Dimbleby tries to stop BBC bias revelations

[mainsail]

Charles Moore was the only panellist on Any Question on Friday to challenge the views of the other panellists - and the BBC itself - that it was quite OK for envronmental protestors to blockade Heathrow Airport.
Moore said the innate pro-green bias of the BBC had distorted the Radio 4 news reports on this issue that morning. Jonathan Dimbleby tried to shut him up by talking over him (although claiming he had "every right" to criticise the BBC) . Moore persisted and made the point that the BBC News headline should have read "BAA takes action to stop protestors interfering the members of the public taking holiday flights"
The actual edition of Question Time can be heard on www.bbc.co.uk/radio4/news/anyquestions.shtml

[Teddy Bear]

The 'Listen Again' feature of the show is presently undergoing service difficulties so I'm unable to hear this particular piece at this time.
However from experience I know that Any Questions, like Question Time on BBC TV, regularly only have one panelist out of four or five who are not 'lefties'. They also make sure that the audience has a similar ratio. At the time when I applied to be in the audience, the question they ask on the application form to make sure of a particular leaning is whether one supported the Iraq war or not.

I see in an article the BBC has on the subject, they offer no counter or balance to this argument (highlights mine):

"Spokeswoman for the camp Anna Jackson said: "It's likely there will be some disruption for people going to the airport.

"I can't say exactly how much because that will be decided by the protesters themselves at the camp."

She said there would be no attempt to access runways, but insisted that causing problems for ordinary holidaymakers was justified.

"150,000 people die each year around the world because of climate change.

"Those people have a right to life more than people here have a right to fly.

"What's more moral - going on holiday or trying to stop climate change pushing our ecosystems to the point of collapse?"

So in the past history of our planet, nobody used to die as a result of natural weather conditions. One has to wonder whether she believes that modern technology might save many more lives than she believes it kills.

Also, how does she justify increasing the time, and therefore vehicle emissions, it takes for all these passengers to drive to Heathrow because of the disruptions these groups plan will reduce 'global warming'?

If BBC reporters had half a 'balanced' brain they would have questioned this woman about these aberations instead of giving her a forum, but of course, we know they don't.

[ascendinglark]

It's amazing but the BBC are giving the loudest voice to people who are, at the end of the day, no more advanced than the medieval village idiots of yore. These are the same people who, when the English king changed the calender system in whichever century it was (16th?), rioted in the streets at the protest of the "loss" of 11 days of their lives. You cannot move them with any kind of logic or reason whatsoever. They say things like "150,000 people every year die because of climate change" without anything whatsoever to back it up. They fail to realize that industry has effectively doubled our life expectancies in the last 200 years, which has resulted in a population explosion and far longer lives. This life-giving aspect of industry and technology is never taken into consideration by the environMENTALISTS. Nor does it occur to them that the natural, unavoidable effects of climate change, which we cannot even begin to alter even if we destroyed all industry, are easier to deal with the more wealth and prosperity we have. Poor people are affected the most by climate change, because they can't afford to adapt or relocate. What these people need is more capitalism to deal with change, not less.

[Teddy Bear]

It's amazing but the BBC are giving the loudest voice to people who are, at the end of the day, no more advanced than the medieval village idiots of yore.

Perhaps it's not the BBC 'giving the loudest voice...to the medieval idiots..' but that the BBC is comprised of the same idiots who think like this.

The inmates have taken over the asylum.

[indikit]

Dimbleby is a prime example of the sickening elite of the BBC. He sees himself as the royal family of the Beeb. A brainless, toffee nosed simpleton who couldn't even tell you what the average price is of a pint of milk.

The fact that these people try to preach to us about the world we live in, when they live in quite a different world altogether is sickening.

[ascendinglark]

Dimbleby sounds like the TV equivalent of a tenured college professor. Basically, they're just ticks. They get fatter and fatter with the blood of their hosts until they're burned off with a lighter.

[indikit]

"Dimbleby sounds like the TV equivalent of a tenured college professor. Basically, they're just ticks. They get fatter and fatter with the blood of their hosts until they're burned off with a lighter."

I like that analogy. The last bit as it has a particularly satisfying visual attached to it.

[Teddy Bear]

You both paint terrific verbal caricatures of this sloth.

[brianboru]

In the period Jan- Dec 2004 (The most recent for which data is available) BBC staff and other individuals on BBC business took a total of 51,570 flights with an aggregate mileage of 181,706,000 miles. Or 1000 flights a week.
This is equivalent to 36,543,000 kgs of carbon emissions.

I am trying to get this up to date -but there is resistance.

[Teddy Bear]

Welcome Brian - you make an important observation which I'm moving to a more apt section with its own topic.

Replies to this will be found there.