On the 'Jihadi Mohammed' story...
Both The Andrew Marr Show (guest-hosted by Sophie Raworth) and Radio 4's Broadcasting House shared a particular focus: on the alleged failings of the British security services.
Sophie Raworth's introduction stated:
Now, with the revelation that the ISIS terrorist Mohammed Emwzai was on a terror watchlist and had links to extremists going back many years, tough questions are being asked of the policy and the security services.
and later interviews pursued this path, with Sophie beginning her interview with Labour's Yvette Cooper with the question:
In terms of Jihadi John, the terrorism threat, have the security services messed up?
Starting the paper review, Sophie and her BBC colleague Bridget Kendall also pursued this path, beginning with the Observer:
Bridget Kendall: It raises so many questions. What do they know?...Sophie Raworth: How long he was on the radar for.Bridget Kendall: How long he was on the radar. Why it wasn't possible to do something about that.
Paddy O'Connell, over on Radio 4, had a critical former MI6 spy and an academic for an entire discussion on the same theme, opening with this question from Paddy:
Harry Ferguson [the spy], did your former colleagues drop the ball? He was known to them for over seven years before he cropped up in his murderous videos.
Similarly...
And of all the possible angles the BBC News website (and the Radio 4 news bulletins) could have led on this morning, they chose to lead on the Mail on Sunday's 'world exclusive' [yep, the hated Hate Mail] - the chain of emails between the MOS's security correspondent and Emwzai. [The difference was that the BBC simply quoted Emwzai's complaints, while the MOS also included the reporter's take on the man - that he had a "persecution complex" and tended towards being "paranoid".]
Sky (initially) went with its investigations into the University of Westminster. And Andrew Gilligan at the Telegraph has dug deep into the extremist CAGE - another piece of fiercely independent investigative journalism from the ex-BBC man that it's most unlikely he'd have been allowed to pursue at the BBC. Both angles the BBC could have also chosen to pursue (along with many others), but chose not to.
And these are only the latest manifestations of the BBC's dogged focus on the alleged failings of the security services.
Obviously, some questioning of the security services is needed, despite all of their excellent work in thwarting attack after attack after attack, but the sheer extent and relentlessness of the BBC's focus - especially when there are so many other angles to this story to cover - suggests a strong determination on the BBC's part to deflect the public's attention in a particular direction. Don't you think?
Update: Pace my comments in parenthesis earlier about the BBC's reporting of the MoS emails, here's a Biased BBC comment:
Update: Pace my comments in parenthesis earlier about the BBC's reporting of the MoS emails, here's a Biased BBC comment:
BBC News Ticker boldly saying (at the moment)
“Emails claim the IS British militant known as Jihadi John complained of persecution by the security services.”
That’s right no context: nothing about Emwazi’s paranoid mental state. Just a bold allegation presented as fact on the BBC ticker so that thousands of Muslims can read it and build their own fears about the security services.
