BBC Immigration Bias is 'Why We're Arguing Now'

[Teddy Bear]

Ed West at the Spectator with an excellent analysis and examples of BBC bias on the subject

The BBC's bias is the reason we're arguing about immigration now
Ed West

Wonderful: Labour has a new slogan on immigration, which appears to be the Conservatives’ old slogan from 2005, the one that Labour said was racist.

I have far more respect for any Labour politician who actually defends their record on mass immigration – only a fifth of which was from Europe, incidentally, although that gets at least four-fifths of the coverage – than those who goes along with the current fashion. Someone who said that diversity made us more tolerant and kinder and was culturally-enriching; and that the economic benefits, although they are more helpful to the rich than the poor, are worth the downsides. That mass immigration was a Left-wing thing – in the words of former Labour speechwriter Andrew Neather, part of the ‘Leftish language of social justice’.

I don’t agree with any of those arguments, but it’s a defensible position, and it’s central to the modern Labour Party. If you don’t agree with it, why would you be on the Labour front benches?

I suspect they don’t make this honest argument because under Blair Labour encouraged immigration knowing it would be pretty unpopular with their supporters, but they thought that these people were simply wrong and would either come around to it or die out. Besides which, the party probably banked on the fact that the taboo about the subject, which stems ultimately from imperial guilt and the European disaster of 1914-45, would prevent any party from trying to outflank them on the Right. And before 2004, when Polish immigration deracialised the subject and Trevor Phillips broke the taboo about multiculturalism (MigrationWatch also played a part), almost no one did.

It’s common among some members of the commentariat to suggest it’s all a myth that we ‘can’t talk about immigration’. But all you have to do is go to the BBC News website’s archive, all available online, to see why people were wary for so long. Look at the way opposition to immigration, or by today’s standards fairly mild criticism of multiculturalism, was presented as racism. A very small selection of samples can be found here:
‘Tories reject Cook race claim’

‘Cook blames Hague for race outbursts’

‘Tory’s race remarks recall “rivers of blood”’

‘Tories deny ‘racism’ jibe’

‘Both major parties have been accused of creating a debate on the issue that could give comfort to racists’

‘Tories ‘whipping up anti-asylum vote’’

Or look at how Labour’s arguments for more immigration were presented, almost without question, even though the economic benefits are flimsy (the social costs weren’t raised at all).

‘Call for immigration rethink’

‘Green card ‘may solve skills shortage’’

‘Migrants ‘benefit UK economy’’

Nowhere was it suggested that Labour might have, ahem, other considerations when it came to opening up the border.

That’s just a very brief selection. But look at any BBC news report from this period and the tone was the same – if you question mass immigration, you’re basically Hitler.

So, yes, there was a sense that ‘we can’t talk about immigration’ for fear of being seen as racist, and a great part of that was due to the Labour Party’s PR machine, with the assistance of sympathetic journalists, presenting it that way. We’re now simply having the argument, in 2014, that we should have had in 2000 and 2001.

[Teddy Bear]

Douglas Murray, also at the Spectator, with his observations on the subject, but having the benefit of knowing the results of the Rochester and Strood by-election.

Another important element to be gained from this story relates to the BBC itself. They are the biggest culprits in manufacturing the doctrine that the only ones who wants to talk about immigration are racists. We know this is the strategy of the left who will always use this type of defence to prevent their being exposed for the poor thinkers they are.

But next time you watch Question Time, or listen to Any Questions and see how many left wingers the BBC were able to make sure would dominate the audience, besides the best case scenario of 3 lefties to 2 (more) right wingers on the panel, think about the real percentages of how people in Rochester and Strood voted.
If we take all the votes that Labour, Lib Dems, and the Greens received, it just amounts to over half the number of votes that went to UKIP, even without taking the Conservative votes into account.

It shows that the BBC is never trying to be balanced, but despite that, how so many people are not taken in with their propaganda. Since they are denied a proper debate, they will just take direct action.

One day these same people, who have to be conscious of the BBC bias, will be coming for the BBC themselves.

BBC = The cancer in our society.

We’re too frightened of appearing ‘racist’ to have a debate about immigration
Douglas Murray

A rather typical 24 hours in the life of modern Britain. Everyone does another round of ‘we need to be able to talk about immigration.’ The main parties once again say (as though this were a great revelation to the rest of us) that it is not racist to talk about immigration. The Labour and Conservative representatives then go on the BBC’s Question Time and claim that the Ukip candidate (now Ukip MP) for Rochester and Strood is a racist. And a Labour shadow minister mocks the awfulness of people who fly the national flag.

Meantime, if you scroll down the news stories you can read about the chief inspector of Ofsted’s discovery that ‘pupils at six small Muslim private schools in east London are at risk of extremist views and radicalisation’. As with the Birmingham ‘Trojan Horse’ case and similar cases elsewhere in the country, the parents and governors at the school have responded by attacking Ofsted and claiming that Muslims are being victimised.

And that’s the thing, you see. We keep saying we want to ‘have a debate’ and ‘discuss’ immigration. But we don’t. Not really. What we want to do is to please ourselves by saying – for instance – how wonderful the NHS is thanks to immigration and then ignore the real, long-term downsides and challenges that come along with mass immigration of the scale we have seen in recent years. We seem intent on ignoring the facts even as they keep cropping up all around us. Will the latest Ofsted inspection lead to a serious discussion of whether it is wise to keep letting large numbers of Muslims from Pakistan and Bangladesh into the UK? Or how on earth we plan to integrate and adapt to British values the millions who are already here? Of course it won’t. To have that debate would be ‘racist’. So we shouldn’t kid ourselves that we’re having a debate, nor have any real intention to do so.

Pretty bleak really. Though if you need cheering up might I suggest one failsafe option? Dwell on the number ‘349’. That is the number of votes that the Liberal Democrats got in Rochester and Strood. 349. It’s beautiful. I can’t stop laughing. There – it’s happened again. 349. It’s wonderful. The new magic number. A number that has the potential to bring a limitless amount of happiness when you think on it.