Tuesday, 31 December 2013

# 293 - WAR - Global cooling confirmed!

The BBC news was full of the Green Peace activists being released from Russia but not  a squeak on this story of global cooling trapping global warming zealots!

Lucky for us Autonomoous Mind is on the case:-


Sunday, 29 December 2013

# 292 - WAR - The BBC and the countryside.

From the Telegraph on Saturday.

I'm glad to see the Countryside Alliance is now led by an ex Army General who calls a spade a spade.

Sir Barney White-Spunner is particularly exercised by the BBC and its coverage - or lack of it - of rural issues. He goes on to say " We do not think the BBC is balanced or fair. It gives a view of rural  England as seen from central London and when the BBC says they try and give a balanced view they mean a balanced view between two people in central London, and not a balanced view between central London and the countryside."

Here here to that as of course has been obvious for years as the BBC is bias in favour of a metropolitan elite. For example while the BBC  clearly oppose the badger cull they focus less on farmer's cows and TB or the loss of hedgehogs to badgers. Also it surely worth a comment from the BBC that 1000s of deer are culled every year to keep the herds down to manageable numbers.

And this from the Guardian back in March.

Deer culling on massive scale backed by expert

New research shows that only by killing 50% to 60% of deer can their numbers be kept under reasonable control

The BBC is bias against the countryside.

# 291 - WAR - BBC staff rehired after being paid off.

From the Telegraph on Sunday.

More than 200 staff made redundant by the BBC over the past decade have been rehired. In one case, a manager who left with a £365,000 pay-off was re-employed.

In a practice described as the BBC's 'merry-go-round' 233 staff have returned on fixed-term or permanent contracts.

Of course the BBC has refused to name any of the executives who have been sacked and re-hired.

Finally Greg Dyke, a former DG, recently described Lord Patten as a 'busted flush.'

Monday, 23 December 2013

# 290 - WAR - And there is more .....of course!!

1. Free advert for Labour policy -  The other day on Radio 2 the 1pm news ended with the item about the dangers of 'Fixed odds betting terminals'. The only comment came from Ed Miliband who was allowed, unopposed, to say that the next Labour government would legislate to ban them.
No mention was made that it was the Labour government's 2005 Gambling Act that gave us them in the first place. So why was there NO balance with a Tory point of view?

2. Another dodgy pay offs - So I read Peter Fincham was paid off with £500,000 yes that is half a million. This was the man who faked the Queen's exit from a meeting apparently in a huff during a programme about her.

3. Top bosses expenses - Again I read that the BBC's top executives have individually run up expenses of £10,000 or more on exclusive restaurant meals which they often attend under the guise of holding important meetings. Well it's not their money after all and they are very important aren't they!

4.Anjem Choudary - Was given airtime to give reasons for Fusilier Rigby's murder. Viewers protested this extremist shouldn't be given airtime but if balanced this is not the main issue for me. The main issue is that the BBC seldom if ever give airtime to right wing views let alone extreme right wing views.

Wednesday, 18 December 2013

# 289 - WAR - Four more examples of the BBC simply NOT getting it.

1. Pay off to staff - Parliament has added weight by confirming the payouts to staff, covered here some weeks ago, were excessive. The BBC have now capped payments at £150,000.

2.Half a million refurbishment of 1 billion new BBC Centre.


3. Unbalanced report -  At 3pm on Friday 13th December on Radio 2 a news item covered the report that grammar Schools were too middle class. The ONLY and UNCHALLENGED contributor to the report was an anti selection person. Balance would have included a comment from a pro selection person who might have pointed out if Man.United can select on talent than why not schools?

4. Lord Patten - I read today that he is trying to suppress a  critical report on the BBC's failed and scrapped £100million IT project.

Good old Auntie they just don't get it do they.

Friday, 13 December 2013

Thursday, 12 December 2013

# 287 - WAR - Is Lord Patten trying to cover up key evidence on Savile?

The Daily Mail reports Lord Patten is aware of a secret tape which shows the author of the official £3millon inquiry into Jimmy Savile said he made a mistake in the final report.

The claim is that the previous DG WAS specifically warned about the disgraced DJ's sex abuse yet allowed glowing tributes to be screened after Savile's death.

Lord Patten's luck appears to be running out and I have never rated this Tory wet and I hope his 'Establishment' veneer is about to be peeled away to show him up for the man he really is.

Wednesday, 11 December 2013

# 286 - WAR - Carbon Emissions.

A blatant piece of pro climate change bias happen on the the 10.00am News on Radio 2 when an item in the middle of the bulletin talked about whether there was any legal basis or not to cut back on the  reduction to our carbon emission targets. The only person interviewed was a David Kennedy who was Chief Executive of the Committee on Climate Change who stated, unopposed and without any cross examination, that keeping our ambitious targets would save us £100 billion over time or £4000 per household.

This was not a balanced report by any stretch of the imagination and was closer to pro Climate Change propaganda.

Interestingly this item was not repeated on the 11.00am news slot.

# 285 - WAR - Mandela's memorial.

Autonomous Mind says it all and I couldn't have put it better myself!


Saturday, 7 December 2013

# 284 - WAR - Lord Patten and the Jeremiahs at the BBC.

Two snippets from the papers this week first Lord Patten is refusing to go before a Parliamentary Committee to discuss BBC bias. I wonder why? This EU pensioner is clearly as pro the EU as you can be and leads a BBC which, having received soft EU loans, is also pro the EU.

Next after the Chancellor's Autumn Statement justifiable criticism has been made of the Jeremiahs at the BBC for for the past three years have taken every opportunity to to talk down our economy - predicting that the austerity 'cuts' would precipitate a triple-dip recession and misery for millions of people.

Take for example Stephanie Flanders who until recently was the BBC's economic editor ( and former student flame of both Ed Balls and Miliband) she was well known in Westminster for her bulletins of economic gloom.

In March she blogged '......there is a distinct possibility that national output will shrink again, in the first three months of this year. In other words, it is quite possible we will see that much talked about "triple-dip".

The truth is by june she had to admit not only that the triple-dip hadn't materialised but nor had the second dip!!

Ms Flanders soon after her inaccurate predictions lef the BBC for a job with JP Morgan on an estimated salary of £400,000.

So here is a classic another Guardian reading left-wing BBC luvvie who has such empathy with the poor!!!!   

Friday, 29 November 2013

# 283 - WAR - Lord Sugar speaks out against the 'Jobsworths' at the BBC.

Lord Sugar, a Labour Peer, is quoted by Ephraim Hardcastle in The Daily Mail as saying, in the House of Lords, recently - "Layers of jobsworths need removing at the Corporation"

Also in the same paper Jennifer Saunders rants that the BBC is full of too many layers of unnecessay management and waste money.

Both these are significant criticisms of the BBC as they come from 'friends' as both Lord Sugar and Jennifer Saunders have been in programmes on the BBC.

When the luvvies start to point out the bleeding obvious, that the BBC is overmanned or should that be overpersonned, then I am hopeful that the worm may be slowly starting to turn.

However having said that I predict that it will still be many years before the BBC is brought to heel or book whichever you prefer!

Wednesday, 20 November 2013

# 282 - WAR - David Dimbleby on the BBC.

David Dimbleby who has been with the BBC for more then 50 years said the following yesterday on Radio 5 Live as reported in the Daily Mail today.

1. The BBC is too powerful and should be slimmed down.
2. It should cut gardening and cooking programmes.
3. The coverage of the Royal Pageant on the Thames was rueful.
4.  It is crushing local newspapers with its online coverage.
5.  BBC4 should merge with BBC2 and concentrte on quality.
6.  If you have one organisation that controls the airwavs is that in the end democratic?
7.  Some of the licence fee money should be used to subsidise other independent radio and broadcast   stations to give more variety.

All those things and more would help the BBC but I'm not certain it would end the bias.

Interestingly in the same article it said former head of of TV news Roger Mosey admitted the BBC was too big and too left wingand also suggested the licence fee should be shared with rivals and the number of TV channels reduced.

Well done David Dimbleby for speaking out but isn't it annoying how those that point out that the BBC is bias are usually FORMER employees of the BBC!!

# 281 -- WAR - Roger Helmer's newsletter.

This from his latst newsletter - "Straight talking"

The BBC: Even when it’s balanced, it’s biased


I was listening to the Today programme early in November, and John Humprhys was doing a piece on the referendum on nationalisation of the electricity grid in Berlin.  He interviewed one supporter, one opponent.  So perfectly balanced, then?  Not quite.


The case against nationalisation was based entirely on finance.  Nationalisation involves spending a great deal of public money for no discernible economic benefit.  The case in favour, on the other hand, was all about “fighting climate change” (though why fighting climate change necessitates nationalising the grid, I’m still not clear).


The two key points were made by the proponent of nationalisation: (A) we need to fight climate change; and (B) quoting Lord Stern, “the price of inaction exceeds the cost of mitigation”.  No attempt was made to challenge either of these points.  Both are highly contentious.  Readers of this newsletter will be familiar with the general arguments on anthropogenic global warming.  On Stern, this is just about the only substantial economic study concluding that costs of inaction exceed costs of mitigation.  Most studies find the opposite.  There is also a splendid and authoritative rebuttal of the Stern report by inter alia David Henderson and Richard Lindzen, which is well worth reading: here. But of course the BBC takes the Stern position as Gospel, and wouldn’t think of challenging it.


While we’re having a go at Humphrys, he did a piece on the Grangemouth dispute with the Unite union recently.  In the course of an interview, he came up with the splendid line “But the Union wouldn’t have taken action without the approval of its members?”  Of course trade unions constantly take action without the approval of members, which was why the law on strike ballots was introduced.  But Humphrys kept digging deeper.  “But the membership voted for Len McCluskey, didn’t they?”.  Just think about it, John.  You might as well say “The people voted for Margaret Thatcher, so of course they all approved of the Poll Tax”.

Sunday, 17 November 2013

# 280 - WAR - It's only your money they waste!

Andrew Gilligan writes a good article today attacking the BBC in the Sunday Telegraph under the heading:-

What Lonley Planet is the BBC on?

In it he points out the BBC lost £100million after selling the 'Lonely Planet' travel book company.

Quite why the BBC enter this market in the first place, which is NOT their area of expertise, is ot explained but one can only assume as they are only ever spending your money they don't have to have a good reason.

The person responsible for this loss making deal was paid off with £800,000.

Other statistics from th4 article include:-

  • BBC managers to be reduced from 437 to 415 by 2015 - WHAT ARE THEY ALL FOR?

  • Despite the BBC's prominence in news reporting they have only won 39% of the awards from the Royal Television Society in the last 5 years and NONE from the Bafta since 2006 and only won it twice in the 12 years since the award was created - IS IT ANY SURPRISE?

  • The BBC is the largest news organisation in the world - WHY?

With most of the BBC news dumbed down and centring on such matters as Beckham's tatoos, while presented in sound bites for those with the attention span of a gnat, I'm not surprised they aren't winning news awards.

Friday, 15 November 2013

# 279 - WAR - Immigration

Jack Straw and David Blunkett have both warned this week of the dangers of riots if too many Roma immigrants come into this country.

The BBC has virtually ignored this story.

Now if this statement had been made by a Tory.................................................!!!!

The BBC is bias bias and bias.

# 278 - WAR - Jeremy Vine show and Climate Change.

This post is a little late as I've been away in London attending a debate on whether we should leave the EU with the result being - 51% for leaving and 49% for staying!! History teaches us that unless the 'outs' enter the referendum 20 points ahead we will lose.

Anyway back to the Jeremy Vine show. Earlier in the week, I believe Wednesday, the first topic for discussion was whether we should now change our minds about the green taxes on our fuels bills because of the typhoon in the Philippines.

Bias number one - Only one person was interviewed being the pro climate change journalist George Monbiot.

Bias number two - George Monbiot comes from the Guardian!

Bias number three - Monbiot was NEVER interrupted or challenged on two of his facts - that the Oceans have warmed up and that the world's temperatures have gone up by 1% over recent years. Both are wrong.

Bias number four - Despite most telephone calls being against climate change Jeremy Vine appealed for more people to telephone in who supported climate change and gave equal billing to both sides.

I believe the only way to get the BBC to change is for a mass boycott of the TV licence.

Wednesday, 6 November 2013

# 276 - WAR - The new BBC News Studio.


Well here it is in all its glory the new BBC News studio opened in March this year and no doubt familiar to you all. Well last night as I was listening to the 'lip twitcher' Hugh Edwards reading the news I suddenly thought 'I wonder how many work in this studio?' I've counted seating for around 250+ and feel this has to be the biggest vanity project the BBC has ever undertaken given the increasingly low grade news output designed for a general public that apparently only have the attention span of a gnat!! This also has to be the biggest white elephant the BBC has ever produced and sums up exactly why the BBC is so out of touch with the public it serves.
Lord Hall told the CBI conference this week that the BBC must spend our money as if it was their own which is a clear statement that the BBC has spent money like water up to now!
The BBC is a hugely bloated oganisation that is quite incapable of reform as all those who work in it and are associated with it have as much idea about beening 'Prudent' as did Gordon Brown!!  

Sunday, 3 November 2013

# 275 - WAR - Is the BBC capable of reform?

NO of course it isn't, that is until it has to live in the real world without the licence fee tax.

Here are 4 examples of how the BBC operate I've picked up over the last few days.

1. They spend your money like water - I read in the press that the BBC have on their books the ex Nu Liebour spin doctor  Godric Smith to act as a PR consultant to improve the image of the BBC after the Savile affair. He only works part-time and is paid £150,000! Apparently the BBC already have 140 people in the PR department but there is always room for one more left-wing ex-Blairite.

Can you imagine the BBC employing an ex Tory spin doctor .......exactly!!

2. BBC management are guilty of turining a blind eye to wrong doing - So Paul Gambaccini admits to be the recent BBC employee to be questioned by the police during its operation Yewtree investigation, into sexual abuse, after the Jimmy Savile situation.

What strikes me, since Savile's exploits hit the headlines, is the extent to which the BBC is guilty of  turning a blind eye to many illegal acts going on around it and indeed on its premises. The BBC is stuffed full with the liberal elite and their rooks are coming home to roost.

Someone peoples heads should roll.

3. BBC stage manage a racist story -  I saw the broadcast Rod Liddle writes about in the Spectator this week.

The programme Inside West, in Bristol, dressed up two people, one in a suit and the other in a Muslim robe and cap, gave them identical CVs and sent them out to apply for the same jobs.

Yes you guessed it the suited man got more job offers.

Rod Liddle concludes " If you dress in a way to emphsise your difference to the norm, don't be surprised if you're afforded fewer job opportunities as a consequence."


This was BBC propaganda and not objective news reporting.

4. The propaganda of a non story - On my local BBC news covering Somerset tonight The lead story involved the governments's spare room allowance ( Bedroom tax).

The story centred on a man with a cronic condition living in a house with a spare bedroom. He was being asked to move as the room was not used but he was appealing as the room was too small to fit a bed in it so he argued it couldn't be classified as a bedroom. The room was small and they are still awaiting the result of the appeal. So this was a non story but built up by the BBC to attack the govermnnet over, what they have been calling the bedroom tax, but referred to during this news item as the spare room allowance. This I assume was after Iain D-S complained about the BBC bias on this topic.

Why was this the lead story especially as it had NOT reached its conclusion?

Why did the BBC not show a successful story, associated with the spare room allowance, helping someone get a house?

The answer is because the BBC is still institutionally bias.

Thursday, 31 October 2013

# 274 - WAR - BBC fuel povety propaganda.

Many reports on the BBC at the moment, about the energy price rises, include the comment or question to a government minster that many peole will die this winter because they can not pay their energy bills.

Coming form the BBC this is not news but pure unadulterated propaganda on behalf of Nu Liebour.

Please, and somebody tell me if I have this wrong, but don't many old people die in the winter from the cold and have done since time began and will continue in the future?

The BBC's Royal Charter says it needs to be impartial and report the news.

The BBC is the promotional wing of the left wing 'Establishment'.

Wednesday, 30 October 2013

# 273 - WAR - It's NOT a 'Bedroom tax'.

Under a Freedom of Information' request we now know Iain Duncan-Smith  has complained to the BBC that his Housing Benefit reforms are :-

'Not a tax and it is wrong to describe it in this way...It is not the job of the BBC to use misleading terms and promote the views of the Labour Party.'

Further to this the Tory Chairman,Grant Shapps, has said that the BBC could lose its exclusive right to licence fees in the 2016 charter review due to its bias.

A BBC spokesman said ....' we are satisfied that on the whole our coverage is fair, accurate and impartial.'

The trouble is when you are in a 'Guardianist bubble' you cannot see the right from the predominance of left!

Sunday, 27 October 2013

# 272 - WAR - BBC compared to Radio Moscow!!

Christopher Booker in the Sunday Telegraph compares the bias in the BBC to the output from Radio Moscow and concludes " The idea that Radio Moscow could ever recognise the extent to which its party line might be biased is as far-fetched as the thought that the BBC's staff might stop reading the Guardian." !!!!!!

Then following up from last week's 2 articles on the BBC there are 8 letters on BBC bias heading up the letters page. An Elizabeth Boon points how "those against government policy are given more time and consideration than those defending the government" and concludes " As far as I can see the only way is to privatise the BBC"

The BBC is bias - PERIOD - and because that bias is INSTITUTIONALISED and those in the BBC are mostly all left leaning then NOTHING will change until the licence fee tax is turned off.

Saturday, 26 October 2013

# 271 - WAR - The BBC and Climate Change.

Two great articles on Climate Change in last and this week's Spectator.

Last week we have Matt Ridley under the title 'Panic over!' explaining how any rise in temperature and indeed even carbon in the atmosphere is good for us. Of course this is NOT a subject the BBC even considered during its coverage of the latest IPCC report.

And this week James Delingpole, author of 'Watermelons', analyses and exposes the bias in the BBC's reporting of Climate Change on Radio 4's programme Feedback.

The BBC is very very very bias on Climate Change!! 

Friday, 25 October 2013

# 270 - WAR - Newsnight and the Guardian

Ross Clark of the Daily Mail has done sterling work today in the paper cataloguing the undoubted connection between Newnight and the Guardian.


Just in case you have forgotten the new Editor of Newsnight came form the Guardian.

The Guardian's influence over Newnight is considerable.

Wednesday, 23 October 2013

# 269 - WAR - Lord Hall quizzed by MPs.

Shock horror surprise!!

I read in the Telegraph today that Lord Hall of Birkenhead conceded that the corporation had to "avoid group-think" and admitted that the BBC is at risk of developing a "metropolitan bias."

He went on to concede that the corporation buys more copies of the Guardian than any other Newspaper!!!!

The BBC is institutionally biased to the left of British politics, is pro the EU having recieved soft loans from them and pro climate change having brought into the 'Green Agenda.'

Monday, 21 October 2013

# 268 - WAR - The Sunday Telegraph 20th Oct 2013

The Sunday Telegraph had a real go at the bias in the BBC last Sunday with its leader on page 33 titled:-

Are you happy, Tony Hall, about the BBC's bias?

Well exactly I've been asking the same questions for years!

The Leader pulled from two stories in the paper.

The first on page 2 by David Barrett which highlighted the bias reporting on the 10 O'clock news last Monday by Mark Easton, the home editor, in the wake of the European Commission's report on immigration. Iain Duncan Smith criticised it as unbalanced, which reading the transcript of the report clearly shows that it was.

Next on page 28 Robin Aitken, who was a BBC reporter for 25 years on the Today programme, wrote under the heading:-


Robin Aitken has just written a book of this name in which he clearly catalogues numerous examples to show why the BBC is bias.

For example he points out the the BBC's coverage of the Ralph Miliband affair concentrated on attacking the Daily Mail rather than asking the vital question as to whether Ed Miliband is a 'cultural Marxist' as a result of his father's influences. That was and is the important issue and not whether Ed's father hated Britain or not.

After 25 years in the BBC Robin Aitken should know if the BBC's reporting is balanced. My own analysis over the years concludes:-

The BBC is institutionally bias.  

Sunday, 13 October 2013

# 267 - WAR - The BBC protects its friends in the Guardian.

Robert Halfon Tory MP said last week ' It is incredibly sad that our national broadcaster has seemingly chosen to side with the Guardian and impose a news blackout on an alleged major threat to our national security by a national newspaper.'

The BBC obviously 'rejected this suggestion' but the trouble is they have shown INSTITUTIONALLY BIAS for so long they simply don't see how biased they are.

The Mail's Editor Paul Dacre said on Saturday :-

 ' This week the head of MI5 - subsequently backed by the PM, Deputy PM, Home Secretary, and Labour's elder statesman Jack Straw - effectively accused the Guardian of aiding terrorism by publishing stolen secret security files.

The story - which is of huge significance - was given scant coverage by the BBC which only a week ago had devoted days of wall-to-wall pejorative coverage to the Mail.

Again, I ask fair readers, what is worse: to criticise the views of a Marist thinker, whose ideology is anathema to most and who had huge influence on the man who could one day control our security forces... or to put British lives at riskby helping terrorist?'

The bias BBC always makes its choice based on protect the left and attack the right.

Thursday, 10 October 2013

# 266 - WAR - Energy price rises.

6 O'clock news on BBC 1 led with the SSE energy rise of 8.2%.

Why is this the lead story and still nothing on the Guardian newspaper damaging our security service - a much bigger story by any measure?

Because this gives the Guardian reading BBC the chance to attack the Tories and give Ed Miliband an uninterrupted one to one while the balance provided by Cameron has him talking to a group of workers in a factory. Miliband churned out some classic anti government pro consumer rhetoric.

When Miliband was interviewed why was he not challenged on introducing the MOST expensive bill in our history, The Climate Change Act 2008, when he was Secretary of State for Energy. This is one of the key reasons our energy bills are rising.

There is also a belief that Newsnight did not cover this story and the speech by Spy Chief Andrew Parker on Tuesday because the Editor of Newsnight is Ian Katz an ex-Guardian Executive. Well I never did who would ever expect that!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

If you want to watch left wing bias in action just watch the BBC news.

Monday, 7 October 2013

# 265 - WAR - The Respect at work Review 2012.

The above review or known as the Rose Report as it was led by Dinah Rose QC was commissioned by the BBC last year to look into 'haressment' at the BBC.

One of the submissions to the review was the dossier 'Bullying and Harassment at the BBC' which was compiles by the National Union of Journalists.

Despite there being ample evidence that the BBC is rife with bullying and sexual harassment little has changed as managers close ranks and most complainants fear that pursuing grievances will jeopardise their careers.

Over the years the list of reports, reviews and comments from departed BBC employees of all ranks have all highlighted work place problems and of course bias. Yet despite these reports and comments Old Auntie just keeps going on and on.

The BBC is far too large, cumbersome, bureaucratic, isolated from reality and institutionally biased to change.

Only two things will change the BBC. First when the money, in the form of the licence fee, is severely  restricted if not scrapped and politicians develop sufficient guts to insist on wholesale changes.      

Sunday, 6 October 2013

# 264 - WAR - Ed Miliband and his Marxist father.

I think my only comment on this is to quote Rod Liddle in this weeks Spectator in which he says :-

" I could write an article insisting that David Cameron was created from the frozen semen of Adolf Hitler by Soviet scientists and that he enjoyed nightly intercourse with feral goats - and still the Beeb and Channel 4 wouldn't give a monkey's. 'He's probably right,' they would all be saying to themselves, 'for once'. There would be no calls for sacking, or prosecutions. The Guardian 'Comment is Free' website would be utterly uninterested."

And there you have the BBC's bias explained from a former editor of the BBC Radio 4's Today programme who is still a member of the Labour party albeit he is in my opinion nothing like as 'pink' as he once was.

The Right don't complain about BBC bias perhaps for fear of upsetting the them while the Left are amongst friends at the BBC and complain about and to anyone who challenges their take on things. Also it is as though the have a guilty conscience which needs to be defended.?

Thursday, 3 October 2013

# 263 - WAR - Russians hold Green Peace crew for piracy!

With regards my joke in post # 262 I cannot recall the BBC putting this story on their main TV news items.


No real surprise there then!!!

# 262 - WAR - Biker joke!!

A Biker in a combat jacket is riding by the zoo in London when he sees a little girl leaning into the lion's cage. Suddenly, the lion grabs her by the collar of her jacket and tries to pull her inside to slaughter her, under the eyes of her screaming parents.
The biker jumps off his
bike, runs to the cage and hits the lion square on the nose with a powerful punch.
Whimpering from the pain the lion jumps back letting go of the girl, and the biker brings her to her terrified parents, who thank him endlessly. A reporter has watched the whole event.
The reporter addressing the
biker says, 'That was the most gallant and brave thing I've seen a man do in my whole life.'

The biker replies, 'Why, it was nothing, really, the lion was behind bars. I just saw this little kid in danger and acted as I felt right.

The reporter says, 'Well, I'll make sure this won't go unnoticed. I'm a Guardian journalist you know, and tomorrow's paper will have this story on the front page... So, what do you do for a living and what political affiliation do you have?'
The biker replies, I work at Buckingham Palace
and I'm a Conservative.
The journalist leaves.
The following morning the biker buys the Guardian to see if it indeed brings news of his actions, and reads, on the front page:



     ...and THAT pretty much sums up the approach of the left leaning news these days so typical of the Guardian and BBC...?









Thursday, 26 September 2013

# 260 - WAR - BBC dumbs down science reports the Telegraph.

Whoever would have thought so?!


The BBC for some time now caters for the lowest common denominator.

Don't expect the BBC in general to attempt to lift people up to a scholarly level any more.

The BBC dumbs down as well as being bias.

I'm glad I don't pay my TV licence and why should I. The BBC's output is meant to be balanced and it clearly isn't. If I brought a can of baked beans and it contained chick peas as well I'd demand my money back.

Of course that isn't an option with the BBC so I just don't pay them!

As I see it it is a simple consumer protection issue.

# 259 - WAR - BBC gets behind Global Warming zealots.

Having just listened to the 6 O'clock news on BBC1 it is now clear all week the BBC has been getting behind the Global Warming / Climate Change zealots to help them get back on track.

There has been admission that the temperature has NOT risen in the last 15 years, that the glaciers in the Himalayas  are about to disappear and that the the extent of man-made emissions speeding up GW is not known.

OK as far as it goes but then reports go on that GW is happening like tonight when we were told clams in the Irish Sea show signs of warming in their growing rings and shots of industrial towers belching out smoke or more likely water vapour!!

Now the facts are that the in the last 100 years the temperature up to 15 years ago had gone up by 0.74 C and in the last 50 years by 0.13. However over the past 15 years air temperatures at the Earth’s surface have been flat while greenhouse-gas emissions have continued to soar. The world added roughly 100 billion tonnes of carbon to the atmosphere between 2000 and 2010. That is about a quarter of all the CO₂put there by humanity since 1750. And yet, as James Hansen, the head of NASA’s Goddard Institute for Space Studies, observes, “the five-year mean global temperature has been flat for a decade.”

Not only does the BBC fail to point out this anomaly it also COMPLETELY fails to talk about the ADVANTAGES of GW always leaving us with the impression that GW is and will cause us problems.

I say bring GW on as the Romans found in their Roman Optimum (c.100BC-300AD) they could grow vines in Northern England and those living in the Medieval Warm Period (c. 900-1400 AD) didn't seem to fall apart and both these periods were hotter than now.

I would dearly love to to grab a red hot poker and administer it to the BBC journalists who have been brainwashed into believing that this whole GW issue is man-made and will cause us problems.

# 258 - WAR - Science Britannica BBC 2 Wednesday 25th.

Only saw a bit of this programme narrated by Professor Brian Cox which celebrated Britain's pivotal role in creating modern science.

funnily enough I caught the bit on Climate Change in which, in his soft reasonable voice, he said the matter was settled because the overwhelming view was based on scientific consenus and peer review.

He said individual books with a contrary view were just that an individuals view and therefore could be discounted as not following the consensus.

For balance this programme at this point should have mentioned the many books and scientists who disagree with the supposed consensus on climate change but have great difficulty being heard, especially from the likes of the BBC, who give them little to no airtime.

While I appreciate the programme was about 'science' for balance the 'politics' of Climte Change should have been mentioned. Also they should have explained how there is now big money to be had in agreeing with the consensus where as Climate Change sceptics earn little to nothing from their stance. This alone surely makes their veiws worthy of consideration.

Climate Change sceptics strike me as simply being after the truth and have not been taken in by the huge amount of propaganda we are all made to endure to fit with this current cosy consensus from those who earn a fortune keeping this myth going.

Wednesday, 25 September 2013

# 257 - WAR - Shrinking Glaciers.

Last night at 10.25pm on News at 10 there was another follow up item from the night before but his time on shrinking glaciers. This of course was due to Global Warming  but the trouble is the night before we were informed that the temperature had NOT increased in the last ten years!!!!!

So what is shrinking those glaciers????

Could it be all the hot air coming out of the BBC!!

I remember when Cameron went off to Norway to hug a huskie he was on a retreating glacier just for good measure. However I seem to recall a story from the time which said that the next door glacier was advancing!!

The BBC is very bias in favour of the 'green' agenda which goes with their whole 'Guardian' outlook on life. 


Tuesday, 24 September 2013

# 256 - WAR - News at 10 last night - Global Warming.

The item at 10.21pm on the news started with the statement that 100 scientists were meeting to discuss their reaction to the fact the temperature has not gone up in the lat 10 years - something I and others have been pointing out for years.

Who are these 100 scientists because from past analysis they are NOT all scientists so why does the BBC say they are?

Next they now at least admit the rather embarrassing fact that the temperature has not gone up in the last 15 years which the called a 'pause' but ow do they know it is not a 'reversal' in the trend?

Finally to attempt to add balance to the report they interviewed a blogger I had never hear of who simply said they pro global warming side must start admitting what they don't know. Why do the BBC NEVER interview a renowned global warming sceptic on such news items. How about the journalists Christopher Booker or James Delingpole, or politicians like Helmner or Lawson( he is occasionally aired) or one of the many scientists who have remained independent of the green lobby and believe the whole thing is mostly bunkum?

The BBC will remain institutionally bias until it is taken off the public life support of the taxpayer funded licence fee and they have to exist in the real world.

Monday, 16 September 2013

# 255 - WAR - Peter Sissons on the BBC

Great article in the Sunday Telegraph by Peter Sissons over the weekend in which he listed the the damage the corporation had inflicted on itself in recent months. These were NOT note damage inflicted from outside the BBC but self inflicted damage which could have been avoided!

1. Jimmy Saville mishandled from start.
2. George Entwistle's severance package after 54 days was £1.3 million.
3. Newsnight and the Lord McAlpine scandal.
4. BBC bias over the Andrew Michell 'Plebgate'story.
5. £100 million wasted on 'tapeless' IT project.
6.£369 millions in severence payments.

Not bad for a self inflicted wound in just a few months.

When Sissons joined the BBC the DG Micheal Checkland was paid £100,000 or £210,00 in today's money. When Mark Thompson left the job a year ago he was on 4 times that and his Deputy Mark Byford was on 2.5 times the Checkland benchmark.

Now if we add to the above list with  - The new BBC centre in Salford cost £200 million and the refurbishment of Broadcasting house Central London cost £1 billion and was £55 million over budget it is also crystal clear the BBC have lost the value of money.

He ends the article with this - " So long as the BBC goes on rewarding failure, changing the structures will achieve nothing.It needs a change of culture, the emergence of a new generation of managers who are not held in contempt, and who are doing the job for something other than the money."

Here here to that.

Sunday, 8 September 2013

# 254 - WAR - BBC pay offs, sexism and ageism.

Good article by Selina Scott in the Sunday Mail confirming ageism amongst BBC staff happened and probably still does for as she amusingly puts it ' When you age exceeds your bra size.... the BBC sacks you!!'

She also found the BBC full of predatory bosses and quotes from Fern Britton's recent autobiography how Frank Bough had leant across to her and whispered in her ear "well young lady, I wonder how long it will be before I am having an affair with you."

Finally she also highlights the £25 million to 150 departing bosses and the pending clash between Patten and Thompson.

As I've said before the BBC is institutionally bias and I'd also add corrupted and NOTHING will change until it is broken up.

It is beyond reform it is just too big.  One day the BBC dinosaur will face extinction. 

# 253 - WAR - Artic ice

Well for years I have been saying that since 1997 the temperature has actually gone down very slightly and also that while the Artic ice does change from year to year overall it is not reducing and now as reported in Sunday Mail, in an article by David Rose, we have proof.

In 2007 the global warming friendly BBC reported that by the summer of 2013 all the Artic ice would have disappeared. However the facts are that this summer the ice cover is 60% more than last year.

Don't expect an apology form the BBC as they will more likely fill our screens with the shot of the lone polar bear on an iceberg and the crumbling ice sheets into the sea.

Oh! and by the way there have never been MORE polar bears than we have now and EVERY year the ice breaks off into the sea.

Saturday, 7 September 2013

Tuesday, 3 September 2013

# 251 - WAR - How and why the BBC lie about Norway and the EU.

Here Richard North shows up the BBC for lying over Norway's relationship with the EU.


The BBC shows a pro EU bias in it coverage of Europe which is the main reason I do not pay my TV licence.

Wednesday, 28 August 2013

# 250 - WAR - Climate Change, Badgers and Fracking.

1. Climate Change

On Life Scientific on Radio 4 on at 9.00am on Tuesday morning professor Joanna Haigh was allowed to exhort that with the odd wobble the temperature is continuing to rise. Well the facts are that since 1998 the temperature has fallen slightly - that is some wobble I'd say.

But then as the enlightened know and see the BBC clearly supports the Climate Change agenda from the various Green lobbies.

2. Badgers

The BBC bagder coverage is bias in favour of Brock.

However I would heartly contend that had the BBC reported, when covering the topic of the culling of badgers, that anything from 500,000 to 1,000,000 deer are culled every year and that the increase in badgers has directly lead to to a decrease in hedgehogs the whole story over the past fews years would have been seen in a different light and the vocal Green lobby could have been made to look ridiculous.

At least the BBC have covered that culls in Australia, New Zealand and Canada have worked.

3. Fracking

Again jugding by the airtime given to the professional protestors at Balcombe, West Sussex it is clear the BBC is NOT being even handed. A huge part of the story completely missed by the BBC is that the Green Lobbying industry in Brussels is campaigning to try and get the EU to make fracking in the EU practically impossible. The reason that the Green lobby are pushing for this is because virtually all they stand for would go up in smoke if fracking was allowed to flourish.

Personally if the Green lobby is against fracking I'm for it big time. As I see it NOTHING used or involved in fracking is not already found on our planet and as to 'stuff'' getting into out water supplies I would have thought if this ever happened the various filter systems of our Water Boards would pick this up.

Monday, 12 August 2013

# 249 - WAR - Report confirms BBC is bias!

I have been saying this for years.


I've been critically observing the BBC for years and noted the bias to the left - now a report confirms this with statistics.

Clearly I'm not surprised as on any given day a simple analysis of the BBC's output will show the following:-

1. Guardian quoted more than any other paper.
2. Right wingers given 'harder' interviews to left wingers.
3. Negative attitude to government 'CUTS' (if only they were cutting!)
4. More interviews and presentations from left wing think tanks etc
5.More interviews with left leaning members of the public.
6. Too ready to knock the bankers and the rich. ( what a cheek from the rich privileged BBC!)

The BBC IS Institutionally bias and will remain so until the licence fee goes.

Sunday, 21 July 2013

# 248 - WAR - Lord Hall's bias to a friend's wife.

All those who read this blog should know the BBC's output is bias in favour of climate change, the EU and the left of British politics.

We also know that the BBC shows bias in the selection of their staff only advertising in the Guardian and again only seriously considerng those with a left wing bias.

Now we have another type of bias with the director-general Lord Hall appointing his wife's friend Suzanne Heywood to a £600,000 two month contract to review making the corporation a 'simpler place to work.'

Nice work if you can get - I'll scratch your left wing back if you scratch mine!!

Sunday, 14 July 2013

# 247 - WAR - The romances of the BBC 2's Stephanie Flanders.

I just think it sums up the staff of the BBC so well that E Miliband told a celebrity magazine this week that he had once gone out with Stephanie Flanders as had Ed Balls.

As the saying goes it is nice to keep things in the family!!

Can you imagine the story being that Stephanie Flanders in her youth had dated Cameron and then  Osborne - exactly impossible.

My Lord I rest my case!!!! 

# 246 - WAR - Charles Moore on BBC bias.

Well worth a read:-


Sunday, 7 July 2013

# 245 - WAR - Does a goldfish in a bowl know its goldfish in a bowl?

I love this quote from Peter Hitchens today:-

"The BBC could never know it was biased just as  a male goldfish in a bowl doesn't know he is a goldfish or that he is in a bowl!"

He goes on to say - "This is because  BBC people have no friends who disagree with them and despise moral and social conservatives as morally evil people.

Then I read on Saturday that Emily Maitlis of Newsnight said this week of the conservative Party after the referendum vote:-

"Cameron is in hock to his party on Europe - otherwise he would not have this crazy Private Members' Bill which has no chance of ever being enacted into legislation."

So there is a bit of BBC unbias reporting for you - NOT!!!!!!

And finally we have Nicky Campbell on 5 Live conducting a phone in asking if the late bank holiday in August should be renamed Margaret Thatcher Day which was followed by an hour of Thatcher bashing.

Even in death the BBC cannot resist the chance to have a pop at Mrs T.

Isn't it strange how organisations who have been identified as being institutionally bias, like the Metropolitan Police for example, have all had to change but dear Old Auntie just keeps the bias going despite endless reviews, reports and comments from ex-employees pointing out the bias.


Friday, 5 July 2013

# 244 - WAR - Your money squandered and an admission of bias.

I make no apologies for these two stories coming from the Daily Mail as while the MSM can all be tarred with the same brush of often reporting in a very shallow and superficial way IMO I find the Daily Mail can be the most robust at times on taking on the BBC and the liberal left which is why the likes of Polly Toynbee sound so venomous when they mention its name. 

Interestingly this is probably why the Daily mail outsellsall the other papers!

Headlines in the DM on Tuesday read:-

The BBC broke rules with pay-offs of £369million

The BBC stood accused of an 'outrageous' disregard for license-fee payers' money on Monday after spending watchdog found it broke its own rules by handing staff £369million in severance payments.

This went to 7,500 staff of which 401 senior staff were given £61 million.

My comment - ' Nice work if you can get it!'

Then the next day I read the headline:-

BBC chief admits: We had a 'deep liberal bias'

This refered to the  the commnet from former news chief Helen Boaden who admitted that the 'deep liberal bias' in the institution prevented it from reporting on immigration properly.

The report also highlighted the bias over the BBC's coverage of the EU.

My comment - ' so no surprise there then I've been saying this for years!'

Incidently tihs report commissioned by the BBC Trust cost £175,000.

Sadly the BBC remains Institutionally biased.

Monday, 1 July 2013

# 243 - WAR - Was Nelson Mandela a terrorist or not?

The best the BBC could do on their 10 o'clock news last night was to say Nelson Mandela was 'branded' a terrorist!

Surely he was either a terrorist or he wasn't.

Here are a few facts:-

Nelson Mandela co-founded 'Umkhonto we Sizwe', MK for short,  which translated as Spear of the Nation, and was the armed wing of the ANC.

MK launched its first guerrilla attacks against government installations on 16 December 1961. It was subsequently classified as a terrorist organisation by the South African government and the United States, and banned.

Their campaign involved bombings and also the use of landmines . The landmine campaign was short lived as the deaths caused were indiscriminate many of the victims being black labourers.

Analysing one period between 1976-1982 there were 150 cases of armed action killing 230 people. 30 were from the security forces and of the remainder 60 were white and 140 black.

Finally can I emphasis two things Nelson Mandela co-founded MK and, especially after Obama's visit to Mandela's jail, the USA agreed that the MK was a terrorist organisation and banned it.

The BBC's news output is now so oftern nothing more than pure propaganda.

Saturday, 22 June 2013

# 242 - WAR - The BBC the enemy within.

Autonomousmind in good form on our fifth column that is the bias BBC. I give you the link and the article below:-


What’s in a name? BBC Northern Ireland conducts cringeworthy contortion
The city of Londonderry in Northern Ireland was given its official and legal name by Royal Charter in 1662.
Although the republican council in the city changed its own identity to Derry City Council in 1984, as a symbol of its rejection of the union with the United Kingdom and desire for unification with the Republic of Ireland, the High Court confirmed in a 2007 decision that the name of the city remained unchanged. There is no confusion here, even of locals prefer to call the city ‘Derry’ its offical and legal name is Londonderry.
So a certain amount of teeth grinding was provoked today when I heard news presenters and continuity announcers on BBC Northern Ireland – the state’s public service broadcaster – constantly referring to the city as ‘Derry Londonderry’ in a crass attempt to sit on the fence over the city’s name.
Neither the UK government nor the Northern Ireland Assembly in Stormont have changed the name of Londonderry. So why is the state’s publicly funded broadcaster being allowed to distort the official identity of Londonderry in this ludicrous manner?
It has long been asserted that BBC NI and Ulster Television (UTV) are reservoirs of republican support and sympathies. This editorial decision by the BBC does nothing to disprove that assertion. The default position of the self loathers and socialist broadcast activists at the Continuity BBC to place a premium on any stance that undermines anything British, but surely this sop to those who reject and oppose Northern Ireland’s British identity has no place on the state broadcaster. This contortion over the city’s name is only being carried out to appease the sensitivities of republicans in Londonderry.
Should the day come that the majority in Northern Ireland choose democratically to leave the union and subsume themselves into the Republic of Ireland, and Londonderry is renamed legally, will the BBC still refer to it as ‘Derry Londonderry’ to acknowledge the sensitivities of the unionists living in the city who wish to remain part of the UK and have so far resisited the republican cultural cleansing that has been taking place to drive protestant unionists out? Not bloody likely.
The BBC is still the United Kingdom’s fifth column, it remains the enemy within. This is just another example of it.

# 241 - WAR - A dead Auntie walking!!

The BBC has been outpaced by reality, and has become unsustainable

By Mark Wallace
Mark on Twitter.

The BBC has been closed down. 

The furore and shock such a headline would stir up is almost unimaginable. Questions would be yelled in Parliament, Polly Toynbee would sob blue murder in the pages of the Guardian and parts of Twitter would solidify into pitchforks and burning torches.

Far-fetched as it may seem, last week Greeks awoke to their own national equivalent of such news. The state broadcaster, ERT, was closed with immediate effect by the Prime Minister as unaffordable and unviable.

Of course, Greece is Greece - once a byword for classical ruins, now a byword for modern economic ruin. Extreme measures are to be expected in a country in which the outright majority of young people are unemployed and a delegation of European Central Bank officials hold unaccountable control over fiscal policy.

It could never happen here, could it? 

It seems highly unlikely that it would ever happen in Britain for the reasons it happened in Greece (unless Ed Balls gets a really long stretch as Chancellor, in which case all bets on the state of the nation's finances are off). But for deep-rooted reasons, the BBC has serious trouble ahead; we just don't like to admit it.

Turning a blind eye

Human beings - and the British in particular - are naturally small-c conservative creatures. We may gripe and grumble, or wish for various things to be improved, but an institution has to be very obviously flawed and failing before we will accept that its very future is in doubt. 

Ironically, this preference for the comfort of things we know rather than the discomfort of revolutions tends to result in crises. Instead of identifying problems which can be fixed or planned for, we sit in blissful ignorance until they are too large and too immediate to ignore any longer. 

This is the reason why so many disasters seem to spring from nowhere, leaving people wondering why no-one saw them coming. Consider the banks which plunged almost immediately from untrammeled success into total disaster - or the Euro, which some British commentators still refuse to accept is fatally flawed. Anyone who remembers the titanic nationalised industries of the pre-Thatcher period will recall the air of permanence which hung about them for so long - and the remarkable speed with which they were torn down.

So it may be with the BBC.

We all know Auntie. It has become a calendar for our lives. Most of us were raised on a staple diet of Blue Peter, then Grange Hill, growing up to shout at Question Time, choking on our cornflakes out over the Today Programme and eventually find ourselves wondering if listening to the Archers means we are officially old. The BBC News website is one of the most read news sites in the world. Our lives are shot through with the Corporation's output.

But its size belies its growing weakness. 

Outpaced by technology

Technological changes mean that the television licence funding model is swiftly becoming unenforceable and outdated.

Funding the BBC through compulsory licences was first conceived 86 years ago, in the form of the radio licence (later fully replaced by the television licence). It was a simple solution in a simple market. At the time, the Corporation was the only broadcaster in the entire country - if you bought a device to receive broadcasts, you were by definition using its services and you were easy to identify in the shop.

Now, as the BBC's tenth decade approaches, that model is broken. 

The simplicity of the system was first fractured by the advent of commercial TV channels and radio stations. Ever since, the Television Licensing Authority (TVLA) has fought a war to enforce payment. While those of us with TVs are assailed with untrue stories of detection vans which can prove that your aerial is receiving a signal, people who prefer not to own a TV have found themselves bombarded with letters from officials who refuse to believe them.

But it is the advent of the internet which rings the death knell for the licence fee. This week, a Freedom of Information request revealed that there are now more than 400,000 households in Britain who inform the TVLA each year that they do not need to buy a licence - and that's just the number who actually respond to the hectoring letters they receive.

Many may well be people who don't watch TV, but it seems clear that a growing number are watching exclusively through the internet. It's perfectly legal to watch catch-up services, rather than live broadcasts, online without a licence. With the fee rising just as incomes have been squeezed it is unsurprising that many have chosen to do so.

I first noticed this among my friends four or five years ago. A growing number were buying a TV, hooking it up to their laptop or Playstation and watching shows through that, legally and licence-free. And why not? Plenty of others were watching live TV online in outright breach of the rules, and yet the TVLA proved unable to prove they were doing so.

Self-destruction, on-demand

Ironically, it is the BBC itself which has pioneered this way to avoid paying. It is now many years since the Corporation focused solely on broadcasting, and it has expanded into every conceivable form of media.

As part of that policy, along came iPlayer - the incredibly useful, legally free to access, online catch-up service. With broadband connections spread across much of the country, it runs like a dream - and is proving to be a nightmare for the TVLA. In terms of the service it offers, iPlayer is precisely the right response to the digital age - it offers flexibility and choice, rather than fixed schedules, it is easily searchable and browsable. In short, it provides a service completely out of keeping with the compulsory licence fee model.

Technology - and particularly the technology we use to consumer media - is moving swiftly away from top-down, one-size-fits-all paying and consuming. In music, not only has the physical been replaced by the digital, the bulk purchase in the form of an album has been replaced by micro-purchasing, song by song. At a click of a button I can buy any particular episode of any commercially available TV show, or any film, that takes my fancy - or I can rent access to them for the weekend. I can design my own TV package through Sky or Vigrin - choosing not to pay for sport or children's television if I don't intend to use it.

So not only is the television licence now legally unenforceable, it is clunky and out of step with the wider world. As consumers become used to building their own digital radio stations based on personal preference, having access to a thousand times the capacity of an old-fashioned video shop through their laptop, or picking and choosing the form of their cable TV packages, more will start to wonder why they pay £145.50 for the BBC at all.

There are plenty of other arguments to be had about whether the BBC is a good or bad thing.

It does produce much high quality drama - though notably much of that has been made in partnership with American cable companies or to pursue international profits. And the need for it to generate poorer quality products like "Hotter Than My Daughter" or "Snog, Marry, Avoid" is questionable to say the least.

There is also clear evidence of political bias withing its reporting of the EU, green policies, fiscal issues among other topics. I tend towards the cock-up rather than the conspiracy explanation, in that I suspect this is the product of groupthink and the impractical idea that one organisation can represent all views at the same time. Whatever the cause, the impact of unfairly slanted reporting from a state broadcaster is both sizeable and negative.

And we are all aware of the series of scandals which has struck at the BBC's greatest asset - the trust people place in it. From the horrifying facts of the Savile case, through the vast amounts paid to ineffective senior executives, to the disgraceful treatment of Lord McAlpine, the Corporation has lost much of its friendly reputation.

But whatever your view may be on its quality, bias or scandals, none of them poses the greatest threat to the Corporation's future. Many would make a case for the BBC's abolition, while plenty of others would line up to defend it to the death. In reality, either case is irrelevant. It is a simple truth that the BBC as we know it - licence-funded, compulsory, immovable - is unsustainable, a dead Auntie walking.

Wednesday, 12 June 2013

# 240 - WAR - NO surprises as the BBC wastes your money.

Good Leader in the Daily Mail today titled - Price of BBC bias.

In this article recent examples of the BBC's profligacy are listed such as:-

1. £1 billion on the New Broadcasting House (over budget and behind schedule) now the biggest newsroom in Europe.

2.  £1 billion on the 'white elephant' MediaCity in Salford, with £24 million spent on bribing staff to move.

3. Well over £100 million down the drain on computer system which the Mail says the former DG deceived MPs about.

4. Losses of £10 million on sale of studios in Manchester.

But why should they worry as it is NOT their money but yours. This is the public sector mentality writ large which pervades the BBC's output on which most Britons depend on for their news.

Where public money is concerned, the still bloated BBC, sides instinctively with the spenders against the providers, the state employee against the taxpayer.

Of course the Left's voice must be head but when the BBC's default position is taken from the Guardian and their output is dominated by the 'Left's Agenda' then as the Mail says we should all be worried.

Thursday, 30 May 2013

# 238 - WAR - Newsnight 29th May - Pro EU bias.

During the interview with the very eloquent and well spoken Polish Foreign Minster Radoslaw Sikorski  ( also a friend of Cameron form his Oxford days) Gavin Esler allowed to get away with the comment that should the UK leave the EU then our trade with the USA as part of the new deal with the EU would be threatened.

This is simply NOT true as on leaving the EU we would in all probability be in the EEA so our trade would be unaffected.

This isn't objective reporting by the BBC on the EU but pure propaganda.

Thursday, 16 May 2013

# 237 - WAR - Wasting your money and a bias complaints procedure.

1. Wasting your money - I don't think I need to write too much on this for you to get the picture!
The papers are full of the white elephant that is their new BBC HQ in Salford which cost you all £1 billion. Further more the National Audit Office has criticised the over generous £24 million paid out in allowances to get staff to move there - 11 staff had as much as £150,000 each.

The reason the BBC get away with this is because they are largely unaccountable and of course are not spending their own money but yours!

2. Complaints procedure - When a viewer heard a Presenter, on the programme 'Thinking Allowed' on Radio 4, using the expression 'cox sackers' over the story about the sacking of the cox from the Cambridge rowing team she complained about the 'grossly offensive play on words'.
The complaint was rejected by the programme team and the next level above them the editorial complaints unit so she then appealed to the BBC Trust who ruled in her favour.

The reason of course the first two levels rejected the complaint is that they operate in a bubble of thier own making and treat you and I will contempt. The surprise is that the Trust upheld the complaint but uphold they did in a 5 page report!!!

Sunday, 12 May 2013

# 236 - WAR - Who the BBC invite to interview is the key to their bias.

Can I remind you that the BBC operates under a Royal Charter to report in an unbiased fashion.

Over the years their standard answer to a particularly bias report has been to say that over time the BBC do ensure balance even if one report was one sided.

The trouble is this is difficult to prove with out monitoring ALL their output over a considerable period of time so the BBC carries on with its bias pretty unperturbed.

In the Sunday Mail and Telegraph today were 2 example of the BBC's bias.

1. In a letter in the Telegraph a John Whaley from Tilehurst, Berkshire pointed out how the likes of Ed Davey, Secretary of State for Energy, Ken Clarke, Former Justice Secretary, and Emma Reynolds shadow minster for Europe are never confronted on Question Time by the likes of Christopher Booker who would be in a position to challenge their half truths with some facts!

2. Peter Hitchens points out in a small piece that on Radio 4 recently John Humphrys "chortled through a Today programme 'debate' as two think-tank spokesmen both advocated decriminalising drugs". As PH went on to say isn't the BBC meant to be impartial?

So the thing to listen out for when tuned into the BBC is who they interview and debate with and how often they give soft interviews to the 'Left' and a hard time to those on the 'Right'.    

Saturday, 13 April 2013

# 235 - WAR - BBC bias now on automatic pilot!!!

Being institutionally bias the BBC's management and reporters just don't see it.  They have been brainwashed over many years to believe the Right are uncaring and the Left are compassionate. North Koreans have also been brainwashed again over many years to believe all their ills have been caused by the capitalist West. I think the power to brainwash should not be underestimated.ed

1. Question Time  - Last Thursday Charles Moore said that the BBC were being bias over the coverage of Margaret Thatcher's death and added that this is something they are not even aware of. More people SHOULD say this when given the chance especially Tory politicians but they are all too frit as Maggie would say!

2. The wicked witch is dead song - This was the LEAD item on the news at 4pm on Radio 2 yesterday and has been covered near the top since.Is it really that important or do the bias BBC just like to report the developments to this story becuase it promotes the anti Thatcher cause??
Anyway this issue is a matter of TASTE and GOOD MANNER and has nothing to do with Freedom of Speech. Freedom of speech should always take into account taste and good manners but having said that people can do what they like after the funeral but common decency should see restraint before it. Never forget the BBC have happily banned songs in the past and even TV shows -  for example doctoring Fawlty Towers because of supposed racist comments and not playing the Sex Pistols 'God Save the Queen' becuase it was considered offensive. SO WHAT IS THE DIFFERENCE NOW??? Its Maggie of course!!

3. BBC gagging orders - So the BBC have included a gagging order in the new DG's contract.
WHY - What do they have to hide?? BTW Tony Hall earns £450,000 so I'm glad I'm not contributing to any of that!!!

4. Director of Strategy and Digital - Is to be the ex Labour Culture Secretary Labout MP James Purnell on £295,000 - so absolutely NO bias there then!!!!!!!

The more people who decide not to pay their TV licence the more it would become a major story and issue for the BBC Never forget as a consumer you are asked to pay for the BBC but you are NOT getting what it says on the tin. Their reporting is bias and provably so - so why should you pay them to watch bias reporting?