in France.
…sirens in Tel Aviv…on reflection, did it occur to any media production using these emotive sounds to point out that in Gaza there are:
(a) no sirens
(b) no early warning system and
(c) no public shelters?
I think not.
No, Petrus. We are all aware of the pachyderm. He appears frequently in the context of merchant banking, too. Read some of the archive.
Israel and its acolytes routinely complain of bias, even when the outlet is favouring them.
All the analysis, academic and otherwise, that’s been done, including the BBCs own commissioned report show overwhelming bias in favour of Israel.
Common sense tells us this too.
I think you are being a little too even handed there Komodo. Sometimes you puzzle me.
Yes Donnison has mellowed. Perhaps that it is because several of a group of friends have written to him personally over a period (and to other BBC ME personnel) pointing out the inhumanities of the Palestinians’ situation in Gaza.
Here’s an interesting example of someone, a Blairite Labour supporter apparently, who complains of BBC bias against Israel, and it’s quite simply a case of their misrepresenting the facts.
It’s depressing that Labour ended up with such supporters. They’re the total antithesis of what Labour was up to the 1980s.
http://www.newsunspun.org/eotn/telegraphs-dan-hodges-says-bbc-news-didnt-mention-hamas-rocket-attacks-they-did
Thanks Komodo, spread my egg yellow all over my wrist pad now….
I suppose we will see, by means of publications and whining for the next two weeks, how much Israel has suffered from the bad coverage, how overwhelmed they were by the cyber attacks and how difficult it was to get one’s windscreen replaced in Asqualan.
I suppose the demo is still on and so is our meeting up.
Have you identified a suitable corner near to the empirical centre? Phil
Mary: There is no excuse whatever for the World Service doing what Craig describes above. But I think it’s helpful to point up the way in which the Zionist lobby is doing its best to push the bias as far as possible towards Israel’s propaganda objectives. And I am happy to acknowledge honest reporting when it occurs – no matter who, or what their history. Stick and carrot.
Scaremongering tabloids like the Mail are handy for the Zionists, and very difficult to correct. I don’t think your friends, whatever their influence on Donnison, would get very far in convincing Mel Phillips’ mentors that lying for Israel was an undesirable activity. Or in convincing the BBC that the Mail’s op-eds did not represent a sector of public opinion which also needs to be represented. Because having got the Zionist narrative into the fishwrappers, the hasbara crew can actually claim that it does represent a sector of public opinion.
Maybe that will puzzle you more. Good. At least it promotes thought…
Nevermind – glad you took that in the spirit intended, but sorry about the ?paint spill?. Yes. We can look forward to weeks of obfuscation from our beacon of democracy and champion of peace. And once it’s all calmed down, no-one will do anything about the underlying problem, and it will all happen again in 2-4 years. Let’s keep this issue live.
Thanks for your polite reply Komodo.
Weasel words from a Guglielmo Verdirame, Professor of Internationa Law, Dept of War Studies at King’s College London
http://members5.boardhost.com/medialens/thread/1353577860.html
His provenance. {http://www.kcl.ac.uk/sspp/departments/warstudies/people/professors/verdirame.aspx}
Mary you are not right at that point , there are isnt anything interesant on your link .
[Mod/Jon: looks like a spambot, link deleted!]
Mary, Sebi wants some nice picture’s to look at, without pictures he cannot read the stories on medialense….
Es gibt reichlich interessante Fakten in Mary’s link, Sebi, lesen, junger mann lesen…
Now for the final call for Saturdays meeting and possible demo.
Phil is still looking for a suitable site/pub/cafe to meet and anybody who is able to leave their screens for some real live communicating is welcome to meet up.
This song surely must encompass the cease fire mood.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Odf1WWhAF6I
Phiiiiiihil, were are we meeting up?
I didn’t go to his link http://www.sexoanaltm.com/ as I assumed it was a spambot judging from the title!