BBC issues mea culpa after The One Show's class 'attack' on David Cameron - Telegraph

BBC issues mea culpa after The One Show's class 'attack' on David Cameron: "After an extraordinary 'investigation' on The One Show on Thursday, the BBC has been inundated with complaints of bias against the Conservatives."

How the BBC's professor of journalism - who is supposed to embody a spirit of impartiality - 'improved' his rival's biography - Daily Mail

How the BBC's professor of journalism - who is supposed to embody a spirit of impartiality - 'improved' his rival's biography: "
Former editor of the Today programme Kevin Marsh has been caught trying to undermine the reputations of two former BBC colleagues by tampering with their Wikipedia entries."

BBC's Sonia Deol is forced off Facebook by Sikhs furious over TV film

BBC's Sonia Deol is forced off Facebook by Sikhs furious over TV film: "
The news presenter has been subjected to a deluge of personal abuse after fronting a documentary about one of the most controversial events in recent Indian history."

British sitcoms have gone downhill, says creator of Only Fools and Horses - Telegraph

British sitcoms have gone downhill, says creator of Only Fools and Horses: "British sitcoms are in the doldrums and rely on swearing to get cheap laughs,
according to the creator of Only Fools and Horses."

MORE HARRABIN CONTORTIONS - Biased BBC

MORE HARRABIN CONTORTIONS: "I asked, last week, how long it would be before the intrepid Roger Harrabin came up with a defence of the Met office, after his Yorkshire-based colleague, Paul Hudson, dared to suggest that Accuweather's Joe Bastardi (among others) was more accurate with his weather-forecasting than the Met and its £170m global warming lying machine (aka a supercomputer). Well, it's taken him all week. And if you can understand his back-flipping, contortionist - nay, fantastical - reasoning, you deserve a prize. As I see it, our friend Mr Harrabin believes that when the Met Office is wrong, they are actually right, because they are nearly right; and that in any case, it doesn't matter, because it's getting much hotter, and their supercomputer can see that, whereas the day-to-day incidences of freezing etc, don't really count because they are part of the 'frying tonight' overall trend - and on that, of course, the Met Office is always right. As for those who doubt any of this, well, according to Mr Harrabin, he doesn't give a damn, because they don't count, and of course, they can't count (unlike the Met). Something like that. Me? I'll stick with Mr Bastardi. His writing style might not be the most elegant, but his message is crystal clear and honest. The Met Office are warmist crooks.

Click through to read and contribute comments on this post.

"

The One Show - Biased BBC

The One Show: "Via the comments - Iain Dale on One Show bias and the BBC's response.

Click through to read and contribute comments on this post.

"

Younge Americans - Biased BBC

Younge Americans: "In September, when US-based left-wing Guardian columnist Gary Younge popped up as a bona fide voice of the BBC on From Our Own Correspondent, I pointed out that he had recently described followers of the Tea Party movement as '(a)nnoying, bizarre, incoherent, divisive, intolerant, small-minded, misinformed, ill informed and disinformed…' In other words, just the sort of prejudice against the American right which finds favour at the Beeb. I noted also the irony of a Guardian/BBC journalist accusing others of living 'in a politically parallel world where everyone they know believes the same as they do.'

We're in the middle of a mini Obamafest at the moment as the BBC celebrates the first anniversary of The One's inauguration. To balance the many pro-Obama films and programmes made by adoring fans, the Beeb has commissioned a couple of documentaries about Americans opposed to Obama. Amazingly, this project was given to someone with a sympathetic view of the subject matter.

I'm kidding, of course:

In this two-part documentary, author and journalist Gary Younge tells the story of the other side of the Obama phenomenon; the story of those who say that the Obama presidency is nothing but bad news. Younge asks who these people are who feel they have been marginalised by the Obama revolution. He also asks what they don't like about him and what Obama could do, if anything, to win them over.
Younge spends 10 days travelling through rural Arkansas and Kentucky, talking to anti-tax protesters, fundamentalist Christians and libertarians, country club members and local dignitaries to find out how they view the last year under Obama and what their hopes and fears are for the coming year.

Click through to read and contribute comments on this post.

"

LABOUR RAY OF SUNSHINE - Biased BBC

LABOUR RAY OF SUNSHINE: "I never thought I would write this, but three cheers for a Labour peer. Their lordships debated 'climate change'on Thursday. Predictably, in the most part, it was an alarmfest about the need for more taxes, laced with endless religious warnings that the end of the world is nigh; the idiotic peddling of moonshine. But there was one ray of sunshine. Step forward Bernard Donoghue, the former policy adviser to Harold Wilson (a job from hell, if ever there was one!), who is now Baron Donoghue of Ashton in the county of Northamptonshire. He said (his contribution is about three quarters of the way through the debate, and sadly, I couldn't find a way of linking precisely to it):

In relation to the media coverage of this important issue, the BBC should follow its charter and cover global warming impartially, not as a cheerleader for the alarmist side. It is counterproductive and provokes, like manipulation of statistics, the kind of public scepticism which the noble Lord, Lord Giddens, fears. As for the Met Office, it should go back to objective science and try to get its forecasts right and cease blatant campaigning for one side. I note that it has just inevitably forecast that 2010 will be a very hot year-noble Lords should stock up on their long-johns and fur boots.

Here, here, hurrah, and all that. It shows that at least one of the lunatics who supposedly represent us has got the picture and has also sussed the BBC and its pernicious propaganda. His lordship also pinpointed something that is deeply alarming: the BBC and politicians - Labour, Conservative, the whole damn lot of them - are totally out of touch with the real world and don't give a straw about what people actually think. Roll on the revolution!

Click through to read and contribute comments on this post.

"

SMEARING CATHOLICS... - Biased BBC

SMEARING CATHOLICS...: "Writing here, Mary Ellen Synon documents another BBC smear..

'The EU's new foreign secretary, Baroness Ashton, was at the European Parliament today, being questioned by MEPs. Since she will also be a new vice-president of the Commission as well as 'High Representative for Foreign Affairs,' (no, I still can't believe it either) she had to submit to questioning like all the other members of the new Commission.

The BBC on-line news service reported on her appearance at the parliament. They had absolutely nothing bad to say about this unelected New Labour Nobody.

But the BBC couldn't resist the chance to use the story to fire off a drive-by smear at Rocco Buttiglione, a Roman Catholic professor of political science, a former professor of philosophy and a former Christian Democrat Minister for EU Affairs in the Italian government.'

Click through to read and contribute comments on this post.

"

WHITE MALES NEED NOT APPLY.... - Biased BBC

WHITE MALES NEED NOT APPLY....: "In the Daily Telegraph's interview with Michael Parkinson, towards the end of the item we pick up this gem;

A senior BBC source said: “We’re desperate for anyone that isn’t white and male. It’s difficult in entertainment because the options are so limited. Diversity is a big issue and they’ve over-relied on men for a long time.' Claudia Winkleman and Shappi Khorsandi, the comedian, have been tipped as potential rising stars.

Still hideously white then?

Hat-tip to the eagle eyed BBC reader for alerting me to this...

Click through to read and contribute comments on this post.

"

THE MISSING JEW... - Biased BBC

THE MISSING JEW...: "

A concerned B_BBC reader writes....

'In next week's Radio Times (16-22 Jan 2010) there is an interview with Dermot O'Leary. A quote from the interview is printed over his photo. The quote says:

'I've probably got more in common with a liberal Muslim than a conservative Catholic'

In the interview he actually says:

'I don't like evangelism and I've probably got more in common with a liberal Jew or a liberal Muslim than someone who'd consider themselves a conservative Catholic.'

I have long noted the BBC's blatant anti-Israel bias and though many other observers have often claimed this is actually an anti-Jewish bias I never thought so until I read that article. I am not Jewish but do now believe that those claiming the BBC *has* an anti-Jew bias may well be on to something quite serious. Why on earth have they removed the word Jew from the quote, especially as it was his first mention? Is it an automatic Pavlovian response by sub-editors (or whoever does these things) to remove any Jewish reference if at all possible?'

Why indeed? Also, any thoughts on how many liberal Muslims Dermot is likely to find.....?

Click through to read and contribute comments on this post.

"

Ed Balls forced to condemn N-Dubz text - Telegraph

Ed Balls forced to condemn N-Dubz text: "The N-Dubz member 'Dappy' is claimed to have sent the death threat to the
young BBC Radio 1 listener, after she complained about the act."

Obama Worship - Biased BBC

Obama Worship: "The BBC's creepy Obama obsession continues on Radio 4 with Obama's Babies:

In Swahili Obama means 'blessed one' and mothers across Africa were quick to bestow the name on their offspring. 'Obama babies' followed in America and across Europe as parents grasped at the hope that the President Elect's magic could rub off on their children. But one year on and with the President's dreams being tested by reality, how have some of the babies named after him fared?

Peter White explores the hopes and fears of five families and follows their lives as the babies approach their first birthdays. For the babies - including Nancy Otieno's son, Barack Obama, and Sasha Fisher's baby, Sanjae Obama - it will be years before they fully comprehend the hopes and aspirations imbued in a name.

The programme focuses on five very different families, examining how our changing world, in part shaped by the man they so admire, is having an impact on their experiences.

I've just heard the saccharine-filled trailer for the programme - it sounds even worse than the above blurb suggests.

Click through to read and contribute comments on this post.

"

BBC - Accomplices to Mass Murder

BBC - Accomplices to Mass Murder: "

I uploaded a YouTube video: On December 5th last, the "Times" had the following report on a BBC TV programme entitled "Don't Panic I'm Islamic":-

"Nasreen Suleaman, a researcher on the programme, told the court that Mr Hamid, 50, contacted her after the July 2005 attack and told her of his association with the bombers. But she said that she felt no obligation to contact the police with this information. Ms Suleaman said that she informed senior BBC managers but was not told to contact the police." (Note: The attack in question is the failed "21/7" attack.)

Mr Hamid, as you probably now know, has been found guilty of organising terrorist training camps, one of which was featured in the aforementioned programme "Don't Panic I'm Islamic." Now that Hamid and his associates (among whom we can include the "21/7" attackers) have been convicted of serious terrorism offences, it would appear that certain BBC employees have also committed criminal offences by withholding information. The editorial guidelines of the BBC clearly state:-

"We have a legal obligation under the Terrorism Act 2000 to disclose to the police, as soon as reasonably practicable, any information which we know or believe might be of material assistance in:

preventing the commission of an act of terrorism anywhere in the world.

securing the apprehension, prosecution or conviction of a person in the UK, for an offence involving the commission, preparation or instigation of an act of terrorism.

It is a criminal offence not to disclose such information, punishable by up to 5 years in prison. Any situation where BBC staff may be in potential breach of the Terrorism Act must be referred to Controller Editorial Policy and Programme Legal Advice."

Ms Suleaman met Mr Hamid after the July attack and noted that he was "agitated." She said: "I think he was worried that perhaps the men [the "21/7" terrorists] might call him because they were on the run at the time. I think he was very, very shocked about the fact that the men he knew were accused of this." The straightforward implication here is clear. The conversation took place at a time when the 21/7 attackers were on the run. She says this. She uses the phrase "on the run." This whole thing would hardly be an issue otherwise. She then informs the editorial board of this and they tell her she no had no obligation to contact the police. It is reasonable to presume that the editorial board also felt no reason to contact the police. Why? Because the BBC now no longer give moral support to mass murderers, they actively assist them.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YAJnKgKiuFU

"

EPHRAIM HARDCASTLE: BBC spends £44.5m on training in one year - but insists on giving top jobs to those who learn trade elsewhere

EPHRAIM HARDCASTLE: BBC spends £44.5m on training in one year - but insists on giving top jobs to those who learn trade elsewhere: "
Robert Peston has been named by GQ as favourite to succeed Nick Robinson as BBC political editor, should he decide to move on."

EPHRAIM HARDCASTLE: Is the ruthless 'Mad Dog' Damian McBride the best figure to advise the BBC's leading lights?

EPHRAIM HARDCASTLE: Is the ruthless 'Mad Dog' Damian McBride the best figure to advise the BBC's leading lights?: "
Gordon Brown's disgraced former spin chief, Damian McBride, 35, has resurfaced alongside Lord Mandelson and others for a private session giving advice to the BBC on the coming Election."

BBC ratings fall as viewers ignore 'youthful' shows - Telegraph

BBC ratings fall as viewers ignore 'youthful' shows: "The BBC's attempt to boost ratings by appealing to younger viewers appears to
have flopped, with poor viewing figures for a string of high-profile shows."

'Your salary is wrong and corrosive', Mark Thompson, BBC director general, told - Telegraph

'Your salary is wrong and corrosive', Mark Thompson, BBC director general, told: "Mark Thompson, the BBC director general, has been warned that his own staff
think the size of his salary is 'wrong and corrosive'."

N-Dubz rapper 'sent death threat to BBC Radio 1 listener' - Telegraph

N-Dubz rapper 'sent death threat to BBC Radio 1 listener': "The N-Dubz member 'Dappy' is claimed to have sent the death threat to the
young BBC Radio 1 listener, after she complained about the act."

BBC1 AUDIENCE PLUMMETS... - Biased BBC

BBC1 AUDIENCE PLUMMETS...: "When I worked at the BBC, many moons ago admittedly, the main justification for the licence fee was that people actually watched BBC shows. Peak time audience share for BBC1 regularly nudged the 40% mark, and over a week, most people actually tuned in to the channel for a significant amount of time. Latest official figures, however, show that BBC1's overall audience share during December was down to 21.5%, and that the peak average (between 7pm and 10pm) during the month - even though BBC shows easily dominated Christmas Day - was only 23.4%, down a whopping 4.7%. So millions of viewers are deserting the BBC's flagship shows. In an internal BBC meeting yesterday, director general Mark Thompson reportedly vigorously defended his salary of £834,000 a year on the ground that he was worth it. On these latest viewing figures the case for his monstrous level of pay - and the BBC licence fee at all - is vanishing almost as fast as snow in summer. If ever there was one. Even his own staff think Thompson's salary is 'corrosive and wrong'.

Click through to read and contribute comments on this post.

"

HOW TO DO BBC RESEARCH - LESSON 1 - Biased BBC

HOW TO DO BBC RESEARCH - LESSON 1: "This, on Bishop Hill, says it all about the BBC mindset. Note the worship of the greenie bible Since Silent Spring (which condemned millions of Africans to death in its total villification of DDT); the belief that the NASA warmist lunatic and eco-thug James Hansen is an authority worth consulting; and the idiotic, arrogant certainty that such an investigation on these terms is terribly important. Truly toxic!

Click through to read and contribute comments on this post.

"

BBC in new 'Sachsgate': N-Dubz rapper leaves abusive message on Radio 1 listener's phone - Daily Mail

BBC in new 'Sachsgate': N-Dubz rapper leaves abusive message on Radio 1 listener's phone: "
The female listener, known only as Chloe, texted the station to say she did not like a song by urban music act N-Dubz, who were guests on the Chris Moyles Show."

'Worst year ever for Christmas television': Official figures spell the end of traditional family viewing - Daily Mail

'Worst year ever for Christmas television': Official figures spell the end of traditional family viewing: "
It was once the time when every family in the nation gathered round the television to watch the biggest programmes of the year."

Kirstie Allsopp and Phil Spencer stay on at Channel 4 after BBC spark bidding war - Daily Mail

Kirstie Allsopp and Phil Spencer stay on at Channel 4 after BBC spark bidding war: "
Ch4 signed Location, Location, Location presenters for a further three years after upping their salaries to fight off competition from the Beeb."

BBC provokes Tory anger after inviting Damian McBride to address staff on election - Times

BBC provokes Tory anger after inviting Damian McBride to address staff on election: "The BBC has sparked anger by inviting Damian McBride, the disgraced spin-doctor who resigned from Downing Street, to address staff in a private briefing before the election."

POLAR POSTURING - Biased BBC

POLAR POSTURING: "I've said it before, but the BBC greenie fanatics are forever on the hunt for new scares, even when it's so cold that global warming stories are scarce. Today's alarmfest centres on the cuddly polar bear. Overpaid ecofreak scientists in Denmark have now decided that it's not only melting polar ice that's a threat to our ursine friend, but also nasty chemicals from industrial activity. There's no such thing as a happy greenie, of course; if it's not 'climate change', it's breathing, farting or simply being here at all that's putting us in peril. The BBC loves to report it all, with knobs on; note especially the rigged graph in the item, and the complete lack of mention - as usual - of alternative views, such as this, which points out that even the alarmists-in-chief, the World Wildlife Fund, say that polar bear numbers are on the up.

Click through to read and contribute comments on this post.

"

The return of Damian McBride? - Financial Times

The return of Damian McBride?: "Well, not exactly. But he has appeared today at a political event at the BBC, as Guido reveals. Apparently it was some kind of internal planning event (understood to have featured Lord Mandelson) giving guidance on the coming election to the Beeb.
There is some discomfort among the Tories about the idea of McBride’s (partial) rehabilitation. [...]"

BBC needs a culture change, and a funding cut - Telegraph

BBC needs a culture change, and a funding cut: "A review has found that the BBC is wasting millions. We need to find a way to
keep it on its toes, says Neil O'Brien."

BBC 'must end obsession with targeting under-35s' - Independent

BBC 'must end obsession with targeting under-35s': "

The BBC has been warned to stop chasing young viewers and mass audiences by wasting money on sports rights, such as for Formula One coverage, and formulaic game shows, such as BBC One's Hole in the Wall, that could be provided by commercial channels.

"

Leading Tory tells David Cameron: BBC must be scrapped - Mirror

Leading Tory tells David Cameron: BBC must be scrapped: "David Cameron is being urged to abolish the BBC by one of the Tories' top right-wingers."

BBC Worldwide should be privatised, says report - Telegraph

BBC Worldwide should be privatised, says report: "BBC Worldwide which sells the corporation's programmes such as Doctor
Who and Top Gear oversees, should be privatised."

BBC Trust should be scrapped, says report - Telegraph

BBC Trust should be scrapped, says report: "The BBC Trust is 'clearly unsuitable for the 21st century' and
should be abolished, the report said."

BBC1 audience share slumped in December - Guardian

BBC1 audience share slumped in December: "

Channel posts lowest share in more than 15 years despite Christmas Day success with EastEnders and the Royle Family

BBC1 posted its lowest audience share in more than 15 years last month, despite trouncing rivals in the Christmas Day TV ratings battle, as Channel 4, BBC2 and Channel Five also saw significant viewing dips.

BBC1's share of the peak-time audience, as measured between 7pm and 10.30pm, was 23.4% last month, a loss of 4.7% of viewers year on year. The channel's all-day audience share (6am to midnight) was 21.5%, a loss of about 1% of viewers compared with 2008.

It is thought to be the worst performance by BBC1 as measured by Barb audience figures since 1993. Nine of the top 10 Christmas Day shows were delivered by BBC1, but millions fewer tuned in to traditional hits such as Doctor Who and Strictly Come Dancing. BBC1's peak-time share on Christmas Day was 39.5%, compared with 43.7% in 2008.

Channel 4 also suffered what is believed to have been its worst all-day and peak-time share since 1993 in December. Channel 4, and its timeshifted 'plus one' channel, saw all-day audience share fall 8.5% year on year to 7.1%. Peak-time share fell by 10% to 6.4%.

ITV1 followed a bumper November with another solid month in December. ITV1's ratings warhorse The X Factor produced a string of huge audiences, culminating with 15.5 million for the final, which fuelled a 1.5% year-on-year boost to the broadcaster's peak-time share to 24.1%. The channel's share of all-day audience remained flat year on year last month at 16.7%.

Channel 4was overtaken by BBC2 for the first time in several years. BBC2's all-day share was 7.8% in December, a 6.7% year-on-year fall and the worst December for the channel since 1993. Peak-time share was 8.8%, a fall of 4% year on year and the worst performance since December 2006.

Channel Five's all-day share was 4.2%, down 9.7% year on year and its worst performance since June 1998. Its peak-time share was 3.8%, a 16.8% fall compared with December 2008 and its lowest since February 1998.

There are some discrepancies between rival channels' share figures because ITV defines peak time as 7pm to 10.30pm, while other broadcasters say it is 6pm to 10.30pm.

Ben Stephenson, the controller of BBC drama commissioning, yesterday unveiled the corporation's winter and spring lineup and argued that there must be a way to evaluate the success of the corporation's drama without relying on the size of audiences.

The BBC said that if peak time is defined as 6pm to 10.30pm then BBC1 was ahead of ITV1 in both all-day and peak-time viewing. The BBC claims that BBC1 registered 21.5% all-day share and 24.2% peak-time share compared with ITV1 at 17.7% and 22.8% respectively.

'This December the BBC's portfolio overall saw an increase in viewing during the Christmas period compared with last year with BBC1 remaining the most watched channel across all networks in all hours and peak,' said a spokesman for BBC1.

• To contact the MediaGuardian news desk email editor@mediaguardian.co.uk or phone 020 3353 3857. For all other inquiries please call the main Guardian switchboard on 020 3353 2000.

• If you are writing a comment for publication, please mark clearly 'for publication'.

• TV ratings
• Television industry
• BBC
• ITV
• Channel 4
• Channel Five

Mark Sweney

guardian.co.uk © Guardian News & Media Limited 2010 | Use of this content is subject to our Terms & Conditions | More Feeds

"

BBC 'must not make shows for the under-35s' - Independent

BBC 'must not make shows for the under-35s': "

The BBC has been warned to stop chasing young viewers and mass audiences by wasting money on sports rights, such as for Formula One coverage, and formulaic game shows, such as BBC One's Hole in the Wall, that could be provided by commercial channels.

"

BBC wasting money on big-name presenters - Telegraph

BBC wasting money on big-name presenters: "Money wasted on 'obsession' with ratings, an independent review
says."

BBC journalist sacked over Hell's Angel link - Telegraph

BBC journalist sacked over Hell's Angel link: "A BBC journalist has been sacked after it was discovered that he had acted as
a spokesman for the Hells Angels motorcycle gang."

BBC should share licence fee with other broadcasters, says report - Telegraph

BBC should share licence fee with other broadcasters, says report: "BBC should end its 87 year monopoly of the licence fee, according to a report
by the Policy Exchange."

SAINT BONO RAPPED - Biased BBC

SAINT BONO RAPPED: "The BBC's complaints unit have rapped the knuckles of BBC producers who decided to give the execrable Bono and his band U2 acres of free publicity at the launch of their latest boring album back in February. But what about removing the hundreds of free plugs on the BBC website? The admiring boys and girls at the corporation chart his and the band's every move, short of when they go to the lavatory. He repays them by spouting foul-mouthed abuse on air. But no matter, Bono ticks every box for BBC sainthood; he's a lefty, he hates Britain, and he believes Africa's salvation is through bucketloads of aid from 'climate change' supporting NGOs.

Click through to read and contribute comments on this post.

"

BBC admits it went too far with U2 support - Times Online

BBC admits it went too far with U2 support - Times Online

BBC boss forced to apologise over foul-mouthed email slur on Ronnie Corbett - Daily Mail

BBC boss forced to apologise over foul-mouthed email slur on Ronnie Corbett: "
The One Show editor Doug Carnegie called 5ft tall comedian Ronnie Corbett a 'little ****' in an email to colleagues after he cancelled a planned appearance on the early evening programme."

Pro-Hamas media bias and Gaza activists block peace - Harry's Place

Pro-Hamas media bias and Gaza activists block peace: "

Ray Hanania is a Palestinian American columnist, satirist and founder of Yalla Peace. This column appears in the Jerusalem Post

When Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud Abbas complained recently in Qatar that the media there was pro-Hamas, and that its bias was threatening the ability to achieve peace, he struck a chord that many Palestinians know is true.

It isn’t just the mainstream Arab media that is pro-Hamas, branded a “terrorist organization” by many nations, but it’s also the groups that support Hamas that slowly dominate the Middle East landscape unchallenged that are threatening peace.

A good example of this is the issue of the Gaza Strip, where Palestinians complain they are under an oppressive military and economic Israeli siege and where Israelis counter that radical elements there continue to target their civilians with Katyushas and Kassam missiles.

Gaza is a very complicated issue, but not that hard to really understand.

The area has been controlled by Hamas and radical Muslims since the 1970s. Although Hamas’s parent organization, the Islamic Association, did provide health and social care to its citizens, that care was only given to those who embraced its hard-line religious ideology.

Hamas opposes genuine peace with Israel, and used the most pernicious form of violence – suicide bombings – throughout the 1990s to destroy the peace process and prevent compromise. Its mission is not to achieve peace based on compromise, but to pursue the impossible dream – more a nightmare for everyday Palestinians – of destroying Israel and returning Palestine to what it was in 1917, before it came under British colonialism.

THAT HAMAS desire is not only shared by the religious extremists who continue to grow, but by those who are secular fanatics yet also oppose peace based on compromise. Most of those activists are based in Western countries, where it is easy to chant for the destruction of not only Israel but of Abbas’s secular Palestinian government which does support compromise based on two-states.

These are strange bedfellows in the Palestinian extremist camps, religious fanatics shoulder-to-shoulder with secular extremists like the Popular Front and the rejectionists led by the activists and fawned on by the Arab media that mistakenly believe “freedom” means embracing the most extremist activists.

The Arab media, which glorify religious extremism and even violent attacks, don’t realize, of course, that under a Hamas-run government, it wouldn’t just be Jews, Christians and secular Muslims who would be oppressed. The media in a Hamastan would be among the primary targets, stripped of the “freedoms” they enjoy today – of criticizing Abbas, two states and peace based on compromise.

THE ISSUE for the Free Gaza protesters is not about bringing freedom to the 1.3 million Palestinians there or lifting Israel’s “oppressive military and economic siege.” It’s about their long-term goals. By “freeing” Gaza, they mean declaring Hamas the “sole legitimate representative of the Palestinian people.” But that’s not their goal.

The purpose of many of the protesters is to strengthen Hamas. They know that Israel is forced to deal first with the threats rather than the compelling cases for peace. And Hamas is a threat not only to Israel but also to the Palestinians, secular Arab countries like Egypt and Jordan, to Christian and Jewish religious independence and, more importantly, to the goal of achieving a peace based on nonviolent compromise.

The activists continue to cling to the false and irrelevant claims that Hamas won one election in 2006 and ignore the fact that Hamas was ousted from political leadership in the same way it was installed. It was a corrupt election that was poorly constructed, allowing the divisions of the majority of Palestinians to be merged with Hamas’s faith-based reticence. In Western nations with elections, they separate the two processes, allowing individual parties to select their candidates from internal battles before putting them up against candidates from the other parties.

Hamas and the activists have allowed the Gaza Strip to fester in economic squalor because it suits their purpose. They can’t rally support based on their ideals because they have no realistic ideals. They call for the destruction of Israel and the destruction of a secular two-state Palestine, and also for the destruction of Egypt and pretty much anyone who doesn’t agree with their extremist agendas.

Rather than help the besieged people of the Gaza Strip achieve freedom and build the first steps of a secular Palestinian state that would lead to the creation of full Palestinian statehood in the West Bank, the protesters have helped to encase the Palestinians there in continued suffering.

THE PROTESTERS seeking to enter Gaza have closed their eyes to the oppression and brutality that is the true Hamas. They have limited their criticism to Egypt.

More importantly, this bizarre alliance between the religious fanatics and the secular extremists which today is focused on the Gaza Strip is silent on the campaign of terror that Hamas continues to wage against secular Palestinians.

Hamas has made it easy for some to oppose Palestinian statehood, and is the main obstacle standing in the way of peace.

The Arab media are going through an internal struggle no different than the one now dominating Arab and Palestinian politics. It’s one between extremists who see the media as an instrument of activism and those of us who believe the media must remain objective witnesses to the truth.

Truth means that not all of today’s tragic events can be blamed on Israel, Egypt, Abbas or on the failure, so far, to achieve peace.

"

Today's Nazi words of wisdom from the BBC - Biased BBC

Today's Nazi words of wisdom from the BBC: "You may think that headline is overwrought, but it's literally true. Today's BBC front page http://www.bbc.co.uk currently has up, effectively as quote of the day, without any comment, and indeed with a slight implication of approval, the words of a prominent Nazi.

I don't know how to record it for posterity, but the quote is towards the bottom left of the front page (as seen from Britain, anyway; the international version of the site may be different).

It comes as part of a 'QI FACT OF THE DAY', just after the information that Arthur Conan Doyle and WB Yeats believed in fairies. Placed thus, it reads to me as a kind of riposte to them:

'Unfortunately this earth is not a fairy-land, but a struggle for life, perfectly natural and therefore extremely harsh. MARTIN BORMANN'

Which is all very well, but the job of saying the stern words of sense in response to credulity could have been given to someone more savoury. Martin Bormann was Hitler's Private Secretary and head of the Party Chancellery. He was condemned to death in absentia at Nuremberg.

OK, you don't have to explain it to me. Whoever put this up has no idea who Bormann was but there were lots of those German philosopher blokes weren't there? The BBC are not Nazis but numpties.

Update: Hat tip to Happysnapper who kindly provided this screenshot. I would also like to pass on Millie Tant's comment:

It's extremely crass of the BBC to quote a Nazi - and doubly crass: a murderer talking about the struggle for life. Yeah.

The Bormann quote is still there on the main page at 18.48 GMT.

Click through to read and contribute comments on this post.

"

Demopaths and Dupes - CiF Watch

Demopaths and Dupes: "

This is a cross-post from Augean Stables which provides a fascinating insight into the mindset of many of the anti-Israel commenters on CiF that engage in demopathic discourse

DEMOPATHS:

Demopaths are people who use democratic language and invoke human rights only when it serves their interests, and not when it calls for self-criticism or self-restraint. Demopaths demand stringent levels of human “rights” but do not apply these basic standards for the “other” to their own behavior. The most lethal demopaths use democratic rights to destroy democracy.

Demopaths differ from civil-society free-riders; the latter enjoy more rights than they grant to others simply out of selfishness or laziness. Demopaths are fundamentally hostile to granting others’ rights, and secretly despise the values of civil society (which demands that they tolerate and respect others). Instead of coming along for the ride, they want to sink the boat.

Demopaths use the jargon of civil society and human rights to convince their targets. Through this progressive discourse, demopaths exploit on people eager to believe that civic values can resolve the problem. Sometimes demopaths are completely hostile to the cultures in which they live, and manipulate human rights as a Trojan horse to enter the city and sack it.

Demopathy is a zero-sum to negative-sum game. It pursues the destruction of the system (demopaths win and reestablish plunder-or-be-plundered aristocracy); in the process, it destroys the system’s very capacity to produce what made it attractive to plunder in the first place. Demopaths do not view opponents as members of a positive-sum collective, but as enemies to be destroyed. In its most virulent stages, demopathy is violently paranoid.

CHARACTERISTICS:

- Radical imbalance between their insistence on asserting their own rights, and their lack of interest in defending the rights of others.

- Moral rhetoric expressing great indignation when appealing for personal rights.

- Tendency to tell demonizing tales of the enemies (of “human rights”)

- Tendency to think in conspiratorial terms (they are conspirators themselves), and to project ill will onto opponents/enemies.

- Do minimal (required) work protecting the rights of others, especially opponents/enemies.

A demopathic organization would protest the media portraying its ethnic/religious affiliates as “terrorists” (inadmissible negative stereotyping), but would not protest the terrorist acts perpetrated by members of their ethnic/religious group (permissible wanton murder of civilians).

As long as civil society is healthy, demopaths stay hidden. Ever since the bombings in London, the number of demopaths revealed by the investigative energy of its own reporters or the brazenness of the demopaths themselves has risen substantially. Since most cases of demopathy must be approached carefully without pre-judging the evidence, we prefer to use these examples and leave the larger questions to each individual.

Bad Joke?

According to one version, the definition of chutzpah is when someone kills their parents and pleads to the court for mercy because he’s an orphan. The joking definition of a demopath, then might be the foreigner who applies for a loan from the agricultural department in a democratic country in order to buy a crop duster with outsized tanks. Although his intention is to spray poison on the local population, when his loan is refused because he is a foreigner with no obvious need for a crop duster, he accuses the agency of racist xenophobia. Is this an urban legend?



DEMOPATHIC DISCOURSE

Demopaths believe that all interaction between people works according to the principle “rule or be ruled” – the dominating imperative. In order for me to prevent you from dominating me, I must dominate you first. This approach to others normally produces prime divider societies where the elite (aristocracy) use their power to dominate the masses. But civil society clips the wings of those who would use force to dominate others. In such conditions, people who refuse to give up the dominating imperative go underground and become demopaths, using all the freedom that civil societies offer to work for their destruction. Until recently, the attitude of civil societies has been to grandfather demopathic tendencies, assuming that the benefits of civic abundance will win over all but the most mean-spirited player.

Demopathic discourse mirrors that of human rights. Thus, it is often difficult to detect the difference. Because discerning demopaths means assessing motive, it requires personal judgment. Therefore, demopathy is best illustrated through examples. In the cases presented below, we invite you to comment on whether or not, in your opinion, the particular case reflects demopathy or sincere commitment to human rights.



*** EXAMPLE : HIZB-UT-TAHRIR (ISLAMIC LIBERATION PARTY)

The UK branch of Hizb ut Tahrir, an Islamic group outlawed in central Asia, constitutes a powerful example of a demopath group working within a Western civil society. The group and some of its members, after being banned from their home countries, found refuge in the UK where Hizb ut Tahrir has been operating as a legal organization for years. Its ideology vows to establish a worldwide caliphate where all religious practice would be regulated by Sharia Law. Websites connected to the group have been openly promoting Jihad, suicide bombers as martyrs, racism and anti-semitism.

MEMBERS:

SHEIKH BAKRI MOHAMMED the founder of the first UK branch of Hizb ut Tahrir, has regularly preached Jihad against the West and praised the 9/11 hijackers as “the magnificent 19″. When the UK government decided to deport him in the aftermath of the July 7 bombings, the radical Muslim, who was on welfare, cried foul and said that it was an injustice because his four wives and families would suffer (see also here). Here is a prime example of a demopath who has worked for a long time to undermine the values and principles of civil society and, when his own self-interest is threatened, invokes the principles of civil society in order to make his case and protect himself. Bakri Mohammed deserves the demopathic chutzpah award. The exiled cleric is still active on the internet.

DILPAZIER ASLAM is an English-born Pakistani Muslim hired as a journalist by the Manchester Guardian. In addition to his news articles, Aslam wrote an editorial using first person plural pronouns to speak about England and the English. He argues that, because ‘we’ (the English) have committed so many wrongs against ‘them’ (the Arabs, Muslims), ‘we’ cannot be surprised by ‘their’ understandable responses of rage and terrorism. See, “Today’s muslims aren’t prepared to ignore injustice“. So while, he was claiming to be an understanding outsider representing the oppressed minority’s views to his co-citizens, he was actually one of “them”, using the protection of the press, the right to freedom of speech, the right to respect – and even to a job – in order to slip a justification for Jihad, and an opportunity to chastise the West for the hatred and regressive revolution that he foments. Initially, after the discovery of Aslam’s concealed activities, the Guardian refused to fire him, saying the matter was “under review”. Eventually, when they did fire him, (not a consensual process though, one editor resigned) Aslam was outraged and invoked the principles of journalistic freedom, despite the fact that his Jihadi ideology rejects that value.

*** EXAMPLE: SAMI AMIN AL ARIAN

Sami Amin alArian is a Kuwait-born professor of computer sciences at the University of South Florida . An activist for the cause of Palestinian rights, he came under surveillance by the FBI, and has now been arraigned on several counts of supporting terrorist organizations at home, in the US, and abroad (especially in Israel).

(analysis)

(news report)

(analysis)

Al Arian invoked all the protections provided by the democratic US legal system and made an appeal to civil libertarians as the innocent victim of a paranoid witch-hunt. As a result, al Arian has received widespread support from human rights activists (see below, dupes of demopaths).

Read Here and Here.

***EXAMPLE: INTERNATIONAL SOLIDARITY MOVEMENT (ISM)

The International Solidarity Movement is an advocacy movement that arose in the aftermath of the second Intifada, and supports the most irredentist Palestinian claims. It claims to be a non-violent organization dedicated to justice and human rights.

Yet ISM displays all of the characteristics of demopaths. On one hand, they object to and try to prevent what they label as inadmissible “collective punishment” Israel’s policy of destroying the houses of suicide bombers (property damage). But they do not object to the practice of suicide terrorism (mass murder), the most heinous kind of collective punishment. The demopathic quality of the discourse is particularly evident in the ISM patented slogan, “Resistance is not Terrorism.” The only possible subject of this slogan is suicide bombers targeting civilians. In other words, terror in the name of resistance is not terror – and this from a pacifist organization. Last spring (2005) ISMers made the argument that since all Israelis go into the army, all Israelis are legitimate military targets.

DUPES OF DEMOPATHS

In order to be effective, demopaths must convince others that their human rights talk is sincere. Only when the Trojans believed that the horse was a “gift” acknowledging their strength, did they take it into their city. When demopaths succeed, a dysfunctional relationship emerges with sincere human-rights activists in an increasingly demonizing rhetoric – against the demopaths’ target – that seeks to influence public attitudes and eventually, policy.

There are several attitudes that predispose individuals to becoming dupes of demopathic discourse.

1. Liberal cognitive egocentrism – most everyone wants positive-sum solutions – prohibits people from imagining such malevolence.

2. Masochistic omnipotence syndrome – it’s our fault and if we can change, things will work out – makes people particularly susceptible to the wide-ranging accusations that demopaths level at western society.

3. Human Rights Complex- human rights violations are particularly reprehensible when they come from Western cultures – opens access to demopaths to participate in public moral discussion.

4. Fear of Ridicule: When “human rights” discourse trumps all other values, demopaths can establish their positions so powerfully, that people who begin to suspect foul play are afraid to discuss the issue for fear of being ostracized as a racist.

A joke runs that an American and a Russian were arguing over who had more freedom.. “I can stand in Washington and call the President of the United States an idiot and no one will arrest me,” claimed the American. “So can I,” responded the Soviet. Substitute Israel and Palestine. If you don’t get it, you’re prime bait for demopaths.

The more radical some people get, the more they enter the boundary between dupe and demopath. For a westerner born and bred in a civil society formally committed to human rights, the border seems to lie around the issue of how revolutionary their ideology. Some dupes truly believe they are working to help the cause of human rights and civil society Other Westerners, remorselessly hostile to their own culture, welcome the violence of its enemies and hope to foster a revolutionary upheaval that will rid the world of evil Western culture These destructive revolutionaries – poisonous, “hot-house” flowers – could only grow in the protected atmosphere created by civil society. The irony is that they militate to destroy the very conditions that allow them to flourish.

DEMOPATH OR DUPE? FOR YOU TO JUDGE AND COMMENT

Distinguishing dupes from demopaths is a difficult and sometimes uncomfortable task. In most cases (even those cited above) different people can honestly disagree. Much depends on the degree of sincerity one attributes to any given person, as well has how far or short-sighted one thinks they may be (are they mean or stupid). We present several cases of what people might consider demopathic discourse below, and invite readers to make their own judgments as well as contribute other examples they feel are appropriate.

Korach: First Demopath in Recorded History?

In the book of Numbers, Korach, a Levite leader, seeks to lead a rebellion against the leadership that has taken the children of Israel out of Egypt and into the wilderness. He attacks Moses for not being sufficiently democratic:

“All the people are holy… Why do you lord it over us?”

Did he so accuse Moses because he meant it? (demotic utopian). Some rabbis hold to this reading, arguing that Korach was speaking of the original plan (before the Golden Calf and the 12 Spies), in which there was no internal hierarchy, all were priests.

Or, did he accuse Moses because he wanted to dupe a people with demotic ideals into following a new leadership into a counter-revolutionary hierarchy (a path so many revolutions have taken)? (demopath).

When one takes into account Korach’s association with Datan and Aviram, the case for demopathy strengthens. These two leaders attack Moses not for failing to bring the people of Israel to the land of milk and honey (and equality), but for taking them out of it: “You took us out of a land flowing with milk and honey (and hierarchy).” (Numbers, 16). (This is also a good definition of symbolic chutzpah).

Said’s Orientalism

In this seminal book, Said claims that Western scholarship should be held to the most stringent standards of non-projection. Any detection of “difference,” especially negative comparisons, is a form of racism. In his work on the Arab-Israeli conflict, however, one finds no evidence that Said attempts to encourage Arabs to reconsider their negative projections onto Israel. On the contrary, he elaborates on all the most stereotyped and negative images provided by Arab culture of Israeli behavior and motivations, thus engaging (when it was to his advantage) in the same behavior he forbade the West.

Chomsky’s Manufacturing Consent

Chomsky holds the Western press to a rigorous standard, which then enables him to argue that it essentially “manufactures consent” with propaganda not information. In the course of his extended and radical critique of the Western press, he ends up trusting non-Western sources more, even though these sources come from countries where “consent” is coerced, and where the media are openly dedicated to propaganda. See, for example, his writings on the genocide on Cambodia (and see also here). This contradiction appears also in Chomsky’s moral universe, where he inflates the crimes of the West out of all proportion, and explains the violence of our enemies as justified anger. A case in point was his reaction to 9-11. Thus Chomsky offers a classic demopathic discourse: invoke the moral values of civil society to attack civil society, give genuinely oppressive regimes and movements a free ride to break all those rules. The question then, is, does Chomsky know what he’s doing and genuinely seek to destroy the only culture in the world that would tolerate a critic like him? Or does he genuinely think he’s contributing to the betterment of human rights around the world?



Jimmy Carter

The former president and Nobel Peace Prize winner has a sterling reputation as a man of peace and deep concern for human rights around the world. His Carter Center sponsors research and activism around the world. And yet, perhaps in an excess of HRC, Carter has made some truly astonishing statements that both praise ruthless dictators like Kim Il Sung, and attack the United States in such harsh turns that Muslim media enthusiastically quote him. Does he think that this praise is somehow going to win over enemies of the very values that he espouses? Does he think that by attacking the US in such harsh terms he encourages self-criticism on the other side?

Ken Livingstone

Ken Livingstone, the mayor of London, represents a case of someone who uses the most virulent demopathic discourse, explaining and justifying suicide terrorism, blaming the West for the hate-mongering of the Muslim and Arab world, and demonizing anyone who disagrees with him. He welcomed Islamist cleric Sheikh Yousef Al-Qaradhawi, a known jihadist, to London. Does he realize what he’s doing? Is his hatred of Israel and his own political culture so profound that he can see no flaws in the opposition, no good in his own traditions?

Robert Fisk

UK Journalist whose articles are striklingly anti-Israel and in many cases anti-Western. He does not apply the moral indignation he applies to Israel and America to any other country and leaves many times muslims and palestinians off the moral hook (see here).

Tagged: Demopaths

"

Letters: Delighted in Tunbridge Wells - Guardian

Letters: Delighted in Tunbridge Wells: "

Marina Hyde (Fans of the tame, rejoice – TV's Beige Age is on its way, 9 January) implies that Jonathan Ross was ultimately the victim of some kind of middle-class backlash; a triumph of conservatism over 'edgy' comedy.

I think she misses the point. This is not why I (and many others) complained about Ross and Brand. We complained because we felt passionately that, although commercial broadcasters may choose to entertain their audiences with bread and circuses, there was no reason for the BBC to follow in their footsteps.

The 'Sachsgate' affair showed that the BBC no longer felt constrained in any way by its founding charter. It became clear that a number of senior executives actually found the schoolboy antics of the two presenters very funny, and were genuinely astonished when many members of the public disagreed.

I don't think this affair marks the triumph of conservatism over creativity. The BBC has often been the focus of controversy, but its audience expects that this will be over issues of substance, such as the allegations of lack of neutrality over coverage of Palestinian affairs. Watching a middle-aged man deluding himself into believing he has been whisked back in time to the Lower Fourth, where he and his chum can fart, flick paper pellets around with a ruler, and leer at the pretty girls in the front row, isn't edgy. It's just plain sad.

Andrew Mayo

Cookham Rise, Berkshire

• The BBC has two sets of enemies, and Marina Hyde may be in danger of conflating them. One consists of commercialists who will hurry to employ Jonathan Ross. The other set laments the material only justifiable on commercial grounds which the BBC already carries. Sadly, radicals wanting to shock godly folk like Charles Moore are at one with the boys with a business plan who recognise the cheap and nasty and the synthetically exciting as big numbers. Money wants those numbers rationally – to sell advertising. The current BBC wants them too, and hires personalties you wouldn't want to meet on a dark night to get them. It meets charges of elitism and cultural subsidy with a pre-emptive flight from quality. Indeed some of its top people now quite love the flash and meretricous. Rather like New Labour coming to love the filthy rich, it's called trahison des clercs. I want a broadcasting service with the virtues of Hugh Carleton Greene's regime and Sydney Bernstein's Granada. It is the justification for the licence, but one to which managers on high floors and higher salaries are blind – dazzled by numbers!

Edward Pearce

Thormanby, North Yorkshire

• Look further into the BBC schedules and you find The Thick of It or Charlie Brooker's Screenwipe – programmes which could hardly be described as 'beige'. A simple fact seems to have been overlooked in the Jonathan Ross departure debate. Ross had become unbearably smug, wooden and simply not very funny. I for one will be glad to see the back of him – not because I live in Tunbridge Wells, but because there are better people on the BBC.

John Hayes Fisher

Tunbridge Wells, Kent

• This may be the director general's 'duck house' moment (Report, 9 January). To blithely compare his own worth to that of a county council chief executive, whose average pay is much less, is crass and insensitive. He is right that the BBC is not a county council: it does not provide key social services and schools that affect millions of lives every day. Is he seriously suggesting the BBC's director of audio and music deserves to be paid more than double the salary of my local council chief executive? The BBC needs to be led by a man with a firmer grip on the current economic reality, with rising unemployment and pay freezes. Perhaps Mr Thompson has provided a public service by highlighting the issue again; maybe he will follow some of his colleagues to the higher salaries and job security of ITV.

G Routledge

Tickhill, South Yorkshire

• Mark Thompson confuses being paid the best with recruiting the best. People who earn the highest salaries are merely the best at getting the highest salaries. Where has he been this last year?

Mark Doel

Sheffield

• BBC
• Jonathan Ross
• Mark Thompson
• Public service broadcasting
• Television industry
• Russell Brand
• Television
• Executive pay and bonuses
• Pay
• Public sector careers
• Public services policy

guardian.co.uk © Guardian News & Media Limited 2010 | Use of this content is subject to our Terms & Conditions | More Feeds

"

BBC's Radio 1 rapped for BNP's Ashley Cole interview - Telegraph

BBC's Radio 1 rapped for BNP's Ashley Cole interview: "BBC Radio 1 has been criticised by the corporation's complaints unit for an
interview with senior BNP members, who said footballer Ashley Cole was ''not
ethnically British''."

CLIMATEGATE BBC TERROR ALERT - Biased BBC

CLIMATEGATE BBC TERROR ALERT: "Fishy. Some days ago, the excellent Bishop Hill site broke the news that - rather bizzarely - the police National Domestic Extremism Unit is involved in investigating the ClimateGate leak at the University of East Anglia. The BBC has finally woken up to the story, and there are worrying signs that it is somehow part of the saga. First of all, it adamantly describes the leak as a 'hack' even though this has not yet been established. Second, they have this extremely odd quote from the police:

'At present we have two police officers assisting Norfolk with their investigation, and we have also provided computer forensic expertise. While this is not strictly a domestic extremism matter, as a national police unit we had the expertise and resource to assist with this investigation, as well as good background knowledge of climate change issues in relation to criminal investigations.'

If I had been the journalist covering this story, I'd be asking first of all what the hell a terrorist unit is doing involved in 'climate change'and what 'expertise' in this field they claim to have. Second, with the world still on terrorist alert after the latest attempt to blow up a plane, how can a terrorist unit spare resources to investigate file hacking (if indeed, that is what it was) when the only 'victim' of this alleged crime is academic internal mail - and the leak was in any case in the public interest?

But not the BBC. It's creepy beyond words that Climategate should be bracketed by the police as a terrorism incident, and equally so that the BBC should broadcast this chilling quote without asking such basic questions. My guess is that the police asked the BBC to carry the story as damage limitation because they suddenly realised that linking Climategate to terrorism was extremely questionable. In overall terms, the BBC has dismissed the importance of Climategate, but if it will provide material to attack 'deniers', they are on the case like a rat up a drain pipe.

Click through to read and contribute comments on this post.

"

Gardeners' World goes back to basics after viewers criticise revamp - Guardian

Gardeners' World goes back to basics after viewers criticise revamp: "

BBC show lost viewers – and received complaints that it was neglecting its core audience – after makeover

BBC2's Gardeners' World is to go back to its roots after a controversial revamp flopped with viewers.

The long-running programme, which first aired in 1968, was given a makeover last year under new presenter Toby Buckland following the departure of Monty Don, who had suffered a stroke.

Critics including former presenter Gay Search complained that it was targeting new gardeners at the expense of its core audience, and ratings for the last series fell below 2 million.

New features on the show included a '30-minute challenge' in which Buckland would create items such as hanging baskets, and a short-lived Top Gear-style segment in which the three presenters retreated to a potting shed to discuss gardening news and viewers' emails.

Stefan Buczacki, the former chairman of BBC Radio 4's Gardeners' Question Time, said the show had become 'trivial, silly and irrelevant by trying to mimic Top Gear and Blue Peter – and if you trivialise, you lose credibility.'

The show's executive producer, Gill Tierney, said the format would 'refocus' when it returns for an extended run in March.

'Change is always difficult and sometimes you don't get it completely right. We have listened to the audience and have taken the criticism on the chin, which is why we are making the changes we are making,' Tierney told the Radio Times.

'We are simply going to refocus to satisfy the needs of our core audience. It will be a much simpler offering. There'll be nothing fancy going on.'

Search, who was a regular presenter on Gardeners' World for six years, said Don's departure had signalled 'what I and many other loyal viewers saw as a deliberate – and unwelcome – change in direction that caused damage to the channel's reputation for serious gardening'.

'Yes, the show went on, but the audience has been quietly opting out ever since.,' she said.

'Gardeners I've met at horticultural societies or in garden centres are almost unanimous in feeling that the programme is now targeting younger, less experienced gardeners at the expense of older, more knowledgeable ones.'

Buckland will continue as a presenter on the show. A corporation spokesman said it was important to cater to a range of gardening needs. 'There are new people becoming interested in gardening all the time and we need to make programmes that they will enjoy as well.'

Two new programmes featuring Gardeners' World presenters Carol Klein and Alys Fowler will launch later this year.

• To contact the MediaGuardian news desk email editor@mediaguardian.co.uk or phone 020 3353 3857. For all other inquiries please call the main Guardian switchboard on 020 3353 2000.

• If you are writing a comment for publication, please mark clearly 'for publication'.

• Television industry
• BBC
• Television

John Plunkett

guardian.co.uk © Guardian News & Media Limited 2010 | Use of this content is subject to our Terms & Conditions | More Feeds

"

Chris Evans angers Togs with his 'manic' style - Telegraph

Chris Evans angers Togs with his 'manic' style: "Chris Evans began his new Radio 2 breakfast show with The Beatles' classic All
You Need Is Love, but fans have responded with the call 'all you need is Sir
Terry Wogan'."

Unbelievable - Biased BBC

Unbelievable: "Here’s something that deserves to be aired on B-BBC.

Guantanamo Guard reunited with ex-inmates.

“But what were the pair doing in Afghanistan in 2001?
They explain that, being in their late teens and early twenties at the time, they had made a naïve, spontaneous decision to travel for free with an aid convoy weeks before a friend’s wedding, due to take place in Pakistan.”

If you believe that you’ll believe anything. The BBC seems to.
Harry’s Place shows the BBC sanitising radical Islam, and yet again meddling in an area that it shouldn’t.
An update includes a transcript of part of an interview on R5 where Victoria Derbyshire asks some questions, but eventually seems to give the Tipton Three the benefit of the doubt.

Click through to read and contribute comments on this post.

"

Another Labour Luvvie - Biased BBC

Another Labour Luvvie: "The BBC began election year with a new topical comedy show hosted by a Tory-hating Labour supporter. What next, Labour luvvie Dermot O'Leary presenting election coverage? Actually, yes:

X Factor host Dermot O'Leary told of his 'excitement' at the prospect of fronting a political show in the run-up to the general election.
The 36-year-old told the Radio Times he is obsessed with politics - but said the show would not be 'particularly serious'.
The magazine said O'Leary is in talks with the BBC about presenting a political programme.
O'Leary said: 'I won't be the man with the swingometer, but politics is a huge obsession with me, so I'm incredibly excited about it.

Here's O'Leary talking to the Guardian in 2003:

Labour, Tory, Liberal or Socialist Workers?

I suspect that these days I'm politically closest to the Socialist Workers, but they'd take all my money so it's still Labour.

And from an article in the Independent in May 2005:

Shortly before the general election, O'Leary was branded a Labour luvvie after inadvertently suggesting at a Make Poverty History rally that Tony Blair should become head of state.

That rally, which took place during the 2005 election campaign, was covered by Ben MacIntyre in The Times:

OH, LUVVIE, I can’t tell you how marvellous it was; truly, darling, an unforgettable performance. There we were at the Old Vic Theatre — just twelve hundred of Labour’s closest friends — waiting for Tony and Gordon to do their matinee double act, when the whispered word went round the audience that the greatest political performer of our times would be making a cameo appearance — none other than old blue eyes, schmoozer in chief, the trouser president: Bill Clinton himself, via live satellite link.

The occasion was a rally — the biggest of the campaign so far — to mark World Poverty Day and held by the Make Poverty History coalition. Everybody who was anybody was there, le tout Labour: there was Dermot O’Leary, Big Brother presenter, and Alastair Campbell, Big Brother enforcer, and June Sarpong, the Channel 4 presenter.

The announcement of Ms Sarpong's addition to the BBC election team can only be a matter of time.

Click through to read and contribute comments on this post.

"

A Formal Complaint to the BBC – Part 3 - CiF Watch

A Formal Complaint to the BBC – Part 3: "

This is a guest post by Mitnaged

There follows my letter of formal complaint to the BBC about Michael White:

” I write to make formal complaint about BBC London 94.9’s Breakfast programme interview with Michael White which was aired on 14 December 2009. The grounds of my complaint are that the interview, and in particular the conduct of presenters and the producer in the face of what I deem to be a libellous and incitatory statement by Mr White, namely:

“In Israel they murder each other a great deal. The Israeli Defence Forces murder people because they don’t like their political style and what they’ve got to say and it only means that people more extreme come in and take their place.”

were in contravention of your Editorial Guidelines as follows:

“1) In terms of compromising impartiality: Your Guidelines state unequivocally:

” our journalists and presenters, including those in news and current affairs, may provide professional judgments but may not express personal opinions on matters of public policy or political or industrial controversy. Our audiences should not be able to tell from BBC programmes or other BBC output the personal views of our journalists and presenters on such matters.

“Not only did the presenters fail to prevent Mr White from libelling the IDF and the Israeli government but they indicated on air that they agreed with it.

“Again dealing with the compromise to impartiality, your Guidelines state:

“we will sometimes need to report on or interview people whose views may cause serious offence to many in our audiences. We must be convinced, after appropriate referral, that a clear public interest outweighs the possible offence.”

“Perhaps you would care to make clear to me how allowing Mr White’s offensive libel of the IDF and the Israeli government was in the public interest?

“Again under the heading of compromise to impartiality, your Guidelines state:

“we should not automatically assume that academics and journalists from other organisations are impartial and make it clear to our audience when contributors are associated with a particular viewpoint.”

“Michael White is the Political Editor to The Guardian, whose animus towards Israel is well-known and well-documented. In spite of that, Mr White’s association with a newspaper which held such views was not made clear to the audience when he made his libellous remark. Given that the presenters of the programme did not appear to realise how offensive Mr White’s statement was, Mr David Robey’s reply to me, where he tries to suggest that listeners to the programme would not confuse Michael White’s statement with those of the BBC, is disingenuous to say the least.

“Yet again under the same heading of compromise to impartiality, the Guidelines state the following, which shows the presenters’ conduct to constitute arguably the most blatant breach:

“we must rigorously test contributors expressing contentious views during an interview whilst giving them a fair chance to set out their full response to our questions.”

“Perhaps you would be so kind as to explain to me how the conduct of the presenters in this case constituted a “rigorous testing” of Mr White’s contentious views? It is my belief that the presenters were themselves ignorant of the offence caused by Mr White’s statement and perhaps may even have become so inured to such a view of the IDF as murderers that they were not even aware that the view was deeply offensive and libellous and should be contested.

“Further breaches of the Guidelines are:

“2) In terms of fact checking. Whereas this was a live programme and I accept that Mr White’s “forthright and colourful” (to quote Mr Robey) misrepresentation of facts could not be checked at the time, there was a strong rationale either for the intervention of the presenters when he said what he said, or for a subsequent on air retraction. Since it is too late for the presenters to withdraw their endorsement of his ill-thought-out and inflammatory statement, then a retraction and an admission that Mr White’s statement misrepresented the IDF and the Israeli government would be in order.

“3) The programme also contravened your Editorial Guidelines in terms of accuracy. To quote the Guidelines:

“Misleading audiences

We should not distort known facts, present invented material as fact, or knowingly do anything to mislead our audiences. We may need to label material to avoid doing so.”

“By their failure to challenge or correct Mr White’s statement, and indeed by making noises which endorsed it, the presenters of the programme assisted him in misleading the audience. Once again, I accept that this was a live programme but this does not absolve the presenters or the producer from their duty towards conveying balance and honesty to their listeners. As I have already said, an on air apology would serve to vitiate the offence caused.

“Finally, I would like to address a point in Mr Robey’s reply to me in his email dated 7^th January 2010, in which he appears to be trying to excuse Michael White’s behaviour because he has “strong views which he expresses in a forthright and colourful manner.” Mr Robey goes on to say that the BBC believes that these were in keeping with his style and clearly identifiable as his own personal views.

“Earlier on in his email, Mr Robey tries to excuse the non-intervention of the presenters and the producer by saying that Mr White also made controversial remarks about Silvio Berlusconi, and that Mr White “did not break stride” in making a series of comments. In other words, Mr Robey argues that Mr White went far too quickly for the presenters to challenge him and for them to do so would have diverted from the main subject of the interview.

“I trust you will permit me to remind you that Mr White’s libel of the IDF (and therefore of the Israeli government) itself diverted from the main subject of the interview (which was about Silvio Berlusconi) and he was allowed to do that because your presenters did not have either the background knowledge or the sensitivity to the offence he might be causing to prevent him.

“Please permit me also to suggest that “strong views” expressed in however “colourful” a manner should not be allowed to perpetrate libel.

“I shall await to hear from you.”

"