Friday 12 June 2015

Another BBC Vanishing Act

DB has spotted that a particularly egregious specimen of BBC bias has now been 'edited out of existence':

The third is:
What should we consider when we cover stories on Europe?
His [David Cowling's] answer is that 'we' should consider reminding audiences of the potential risks of leaving the EU.  
What does the latter mean for BBC reporters? Well, according to David Cowling, if some member of the public says, "Yes, yes, let's leave the European Union", 'you' should say:
Do you understand what life is going to be like if we do leave the European Union? So would you like me to tell you what the possible consequences are and then make your judgement? 
That he really does mean 'pointing out the the risks' when he talks of 'telling people the possible consequences' of leaving the EU is made clear in what follows:  
So all I'm saying is that when we do address the issue of Europe it's very easy to slip into all of the negatives....{blah, blah, blah}....but I think the thing that's missing - the sleeping tiger - is actually 'What does it mean? What are the consequences of Britain being outside Europe, in terms of our jobs, in terms of our status, in terms of employment, and industry, and...a whole range of things. And those questions I think it's quite legitimate to say, "Let's discuss  those too, and then we can get, perhaps, a more balanced and informed debate"'.
And that BBC desire to 'get' 'a more balanced and informed debate' by 'telling' BBC audiences 'what the possible consequences are' and countering the 'negatives' about Europe (that are 'very easy to slip into') is precisely what people who accuse the BBC of having a pro-EU bias are complaining about. That's what we think the BBC is doing: Pushing 'counterbalancing' pro-EU points at us.   
And, courtesy of this BBC Academy's video, it appears that that's exactly what BBC reporters are 'taught' to do from the very start. 
And I missing something, or isn't this a very real proof of BBC bias (and an insight into how that bias is 'taught')?
And now that 'very real proof of BBC bias' is gone. Click on the old BBC Academy link now and this is what you'll see:


  1. I must have missed your previous post about it. Once again we have confirmation that there really is an agenda on certain issues, and they really do have editorial directives. Lying sacks of sh!t.

  2. Boy, the kapos are out in force these days.

    It's bad enough revisiting 'closed for comments' blogs of theirs to find they have gone through and 'tidied up' for posterity, of course with zero opportunity to appeal for those erased, but the BBC pulling regular Kremlin May Day balcony erasings of stuff they have formally published as pages that has blown back, is dire.

    I keep a folder of howlers and often find the URL leads to a 'no longer here/wrong page' claim, so the best thing is to also keep a page capture in complement.

    Frankly such efforts serve the same way as all cover ups, often highlighting and looking worse than the original.

    I have pointed at David Cowling's gem before, but will now do so pointing out what the BBC tried to do to conceal it.

  3. I found several other BBC Academy videos on the subject of reporting on the EU. They're not new by any means; most are three or four years old and concern the Euro crisis more than the EU itself. The featured stars are something of a rogue's gallery: Gavin Hewitt, Hugh Pym, Norman Smith, Bridgett Kendall, Jonty Bloom, and Paul Mason. Most appear to be from the same forum on the same day. But even in these things the Beeboids usually can't help but give something away when they're amongst their own kind, so it's worth checking out. And as we know, often enough they don't even realize they're doing it.

    Mason's bit is a classic. Even when talking about reporting on a murder case (what he used to do before becoming an economics correspondent), he finds a way to make it about the working class stroogle. Relevant bit right at the beginning:

    I haven't had time to watch them all yet, but will get to them over the next few days. I have downloaded them all in case the BBC tries to send them down the memory hole. I will post more links if there's anything revealing.

    1. By coincidence, David, I was also looking at the BBC Academy's extensive YouTube archive today:

      The one I was specifically after was Mark Easton discussing the BBC's reporting of race:

      I've barely got a minute into it yet but ME has already had a sly dig at "Messrs Desmond, Dacre and Murdoch" for not sharing the motivations of the charter-bound BBC (to promote good race relations)..

      It could be an absolute goldmine of BBC insider thinking.

    2. Yes, indeed. I guess the blatant bias offered by Mark Mardell in his session (which I'm sure we all recall fondly) is standard fare.

  4. "It could be an absolute goldmine of BBC insider thinking"

    Oh, dear. If they suss out that might not work in the way they think it should, we may be in for another of those renowned BBC exercises in trust and transparency as the electronic servers are frantically punched.

    David's download could one day be very valuable.


Note: only a member of this blog may post a comment.