 |
| Happy Muslim polygamists, here in the UK (courtesy of the BBC website) |
Browsing through the comments at Biased BBC (as one does), I was intrigued to read a highly-liked comment about Azad Chaiwala and his polygamy-promoting website for UK Muslims.
The commenter outlined the story, as reported in the Times, and then complained, "Alas, the silence from the BBC is deafening. What vile hypocrites they are" (for failing to report the story).
That commenter was mistaken, however, for the BBC has not been silent. They'd already reported the story two days ago.
(It's an easy trap to fall into. The BBC's output is so gargantuan that it's easy to miss such things).
The interesting thing about that BBC report, however, is that it speaks volumes about the BBC's present-day reporting, and is a world away from the Times's take.
The Times overwhelmingly focuses on voices critical of Mr Chaiwala and his Muslim polygamy promotion while the BBC overwhelmingly focuses on voices sympathetic to him and his cause.
Of the two, the Times's take is the better balanced. (Blink and you'll miss the 'balance' in the BBC piece.)
The march of moral relativism at the BBC evidently goes on.
If you were wondering what was coming next after the transgender agenda-pushing, maybe it's Muslim-friendly polygamy.
The BBC used to say it couldn't be neutral on apartheid. I think they were right to say that. But equally I would say they cannot be neutral on polygamy, murder of journalists, Sharia law, free speech in universities, threats to assassinate people like Geert Wilders and Robert Spencer, or the wearing of the Burka. I expect them to maintain some standards that reflect our common culture.
ReplyDeleteOf course "the hip bone is connected to the thigh bone", and in this case the BBC have NEVER been given a clear lead by politicians in the UK. Our average MP or even PM seems unable to distinguish between religion, culture, race, skin colour and minority as discrete concepts or to understand that not all religions are the same in their aims and the consequences of achieving their aims. Most people at the BBC are completely bovine, apart from a few elite bureaucrats. They need to be given a clear lead by politicians as to what they should be doing.
Whittingdale & Cameron had the chance to give that lead, or even to impose it, but they threw it away.
ReplyDelete...and thus the madness of multiculturalism.
ReplyDelete