tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3272054900018746845.post49866038148110053..comments2024-01-01T17:21:52.555+00:00Comments on Is the BBC biased?: MIDWEEK AIMLESS THREADCraighttp://www.blogger.com/profile/08741318067991857821noreply@blogger.comBlogger4125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3272054900018746845.post-16539569729445036762014-09-05T00:42:34.163+01:002014-09-05T00:42:34.163+01:00The complaints are always the same: the BBC is Zio...The complaints are always the same: the BBC is Zionist because they don't openly state that Israel is bent on genocide. The BBC is controlled by Zionists because they don't openly state in every report that every Israeli action is a war crime, or show enough footage of the evils done by the Jews. Any report suggesting Hamas might have done something slightly naughty is dismissed as Israeli propaganda. Then there's apparently Universal Mark Regev, given a regular free platform on the BBC to spread Israeli propaganda. He's never off the airwaves, right? Paul Mason even said the BBC was biased in favor of Israel because of their Gaza Flotilla reporting and the decision not to air that propaganda/charity appeal a couple years back. Of course, the latter has since been balanced out by broadcasting that recent appeal, but that's never enough for the anti-Israel crowd. The just doesn't wave enough shrouds to suit them.<br /><br />The sad part is that the BBC uses this as proof that they're not biased because they get complaints from both sides.David Preisernoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3272054900018746845.post-89139243389446651702014-09-04T07:54:45.620+01:002014-09-04T07:54:45.620+01:00Just a quick reaction to some of your points Craig...Just a quick reaction to some of your points Craig.<br /><br />The Israel-bashing brigade <i>does</i> have the upper hand. It has done for as long as I can remember. Forever, actually, apart from a brief spell immediately after the six-day war until the ‘plucky little Israel’ phase wore off.<br /><br />I have always been baffled about the substance of the complaints about pro-Israel bias at the BBC. I mean, what can there possibly be to complain about? I think they seem to consist of claims that the BBC hasn’t mentioned the words ‘siege’ and ‘genocide’ often enough. In other words ‘why let facts get in the way?’<br /><br />No matter how factual BBC Watch, Is the BBC Biased? and all the other fine pro-Israel blogs care to be, it makes not a jot of difference. No matter how diligently they stick to concrete examples and statistical analyses/ The anti-Israel movement is entirely emotional. It’s a coalition of Muslims and the left-leaning with a smattering of old school antisemitic FCO types. They’re vociferous and numerous.<br /><br />The BBC has pitched its ‘voice’ with the Palestinians. Everything they tell us is as seen from their perspective. They have thoroughly embedded themselves within that position and through that mechanism it has been firmly established that Israel is the bad guy and the Palestinians are the hard-done-by underdog, permanently and irrevocably. They’ve created an upside-down reality.<br /> <br />Now that there’s this horrendous upsurge of barbaric Islamic violence and turmoil with the overtly aspirational intent to create a world-wide caliphate, we’re seeing cognitive dissonance, where our emotional identification is once again with our own side. In other words we empathise with our own people rather than the ‘other side’. You could call it a ‘reversion’.<br /><br />How long it will take before people put the last piece in the jigsaw I know not. The BBC has it in their hands, and by the look of it we shouldn’t be holding our breath.<br />suehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02693686958796849316noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3272054900018746845.post-16180212309323985322014-09-04T06:55:31.825+01:002014-09-04T06:55:31.825+01:00"The anti-Israel brigade have clearly stolen ..."The anti-Israel brigade have clearly stolen a march on supporters of Israel (and fair-minded neutrals) by marching in such numbers against "BBC pro-Israel bias"..."<br /><br />So true. A month ago on 'Over to You' on the World Service a Palestinian comedian complained bitterly about the BBC announcing,"in a cold, icy tone" that, "Israel had bombed Gaza and Gaza had fired rockets at Israel." She was objecting to the apparent lack of appreciation on the part of the BBC that Hamas is "a resistance movement." She also complained that there were no human stories on the ground in Gaza from the BBC. She obviously never listens to the World Service, with Kevin Connolly, Lyse Doucet, Jon Donnison, Chris Morris and others doing little but human interest stories and faithfully following the Hamas line.<br /><br />I guess 'Over to You' chose this stupid woman because it was so easy to refute her claims and have the BBC looking good:<br /><br />http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/p023ff6tTrueToonoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3272054900018746845.post-7884586533837109912014-09-04T01:44:02.098+01:002014-09-04T01:44:02.098+01:00Keep your head up, Craig. DB's amazing work do...Keep your head up, Craig. DB's amazing work does get more results than almost everything the rest of us have done combined, yes, but that probably has more to do with the fact that the Beeboids and loads of other people not normally concerned about the BBC read that and not these blogs than the relative quality of your work. DB still deserves the highest of accolades for what he does, though. If only it was made more public.<br /><br />Interesting that you mention the equivalent of the West Lothian Question. I've often wondered if that is evidence of confirmation bias, and it has made me question my own opinions of BBC output. That's why I always tried to stick to pointing out factual errors and consistent patterns, and highlighting when they really do reveal their personal opinions, along with my own interpretations of what the Beeboids were thinking and trying to accomplish. I was not always successful, but I know there is hard evidence of patterns and agendas.<br /><br />But I don't really see that the air has gone out of the "The BBC is biased" movement. There are still regular instances of complaints in the mainstream media. Ed West recently published a study on the BBC's bias about immigration. Rod Liddle has made several damning observations over at the Spectator, much of which is nearly verbatim to what Biased-BBCers have been saying for years. There's something in the Telegraph or Commentary a conservative blog almost every week.<br /><br />I often wonder, though, if the lack of progress you correctly observe is due to the almost total absence of coordination between the various people who are dedicated to exposing the BBC's bias. BBC Watch, for example, is, if not a one-blogger blog, certainly a one-note blog. Biased-BBC is pretty much as you say. Sometimes I feel like updating the Tweets page, but feel it would be hypocritical or sneakily rude to do so now. I don't really understand why DB hasn't done that himself. Rod Liddle is on his own, and there's no real connection between the Right-wing columnists who do occasionally point out the BBC's bias.<br /><br />The question is, how to coordinate it all? The only way the Leviathan can feel the sting of the gnat is if a bunch of them get together and hit the same spot all at once, and then hit other spots with equal strength. And I don't just mean the occasional link to another blog. I mean there needs to be an organized, concerted effort when a good target arises. I can think of quite a number of prominent journalists and pundits who share these concerns, an might be persuaded to move as one if the situation is right. The BBC's malfeasance on multi-culturalism and the grooming gangs would be a good place to start. There's plenty of evidence. <br /><br />Despair is a sin. Do not succumb to it. Spend a couple hours this weekend watching this fascinating concert instead:<br /><br />www.weagreetodisagree.netDavid Preisernoreply@blogger.com