The BBC's Charter and its Producers Guidelines state:
...'Due impartiality lies at the heart of the BBC. All programs and services should be open minded, fair and show a respect for truth? [BBC reports should] contain comprehensive, authoritative and impartial coverage of news and current affairs in the United Kingdom and throughout the world??
I should have started this thread a long time ago. I know that from time to time I comment on the ludicrous nature of which stories make the main Mid-East webpage of the BBC and which are ignored.
So now this aspect will have it's own thread. Contrast and compare the stories covered by the BBC and that of Yahoo, as to which stories are regarded as important and which not. Decide for yourself what type of bias the BBC has.
I notice that anything positive related to Israel is omitted from the BBC website, whereas anything ANYTHING negative is inserted, regardless of merit as MAJOR news.
Last Edit: Jul 27, 2011 20:45:47 GMT by Teddy Bear
Consider that the Syria regime, as just one example, is launching a deadly crackdown on those wishing to demonstrate against it. Using tanks and arms indiscriminately firing on its citizens, which so far has resulted in at least 1500 dead, and thousands more fleeing to Turkey to escape this massacre.
One would imagine that any genuine Western international media organisation would be highlighting events here, and the absolute corruption of the Syrian regime in their actions, raising public outcry.
So over the weekend I was struck by the fact that only one article out of the first ten on the BBC Mid-East webpage referred to the Syrian uprising, and that tanks were used against civilians, and four were devoted to events in Israel.
We can compare it to the news that Yahoo has compiled for its Mid-East webpage, and bear in mind that Yahoo itself is not a media organisation, yet they seem to have a better grasp of which stories rate more mention and have greater importance to us.
Here's the stories Yahoo puts forward
Here's a screen-shot to show which stories were changed by the BBC between the 6th and 7th of August. I've put a red arrow next to each one that relates to Israel.
To the first of these, which the BBC places second to events in Syria and headlines as 'New Israeli Air Strikes on Gaza', actually is an article from the 5th August, and in the actual headline shows it as Second night of Israeli strikes on Gaza after rocket fire. But anybody reading the main news items will obviously think of it as 'new'. They could have also put the emphasis on 'New Rockets Fired from Gaza' which preceded the Israeli air strike, but true to form the BBC avoid telling the public about this. The Israeli response is always inserted as if they are the aggressor. Even in today's BBC Mid-East headlines, the same wording for this article has been kept, so one is supposed to assume that there were more Israeli air strikes.
To the second headline - why exactly Israeli Rock rabbits or Hyrax should make major headlines at all, especially considering the violence going on elsewhere in the region, is beyond me. Perhaps it's supposed to make the other events appear less important. I'll leave it to you to decide this, especially after reading the Yahoo main news.
The next headline relates to Israel approving 900 settler homes, with the BBC giving the impression that the Israelis are stealing more land from the poor Palestinians, the usual spin by the BBC.
Then we have 'Man Guilty of Fogel Family Murders'. The 'Man' is a Palestinian teenager, and if you didn't know who the Fogel family were, especially as the BBC initially called them a 'settler family' till they were shamed by an MP for the cold indifferent way they reported this shameful incident, it wouldn't mean anything to you. Precisely the intention.
Finally, though I omitted to put a red arrow by it, only noticing it afterwards, is in the 'Feature and Analysis' section. The headline and blurb reads 'Longer weekend? Israelis divided over proposal for 2 and a half day weekend.
Looking at the Mid-East webpage today I was struck by the amount of articles related to Israel (highlighted red arrows), with only one on Syria, (highlighted green) concerning Russia's dismay at the UN proposed oil sanctions. Since there have been daily incidents where protesters in Syria have been killed by Assad's forces, I thought it strange that there was no fresh reports.
Reading the article on Russia's condemnation of the UN proposal I noticed two things, just like the BBC omitted to relate before the Iraq invasion that the reasons France and Germany were against this invasion by the UN was because they had vast investments with Saddam, so the BBC doesn't tell us how much oil and investment interests the Russians have with Syria. I haven't looked it up but I'm quite certain it would be substantial. The only reason given for Russia's declaration by the BBC is this Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov said the sanctions would "lead to nothing good". Definitely worth the headline.
The other thing I note in the article is that yesterday 14 more protesters were killed in Syria, and however many today, but that we won't find out from the BBC. Looking at the most popular stories during the week however, nearly all of them concerned Syria (green arrows).
Somehow the BBC think that Turkey wanting to take Israel to court over the 9 activists killed on the Mave Marmara last year (highlighted purple) has far greater prominence. This too despite Turkey killing 160 rebels itself this week (purple arrow). It is clear that this is a purely political move by Turkey, and the BBC are happy accomplices in playing into Turkey's hands.
Since Gaddafi's demise is pretty much a fait accomplit, the BBC have no problem running numerous articles now on the subject (highlighted orange).
Last Edit: Sept 3, 2011 23:56:32 GMT by Teddy Bear
'A picture is worth a 1000 words'. In this case it's a picture of words, or more accurately a comparison between the 10 top stories shown by the BBC on their Mid-East webpage, and the 6 top stories shown by Yahoo, from the AP Mid-East website. Somehow a whole article about what a great guy Bin-Laden was, as well as the bullshit Freedom Riders story dominates other, and one would think, far more important stories going on in the region. Look too at how many days old articles are still held as current. You think this is quality reporting by any stretch of the imagination?
Last Edit: Nov 16, 2011 23:34:15 GMT by Teddy Bear
By now one should clearly be able to see the difference between a professional news outlet, who are more interested in reporting the news as it happens, and the BBC who are more interested in maintaining their agenda.
Just look at the articles appearing right now on the Yahoo Mid-East webpage, and note too just how recent these articles are. Consider too the import of these articles in understanding just what is going on in the various countries that comprise this region.
Now see what the BBC offers. One would think that 3 day old articles are still relevant in light of other events. Notice there is no mention of the continuing violence against the Copts in Egypt by the BBC, and they still think that the article praising the 'humanity' of Bin Laden, and another about the Palestinian scam to portray Israel buses as racist are worth hanging on to.
Post by thehighlandrebel on Nov 30, 2011 12:38:04 GMT
These remarks were said by the Australian Prime Minister, John Howard in 2008.
The remarks apply equally well to any minority who are unhappy with the country in which they have chosen to live -
. . . . This culture has been developed over two centuries of struggles, trials and victories by millions of men and women who have sought freedom.
We speak mainly ENGLISH, not Spanish, Lebanese, Arabic, Chinese, Japanese, Russian, or any other language. Therefore, if you wish to become part of our society . Learn the language!
Most Australians believe in God. This is not some Christian, right wing, political push, but a fact, because Christian men and women, on Christian principles, founded this nation, and this is clearly documented. It is certainly appropriate to display it on the walls of our schools. If God offends you, then I suggest you consider another part of the world as your new home, because God is part of our culture.
We will accept your beliefs, and will not question why. All we ask is that you accept ours, and live in harmony and peaceful enjoyment with us.
This is our country, our land and our lifestyle, and we will allow you every opportunity to enjoy all this. But once you are done complaining, whining, and griping about Our Flag, Our Pledge, Our Christian beliefs, or Our Way of Life, I highly encourage you take advantage of one other great Australian freedom,
The right to leave.
If you aren't happy here then LEAVE. We didn't force you to come here. You asked to be here. So accept the country YOU accepted. . .
It's a view I would regard as plain common sense, as I've no doubt any intelligent person would. It shows up the real mentality of those involved at the BBC, among others. When following 9/11 and 7/7, polls were done amongst Muslims in this country, and a majority felt these attacks were justified, as well as wanting Sharia law implemented, the writing was on the wall for our society when NOTHING was said or done about that then.
The BBC were more concerned about THEIR sensitivities than the rest. OUTRAGEOUS!
'Urgent government action is the only thing that can stem the crisis...' 'They were drawn from a daunting range of disciplines...' '...he wants governments to wake-up, stressing the need for urgent action.'
Reading these lines from an article posted on the BBC Mid-East webpage, what would you imagine are they referring to? Well unless you consider that this is the BBC we're talking about, i wouldn't expect you to guess correctly.
The BBC have exceeded themselves with this their latest offering. In one of the most asinine, conceited, head up their arse articles to get people concerned about environmental issues. Especially so as it is at a time and place in the world where the least of concern for most affected would be this.
Yet the BBC believe this issue is worthy of near top spot on their Mid-East webpage. Just below the stories of 50 killed in Iraq attacks, and the journalist who survived the attack in Syria asking to be evacuated. Yet this environmentalist BBC author, Sylvia Smith, seems oblivious to what is really going on in this part of the world, except as an almost aside, so full of her own self-importance. She hasn't even proof read her article, or simply can't speak English properly.
But worst of all is some of the assertions she reports, which we in the real world know to be complete bunkum.
There's this paragraph as an example 'But with Europeans deterred by a lack of money, or fear by fear of taking holidays in eastern and southern Mediterranean countries, places such as Syria and Egypt are already enjoying reduced tourist pressure on their precious wetlands.'
Enjoying? Sounds like it's worth having a violent revolution so long as it protects the 'precious' wetlands. Never mind about the lives lost.
This is followed by this 'This optimistic note was echoed by Nejib Benessaiah, the Tunisian co-ordinator of MedWet. "The Arab Spring has brought huge changes," he states. "It is different in every country but the general trend is towards more democracy.'
I'll leave it to you to decide if the correct term for the the assessment is 'optimistic', but I have yet to see where the trend following Arab Spring has been toward democracy. At least any definition that I understand. But then the BBC have never let facts get in the way of their desired narrative.
And in keeping with that they insert this line - "Overuse and pollution of water is forbidden in the Qu'ran and the Sharia,"
Look at most of the other stories going on around the world concerning Islam and see for yourself how impressed you are by the respect it gives to living beings, even of their own faith, never mind about water.
Here's the BBC Mid-East webpage
And here's the article. Thought I'd keep a picture for later evidence of how they ran it
Most will be aware of the terrorist attack in Algeria and the recent conclusion resulting in quite a few deaths on both sides. I note the BBC still refers to these scum as militants, and only when somebody else like Cameron refers to them as terrorists do they put it in the article, but with quotation marks around the word.
There's also been incidents recorded in Egypt, Syria, Iraq, and Iran in the last 24 hours, but let's see what the 'world class media organisation', at least that's how the BBC like to term themselves, has to offer on its Mid-East page
As you can see there are articles going back 4 days, and for some reason the BBC decided to give greater prominence to Netanyahu pledging to keep settlements, from 2 days ago, over the evidence of a massacre in Syria which killed 100, from a day ago.
Just compare the BBC output to that of Yahoo news to see just what is going on in this area in the last day and see just what a pathetic job the BBC are doing.
Last Edit: Jan 20, 2013 20:05:52 GMT by Teddy Bear
I anticipated what was likely to happen in this video and confirmed at the end it was indeed the case.
A warning is necessary that it has very graphic scenes of a woman being shot by a crowd of 'brave' armed Islamists for apparently wearing a red vest. I don't think it's necessary to see this shit to be disgusted by this mindset.
Post by thehighlandrebel on May 28, 2015 11:13:32 GMT
Maybe not directly involving al-beeb but a bit of poetic justice none the less. Just days after the Qatar authorities called on FIFA to ban Israel from the international football arena the heavy hand of plod moved in to collar them. FIFA had received millions of dollars from Qatar who along with Kuwait have taken over from Saudi Arabia as the worlds top financiers of international terrorism so it's not surprising where the anti Israel agenda came from. Qatar apart from taking over large sections of the media in this country also give huge amounts of money to educational establishments - but these donations come at a price, a heavy price. These donations come with the condition that Islam will be promoted and anti Semitism be encouraged in classrooms and campuses and the outcome of this in the future for the lives and safety of the people of this country is terrifying. I would hope that this government would have the spine and moral convictions to end this insidious practice of terrorist funding of our educational establishments but somehow I don't think they have the gonads for it.
I would hope that this government would have the spine and moral convictions to end this insidious practice of terrorist funding of our educational establishments but somehow I don't think they have the gonads for it.
I have suspected this kind of corruption going on for a long time, and no way to know just how deep is its reach. But just seeing how little the government does to address the insidious BBC there's nothing that makes me feel there's any kind of ethics within the majority of them, let alone 'gonads'.
Post by thehighlandrebel on May 29, 2015 2:21:47 GMT
This is what is happening at our universities today - thanks to funding from terrorist supporting states like Qatar, Kuwait, Iran and Saudi Arabia. We bemoan the fact that educational standards in this country are plummeting but is it any surprise when we attack the country with the greatest number of Nobel prize winners and defend a barbaric stone age cult that murders their own girls for going to school. Why are our politicians silent?
At present, the BBC is only answerable to itself in deciding its standards and coverage. How does it measure up to what you consider good quality, and impartial and unbiased reporting as required by its charter? All TV viewers in the UK are forced by law to pay for this 'service'. Do you believe that what is received truly 'serves' the society, - or merely increases the problems within it?
Your perceptions of BBC output are important and welcome. Register and activate your account to be able to post