Never mind Storm Dennis, is the BBC facing 'a perfect storm' at the moment?
Anyhow, batten down the hatches again, and here's a new Open Thread that looks very like the old one.
Thank you for all your comments.
“From Our Own Correspondent is a weekly BBC radio programme in which a number of BBC foreign correspondents deliver a sequence of short talks reflecting on current events and topical themes in the countries outside the UK in which they are based. The programme offers the BBC's correspondents around the world a chance to give a personal account of events from the epoch-making to the inconsequential.” (Wikipedia.)
"Insight, wit and analysis from BBC correspondents, journalists and writers from around the world. (FOOC website.)
"Agenda-driven propaganda laced with ill-informed, prejudiced and unoriginal platitudes.
(Is the BBC Biased?)
"President Trump’s plan for peace in Israel and the occupied Palestinian territories would allow Israel to apply its sovereignty to all the Jewish settlements as well as swathes of strategic land in the West Bank. The Palestinian leadership has rejected the plan outright saying it would create a "Swiss cheese state". Our Middle East Correspondent Tom Bateman spent time on two sides of a fence that separates an Israeli settlement from a Palestinian family with its own checkpoint. (FOOC website)Kate Adie’s intro was roughly the same as the above blurb: A Family Fenced in.
“We should completely close the borders … enough is enough”— BBC Question Time (@bbcquestiontime) February 20, 2020
This audience member says the number of people ’flooding in’ to the UK is costing public services too much. #bbcqt pic.twitter.com/T5EshhWqQu
‘Yet Question Time then saw fit to clip the 82 seconds of hate, accompanied by a succinct summary of the audience member’s rant. Lies and hatred, uncorrected and unchallenged, rippled across social media from the account of the BBC’s self-described “flagship political debate programme”
The BBC is under threat in a way it has never been before. The pernicious route they [the Government] are using is to say the licence fee is wrong or unfair. I don't believe it is wrong or unfair.
It is a way of damaging and undermining the BBC that is dangerous and should be resisted forcefully if public broadcasting is to survive. Anything that chips away at what we believe to be a good democratic process is dangerous and has to be fought against.
It has to be explained why not speaking to people is dangerous, why not appearing on television is dangerous.I rather doubt that dialling up the hostile rhetoric in this way is going to prove particularly helpful to the BBC.
...However, her willingness to accept money from an industry under fire for its environmental impact raises questions about the potential conflict of interest. She is frequently required to cover climate change on the Today programme and was sent to Sweden in December to interview Greta Thunberg.
I don’t want to get into a BBC fight, but they are interventionist, and want their drama and their other programmes to reflect their own position on various issues. That means that if you disagree with the BBC, then you’re not the writer for them, really.
I do wish British journalists — esp Brussels-based — would stop repeating the false mantra that the EU holds all the cards in upcoming negotiations. It holds many, perhaps more than UK. But if UK left on WTO rules it would have total regulatory freedom. EU’s worst nightmare.
“…..But, about half-way through, he started talking about places where Holocaust denial was strongest, and came up with Gaza and the West Bank - ie Palestine - with a figure of 82%. So he headed off to SOAS to meet a supposed authority on the subject, Professor Gilbert Achcar.
So what did Achcar have to say for himself here, to Baddiel? Basically, he argued that because the Palestinians live in such a state of miserable oppression under the Israelis, their Holocaust denial should be seen as a “provocative” means of hurting their enemy - a kind of "fuck you" to their oppressors. “I don’t think you can generally, without some degree of pathology, be a Holocaust denier in Europe. But you can be perfectly sane and be a Holocaust denier in the Middle East because of ignorance of the topic,” he said. In other words there's "bad Holocaust denial" - the Western kind - and "good Holocaust denial" - the Arab kind.
Arab Holocaust denial, in other words, gets a pass. As does Arab antisemitism...as always. No mention of Holocaust denial in the Middle East outside Palestine, so comprehensively documented, for instance, at MEMRI. No mention of Iran, or Syria, where denial is government sponsored.
The subject wasn't pursued. Achcar's vile excuse for Palestinian Holocaust denial - understandable because of what the Jews are doing to them - was left unchallenged. Baddiel, to his credit, wasn't happy with that "good Holocaust denial" vs "bad Holocaust denial" distinction. But the episode still left a bad taste in what was otherwise an excellent programme.
Am I alone in thinking that Ash Sarkar is given vastly disproportionate airtime by @BBC; deployed so frequently solely because she articulates her communism vehemently, thereby polarising debate, adding clicks.. and people tweet to object? Thank God for Michael Portillo. #bbcqt https://t.co/V5QAWp3X6S— Adrian Hilton (@Adrian_Hilton) February 19, 2020
“It was devastating in the election campaign to knock on doors and find that many within the Jewish community just didn’t trust us any more.” - @RLong_Bailey— Channel 4 (@Channel4) February 17, 2020
Labour leadership candidates are asked to commit to tackling anti-Semitism by a former Labour voter. #C4Debate pic.twitter.com/VX7pBOPQkj
- “To oppose any proposed solution for Palestinians, including Trump’s ‘deal’, not based on international law and UN resolutions recognising their collective rights to self-determination and to return to their homes.
- "To adhere to a consistent ethical UK trade policy, including in relation to Israel, in particular by applying international law on settlements in the occupied Palestinian territories and stopping any arms trade with Israel that is used in violation of the human rights of Palestinians.
- "To oppose the government’s proposed restrictive legislation regarding procurement and investment and, if that is passed, to promise that a future Labour government would make it a priority to rescind laws which restrict the globally recognised rights to freedom of expression and association to campaign for ethical trade policies.”
What’s the problem?
"Prospective leaders of any major party shouldn’t be having their stance on Israel and the Palestinians dictated by the PSC, an organisation that has never committed to a two state solution, never accepted Israel’s right to exist, leads the BDS (Boycott Divestment and Sanctions) campaign in the UK, and has failed to deal with antisemitism in its own ranks.
The pledges say nothing at all about Israel or two states.
In fact, the first one undermines the concept of two states with a reference to a complete right of return. We know from its campaigning that PSC don’t mean a symbolic settlement of this issue with small numbers of Palestinians returning to Israel, and compensation for others, it argues for the absolute right to live in Israel of all descendants of Palestinian refugees, about seven million people. This would mean Israel ceasing to exist as a Jewish state. There would be two Palestinian states, not two states for two peoples.
If that's not 'condemning', then what is?It is right that Andrew Sabisky is no longer working for the Government. We had registered our concerns with Downing St earlier. There can be no place for such views in our politics.
How can it be appropriate, impartial or within BBC rules for senior journalists at the Corporation to use BBC-branded Twitter accounts to promote political campaign material claiming "The government have declared war on our BBC" and comparing the PM to Donald Trump?The BBC: We are deeply loved by the public. Also the BBC: Funding us by voluntary subscription would destroy the BBC.The BBC: We are impartial and take no part in political campaigning. Also the BBC: Sign this petition attacking the govt for suggesting voluntary subscription!
Who in BBC News is deciding that Labour's trans madness is not a major story? Much of the BBC's increasingly extreme bias is imposed via its story selection, not just its story treatment.
Well BBC Politics website running nothing on Lab leader contenders' trans lunacy as of now. Can it be that none of the dozens of Beeb political correspondents has noticed the story? I suggest not. There is clearly a de facto ban on covering furores that challenge the extreme woke orthodoxy.
AM: Alright, let’s talk about another big issue. You have stood up to antisemitism in the party, you said, yes?RLB: Yes.AM: Do you recognise this sentence? ‘It should not be regarded as antisemitic to describe Israel, its policies or the circumstances surrounding its foundation as racist.’RLB: I think under the International Holocaust Movement’s definition it would be antisemitic to regard Israel as a racist endeavour.AM: So you regard that sentence as antisemitic? You’ve said that?RLB: I don’t think it’s racist to stand up for the right – or antisemitic, should I say, or racist, either/or to stand up for the right of Israel to exist. And that’s something that I very much support. But I also support a two-state solution and don’t condone the actions of the Israeli government in terms of illegal settlements etc, etc. And that’s why it’s so important...AM: That sentence – you in the past have said was antisemitic. There was a National Executive Committee meeting in October 2018 where Jeremy Corbyn arrived and read out that statement as a proposed addition to the Labour Party policy. You must have been horrified when that happened.RLB: I think under the IHRA definitions it’s very important to make it clear that supporting the right of Israel to exist and not kind of examining in any great detail the history is not – it’s incompatible with the definition of antisemitism, quite frankly. And we need to be very careful on that. But that doesn’t discriminate against...AM: Sorry to interrupt, but when you heard that statement made by Jeremy Corbyn, which you have described as antisemitic, did you speak out against it at the time?RLB: I don’t remember the incident itself. It was mentioned to me at a meeting the other night and I don’t recall it.AM: You were at that meeting.RLB: Well, I don’t recall that statement being made. But I’m very clear on us not questioning the right of Israel to exist, and certainly not saying that in any way it’s a racist endeavour. I’m clear on that, Andrew.AM: This happens at the moment when the antisemitism row is at its height in the Labour Party. You’re at an NEC meeting, your leader arrives and reads out a statement which you regard as antisemitic, and you can’t remember that?RLB: And why I’m being clear on what my view on this is, Andrew, I do not think that it’s right to call Israel or the creation of Israel a racist endeavour. I think that that’s antisemitic. And we’ve got to recognise where we are on antisemitism within the party. We have not taken enough action. It’s not been robust enough. And as Labour leader I would adopt any recommendations made by the EHRC, I would atop the ten pledges made by the Board of Deputies, and I would restore trust with the Jewish community.AM: Rebecca Long-Bailey, thanks very much indeed for talking to us today.
One of the cleverest things Oliver Dowden and John Whittingdale could do is relax the FOI derogation the BBC is afforded and abuses. This would shine a spotlight on the BBC no amount of DCMS select committees or ministerial enquires could.
The BBC has a huge amount of output across our news channels, bulletins, radio, online programming and podcasts. This election is being primarily covered by our US-based team… meaning we have sent far fewer London staff than we have ever done previously.
I’ll be talking to Andrew Marr in the morning about my proposals for a People’s BBC owned by staff & the public.
In response to Tory attacks, the BBC must be freed from government control & guaranteed as a cornerstone of public knowledge in our democracy.