 |
|
|
Thursday, January 10 2008Long Term Media Analysis: The BBC in 2007Did the reporting at the BBC improve in the second half of the year? Find out by reading HonestReporting's latest long term media analysis.
TrackBackTrackBack URL for this entry: Listed below are links to weblogs that reference Long Term Media Analysis: The BBC in 2007: CommentsYou always concentrate on TV, never a mention of radio. Whenever anywhere outside the green line is mentioned, BBC radio is careful to describe it as "the Israeli occupied West Bank" or the "illegally occupied, etc." Went to the BBC website to complain, but can't figure out how to submit a general complaint that is not about a particular program. Thanks for all that Honest Reporting does. Your study of the BBC is accurate, I'm sure. But you miss the larger picture. As a long time observer of - and local participant in - the "media battlefront" of the Arab-Israeli conflict, I can tell you that the sort of bias reflected by the BBC is really not that exceptional. Reuters and AP is just as bad. CNN is terrible. I understand that in Israel, your largest cable TV service provider dropped CNN in favor of English-language Al-Jazeera! There are larger forces here at work. I don't know if you have the resources to do this, but I think a better target would be the Arab (and also probably Iranian) funded anti-Israel effort. Why do SO MANY media outlets toe the SAME anti-Israel line? Does this improve ratings? Then why is more pro-Israel FOX beating the crap out of CNN, at least here in the U.S.? In short, I think you are focusing on the puppet instead of the puppet-master. In view of the fact that BBC News is boadcast on PBS stations, who is paying for it ??? If they ( PBS ) are getting support from our tax money , why isn"t it stopped or why is there no outcry against PBS and BBC ??? We need to organize an International Boycott of BBC and BBC affiliates. No Advertising, No Subscriptions, No MONEY PERIOD! We need to let them know MAJOR partners are honoring the boycott internationally. They clearly don't care about their biased reputation regarding Israel! We need ACTION in response to AWARENESS! I justed watched a BBC program about the effect of violence on children on both sides of the Israel-Palestine conflict. The Palestinian girl's armed uncle was shot. However, the Program did not investigate whether he was a terrorist and therefore a legitimate target of the IDF, since he would try to kill Israeli civilians. The Israeli children were targets of Kassam rockets from Gaza. No moral equivalence! I'd love to hear a BBC response to this report. Do they have any explanation for their shameful lack of balance and professionalism? Keep up the good work HR!! During WW II my family gathered around the radio every evening listening to the BBC as the source of truth. Ironic that 60 years after Auschwitz- the very same BBC - or or perhaps not ? - exhibits a quite different face ? The Holocaust was made possible not the least by the massive and uncessable sub-liminally anti-Jewish, read anti-Israel propaganda. It is tragic to notice the now well-documented role of BBC and in this propaganda war. The question remains - what is the motivation and who is responsible ?
When I was teaching many years ago, I was able to transmit the concept of an "Oxymoron" with one simple example: British integrity. I try to take part in the public debate in Norway over the Mideast conflict, and have had a great help in reading your convincing relevations of what really goes on behind the official scenes - in contrast to what media at large tells us. Dave Harris, unfortunately the BBC complaints system is a bad joke. I have complained about instances of bias and mostly don't even get the courtesy of a reply. I also don't know how to make a general complaint since, as I'm sure you noticed, they narrow it down to specifics. But I suppose one can take a particularly bad example of bias from their website, use that url and provide other examples in the text of the complaint. The BBC has been known to take complaints from licence payers more seriously than from outside the country and if you live in Britain there are more avenues open to you - eg you can phone and complain. Regarding bias on the radio, the World Service has chosen to play down the importance of President Bush's visit to Israel, and is being extremely stingy on providing info on it. Yesterday the coverage of Clinton and the Democrats eclipsed that of Bush. It was actually a very revealing instance of bias. Here you had a major international event being shoved into second place by a minor national one simply due to the BBC's leftwing agenda, its loathing of Bush and its breathless admiration for Hilary Clinton. There are a number of bloggers who expose the BBC's gross bias very effectively. One of them is BBC-biased.blogspot.com. Another is biased-BBC.blogspot.com. This one has become such a thorn in the side of the BBC that some of its staff regularly comment on the blog and try to deflect attention from the bias by playing semantic games and hoping to discredit the contributors to the blog. Hats off to Honest Reporting for the excellent work that you do. The battle against the BBC and others continues. As soon as they lie by omission and distortion of facts, people like HR and the bloggers are on their case, exposing them worldwide for the sly propagandists that they are. In the old days a BBC or New York Times or Guardian editor could just chuckle over a letter of complaint and throw it in the bin. Now evidence of their narrow agenda is around the world in minutes. How they must hate the internet. I am/have been a supporter of my local PBS station, WUSF. Part of the University of South Florida. I just received the January issue of their publication "First Choice". The cover artcle is devoted to the BBC and it's availability on their channel. What is being done with the info gleaned from this report on BBC bias. If its not taken further, then its almost useless. Surely the BBC, as a public funded news caster, operates under a mandate. If its not fulfilling its mandate, or its shows bias, it can be taken to court. Is this the next step? First, for those who complain of no response, just persist and remember you cannot respond to their emails to you. it says so on them, you must always go through the Complaints page. Try to be specific or they will fob you off with exactly that response. During the next few days, the BBC Trust will hear my complaint about a Jeremy Bowen/Today broadcast in January 2007, it has taken that long and a lot of persistence to get there. I have advised them that I will go on and on until I do get a positive response. I did get two apologies last year but neither was published, yet two more complaints. I have at least seven at various stages. Using HR material I complained about the leaked Bowen email. The BBC do not want to consider it as it was not a "official" document. Bowen is a BBC employee and the email was written to other BBC employees, originated within the BBC with a BBC email address. The editor of BBC News advised that the leaked email and was one of a series. It was not fair to take a single item without taking a holistic (whole is greater than the sum of its parts) approach. I also have a complaint based on HR's 6 month survey, using their words but expanding the references after they tried to show no knowledge of what I was saying. The response, from the same BBC news department, was they could not consider the holistic approach but would consider individual complaints. Heads they win, tails I lose. I will spend considerable time extracting individual references to add to the HR report. And, in answer to Michael, Is this 'Media Analysis' as full of errors as the 6 month BBC report?, the BBC did not seem to think so. I have phoned the BBC complaints dept. many times as it 's impossible to e-mail them effectively. The biased reporting goes on and on. The BBC News last evening (10th Jan) included a report by Jeremy Bowen which was biased in the extreme. This dishonest and one-sided reporting makes me so angry but so frustrated as there seems to be no way to combat it.What can we do!? Maybe they should be taken to court as suggested by Sam Paradisgarten. Is there any need for a boycott? Just make them redundant. The BBC sell a product, so unsubscribe and make it clear why. We got rid of the TV just over a year ago. We've had some threatening letters from the licensing company (and tantrums from the kids) but always answer that we will consider repurchasing that 'service' when the Balen Report's been published. I can think of at least a hundred other reasons to get rid of the poisonous box in the corner and free up some space, but Balen was the last straw for us. The media is defending the most racist people on earth that do not accept anyone else's right to exist. Not just jews but anyone that is not Islamic. Remember what Armadenajad of Iran said. He said The US can only have peace if everyone converts to Islam. They consider everyone else as non-human, pigs and dogs. How is that for racist!!!!!! So media experts (?????) please know who you are defending and get your head out of the sand. I also believe that journalists working in Gaza and other arab areas are in fear of their life and may recieve threats against their children directly or indirectly if they do not report the news of events in a favorable way for the palasinians. Look at what happened to Pearl!!!!!!!! Good for you, David Kravitz and jayne. If we keep on bashing away at the BBC it is bound to have an effect. The fact that they know they are continually being monitored must limit the free expression of their bias to some extent. Imagine a BBC with no restraints from the public. There was another careful little bit of propaganda from Jeremy Bowen on the World Service today. Careful not to say the slightest positive thing about Israel regarding the peace process and careful to cast the Palestinians as the wronged ones. The whole rotten Middle East crew is beyond reforming and has to go. That includes Bowen, Jim Muir, Hugh Sykes, Tim Franks, Martin Asser, Matthew Price, Jon Leyne, Alan Little and many more. While these people with their rigid agendas continue to set the tone of BBC reporting on the Middle East, the BBC will continue to distort and omit facts and spout biased, propagandist rubbish at an unsuspecting public. And it will continue to whip up anti-Israel and anti-Semitic feeling worldwide. Since the BBC wont fire any of its beloved reporters, no matter what they do, it should find them employment where they wont be able to do any damage - like cleaning the floors. Shouldn't the chief editors of the BBC be the ones held responsible for the biased pro islamic reporters they are hiring?. Wheres the accountability? Washington Post today, page A 17.
Next
»
Post a comment[Comments are held for approval before appearing.]
|
