The BBC, damned, again


by Al-Hack
31st October, 2006 at 2:46 pm    

According to the easily excitable Melanie Phillips, the BBC has gone from the Brazen Bias Corporation to the British Bigotry Corporation. “But this is much more than political bias. This is deep, culturally embedded, venomous bigotry. Yet to my knowledge there has been no inquest at the BBC, no expressions of concern by staff, no sign of life from the Governors. Astounding.

And what have they done to attract her ire (this time)? It was an episode of Spooks don’t you know. Well at least she’s getting better than the SWP at spinning those acronyms!


              Post to del.icio.us


Filed in: Humour,Media






48 Comments below   |  

Reactions: Twitter, blogs


  1. Leon — on 31st October, 2006 at 3:12 pm  

    She starts by saying: “Although I didn’t see it”

    Therein lay the value of her opinion on the matter…

  2. Don — on 31st October, 2006 at 3:27 pm  

    Damn, beat me to it.

  3. Neil — on 31st October, 2006 at 3:32 pm  

    I don’t see anything wrong with it. If 24 can broadcast nucluer bomb plots by Mid east terror groups covered up by american citizens (Season 2) then why can’t spooks show Israeli agents raiding the Saudi embassy dressed as Arabs?

    It’s not like israel doesnt do similar things. It has a long list of similar failed covert ops. E.g Lavon affair, saddam hussain assination at funeral. It’s only TV!

  4. Vikrant — on 31st October, 2006 at 3:37 pm  

    Therein lay the value of her opinion on the matter…

    Does she HAVE to see it to have an opinion… BBC IS biased… its anti-Israel, anti-India stance has been well documented. Too bad my parents pay for it…

  5. Anas — on 31st October, 2006 at 3:37 pm  

    Why does anyone take a word this woman says seriously at all? — Not least after she’s shown herself up to be a hypocrite of the worst kind and an apologist for terrorism(http://anask.wordpress.com/2006/10/29/who-is-she/).

    Abu Izzadeen, Abu Hamza and other Muslim counterparts of Philips are widely regarded as nuts and oddballs, so why isn’t she to the same extent.

  6. Vikrant — on 31st October, 2006 at 3:38 pm  

    Therein lay the value of her opinion on the matter…

    Does she HAVE to see it to have see the program to have an opinion… BBC IS biased, thats an old story… it’s anti-Israel, anti-India stance has been well documented. Too bad my parents pay for it…

  7. Anas — on 31st October, 2006 at 3:44 pm  

    Where, Vikrant, and by whom?

  8. Jai — on 31st October, 2006 at 3:56 pm  

    “Spooks” is quite brave in terms of the issues the show sometimes deals with. Last night’s episode was thought-provoking too. I can see why a lot of the plotlines would be perceived as controversial, but you can’t deny how timely much of it is.

  9. Sid — on 31st October, 2006 at 3:56 pm  

    Hey Mad Mel!

    Go back to the Middle Ages [blah blah]
    Freedom of speech [blah blah]
    Where were you in 1795? [blah blah]
    Liberal pluralist democratic values [blah blah]
    FoE [blah blah]

  10. PFM — on 31st October, 2006 at 4:02 pm  

    i watched spooks last night very intriguing, next shes gona be fighting the cause of the protestant church! and next she will be defending muslims!…. ok i lie will she hell!

    its funny how shes picking and choosing who to defend, hmm i wonder who owns her publishers…

  11. Leon — on 31st October, 2006 at 4:02 pm  

    Does she HAVE to see it to have an opinion… ]

    I never said she has to see it to have an opinion only that her opinion lacks value becuase she did, in fact, not see it.

  12. Vikrant — on 31st October, 2006 at 4:05 pm  
  13. Anas — on 31st October, 2006 at 4:11 pm  

    Thanks, Vik, I’ll check it out.

  14. Vikrant — on 31st October, 2006 at 4:12 pm  

    You guys can sings odes to ‘brave’ BBC, but it still ownt take away the fact BBC does HAVE anti-India (esp anti-Hindu), anti-Israel bias… have you ever noticed BBC’s inverted comma scepticism whenever it presents India or Israeli viewpoints…

  15. genghis — on 31st October, 2006 at 4:20 pm  

    BBC were accused of misleading reporting on the Isreali/Palestinian conflict by an independent review commissioned by the BBC Board of Directors:

    BBC ‘Misleading’

    Thus if anything it is PRO-ISREALI.

    But not surprised by the ranting of Melanie Phillips she loves playing the zionist victim status card. And continously confuses and conflates, Anti-Zionism and Anti-Semitism (same as sunny in that regard!)

  16. Leon — on 31st October, 2006 at 4:23 pm  

    It’s half a dozen of one and six other the other from were I stand.

    Everyones sees a bias that merely reflects their own lack of satification with BBC reporting.

    To me it looks far too corporate friendly (the amount of “stories” that are thinly veiled press releases from a PR department it does in the tech pages is a joke)…

    Vikrant, I think you’ll find that generalised and unsubstantiated statements like “You guys can sings odes to ‘brave’ BBC” have much value as anything the Daily Mail mouthpiece utters.

  17. sonia — on 31st October, 2006 at 4:25 pm  

    so do tell me vikrant which indian news outlets aren’t biased?

  18. Vikrant — on 31st October, 2006 at 4:43 pm  

    .so do tell me vikrant which indian news outlets aren’t biased?

    When did I ever claim that Indian media is unbiased… But then agins tabloid news channels from Bombay dont command same respect as the great Beeb.

  19. Vikrant — on 31st October, 2006 at 4:45 pm  

    Vikrant, I think you’ll find that generalised and unsubstantiated statements like “You guys can sings odes to ‘brave’ BBC” have much value as anything the Daily Mail mouthpiece utters.

    Well we do carry that lil “I believe in BBC” sticker at the bottom of our blog roll? The thing with media is that everyone has a bias. While ‘BBC’ pretends to be unbiased, Daily Mail doesnt claim so. Whats more Daily Mail isnt financed by my tax money, BBC is.

  20. Kulvinder — on 31st October, 2006 at 4:50 pm  

    Does she HAVE to see it to have see the program to have an opinion

    Winged monkeys won’t come down and snatch her grab if she hasn’t watched it, but its a little difficult to take seriously a journ…columnist who basically says ‘here is my opinion on something i know nothing about’

    If she said she saw spooks once and it was shit it’d have no problem, but to bring up a particular episode that you haven’t watched as ‘proof’ of the vast conspiracy at the bbc is a tad bizzare.

    I’ve never read any of her work, but apparently some say shes a repressive authoritarian bint with a massive pro-israel anti-goyim bias.

  21. genghis — on 31st October, 2006 at 4:50 pm  

    Vikki,

    BBC is indeed biaised. But towards the zionists!

  22. Anas — on 31st October, 2006 at 4:53 pm  

    I couldn’t comment on the BBC’s anti-Indian bias, but I am genuinely baffled at the accusation that it’s anti-Israeli. Especially when it broadcast a documentary by film maker Noam Shalev that was just a cleverly disguised piece of Israeli government propaganda:

    http://www.counterpunch.org/cook10122006.html

  23. genghis — on 31st October, 2006 at 4:54 pm  

    Kully,

    How dare you, she (mel), apparently, is the beacon of freedom of expression and is unbiaised and has a very balanced view of the world, loves multiculturism and above all has a healthy outlook on the future of a ethnically diverse britain.

  24. Kulvinder — on 31st October, 2006 at 4:55 pm  

    http://www.biased-bbc.blogspot.com/

    That site makes no sense to me, i literally (literally!) don’t get the fuss over the points they’re raising.

  25. Leon — on 31st October, 2006 at 5:02 pm  

    Well we do carry that lil “I believe in BBC” sticker at the bottom of our blog roll? The thing with media is that everyone has a bias. While ‘BBC’ pretends to be unbiased, Daily Mail doesnt claim so. Whats more Daily Mail isnt financed by my tax money, BBC is.

    The BBC isn’t financed via tax money. As for the log ask Sunny, it’s his site and his explanation you’re seeking. The BBC has imparliality built in to it’s charter, it doesn’t parade that as far as I’m aware. Just because it’s not perfect doesn’t mean there’s some conspiracy of bias at work.

  26. Sunny — on 31st October, 2006 at 5:05 pm  

    but it still ownt take away the fact BBC does HAVE anti-India (esp anti-Hindu), anti-Israel bias

    Bollocks. There are individual examples of bias (towards both sides as I’ve seen), but I still haven’t seen any examples of complete bias towards one side. If anything, and since the Hutton report, it has become less inquisitive of the government.

  27. Anas — on 31st October, 2006 at 5:08 pm  

    As a little test for any impartial observers on the BBC’s alleged anti-Israeli bias, I’d urge you to read the reports on the recent Lebanon conflict by organisations like Amnesty, Human Rights Watch,and then compare them to the BBC’s News output.

    Then read human rights reports (including those by Israeli human rights agencies such as B’TSelem) and the reports of other reliable impartial observers on Israel’s treatment of those in the occupied territories, compare them with the BBC coverage and then tell me that the BBC’s output is biased against Israel.

  28. soru — on 31st October, 2006 at 5:49 pm  

    Spooks is fun, but has about as much relation to the real world as Torchwood.

    In fact, Torchwood is more plausible, as noone knows what aliens and Time Lords are like, so I suppose they could be the way they are shown in the program. It is harder to believe that MI5 every single week has someone from MI6 assigned to it to help, every single week they are completly trusted without any suspicion, and every single week they turn out to be agents of a Mossad, Christian, American, Fascist or Serbian conspiracy.

    Has the program ever shown anyone from MI6 who wasn’t some variety of traitor?

  29. Yakoub/Julaybib — on 31st October, 2006 at 7:13 pm  

    Heaven forbid that anyone should imply Israel is not a shining beacon of open government, human rights and democracy. Did some of the Musi groups moan on when their is was an episode featuring Muslim terrorist? I suppose might have a point – let’s face it, programmes like this work on appealing to twerpy ideas about global politics and the Sun-muddled stereotypes that inevitable go with such faff. The problem with Mel baby is that, on matters of discrimination, she has tunnel vision. A tunnel wide enough for nanobots, to be precise.

    Wasalaam

    TMA

  30. sunray — on 31st October, 2006 at 10:13 pm  

    ‘Bollocks.’ I still haven’t seen any examples of complete bias towards one side

    Bollocks. Ive proven and sent you volumes on their Hindu bias re BBC Asian Network (althoguh I cant prove the same for BBC TV) but hey they are part of the BBC full stop.
    And to think they are asians as well!!
    They are being blantantly and openly being biased right now to Hindus and Sikhs but you still cant see it.

  31. El Cid — on 31st October, 2006 at 10:32 pm  

    I’m a big fun of spooks. Monday night wouldn’t be the same without it. I mean, what does she want … more makeover, mother-in-law swap, dodgy builders, pop idol, i’m a wanker get me out of here, shite?
    The writers would be a bit challenged to create .. what is it now.. three series based on home-grown moslem terrorist threat.
    I thought it was a cleverish twist (although I saw it coming early doors — honest). And is it that far-fetched to think Israel would try something underhand to avoid the Saudis going nuclear (understandable to some extent). Melanie.. you’re turning into a Jewish Mary Whitehouse love!
    Actually, I have an idea for a new episode. It involves the mayor of London being turned by al-Qaeda and helping to get a job on the London tube network for the son of a firebrand hooked-handed cunt of an Islamic cleric. Now that would be far-fetched!

  32. TheFriendlyInfidel — on 31st October, 2006 at 10:40 pm  

    Vote for your favorite biased BBC news article webedit at:

    http://newssniffer.newworldodour.co.uk/articles/recommended/list

    Go on its fun!

    TFI

  33. S — on 1st November, 2006 at 9:33 am  

    Hey Mel maybe mad and I like BBC news but she isn’t wrong about Spooks. It and most BBC drama is a stoppers wankfest.

    ep 1
    “It soon becomes clear that, far from being a foreign terror threat, a team of influential businessmen and politicians, led by Ros’s father, are attempting to take control of the government.”

    ep 2
    “A car bomb planted by the conspirators leaves Juliet paralysed. Meanwhile the weakened Prime Minister is preparing to announce the introduction of a dictatorship.”

    ep 4
    “With the assassin still in their control, and still eager to complete her ‘mission’, the team decide to take the law into their own hands. As the conference reaches its climax, they release the assassin. She kills the African leader before being shot herself by security.”

    ep 5
    “The team realise Ruth has been set up. Adam discovers that the terrorists’ deaths were faked to enable them to be tortured”

    ep 6+7
    “The team soon realise they’re actually dealing with an Israeli plot designed to discredit the Saudis and de-rail the nuclear deal.”

    etc etc.. ad nauseum

    ps I hate 24 which is similar bullshit.

  34. Chairwoman — on 1st November, 2006 at 10:15 am  

    Yeah, yeah, yeah, Mad Mel, BBC, Israel……..

  35. Leon — on 1st November, 2006 at 10:44 am  

    Ok, I’ll say it; Spooks is shi**e! It’s about as good as Neighbours or that X factor crap.

  36. sonia — on 1st November, 2006 at 11:10 am  

    i must say not having a tv is a nice cushion from all this sort of thing

  37. Leon — on 1st November, 2006 at 11:28 am  

    i must say not having a tv is a nice cushion from all this sort of thing

    You don’t have a TV?! What’s all your furniture pointed at??

  38. soru — on 1st November, 2006 at 11:32 am  

    fun fact about Spoooooks – one of the MI5 ‘insider consultants’ they use is David Shayler:

    I even came up with the title Spooks – as a joke.

    Interestingly, in that article a few years back, he was saying:

    I also advised Kudos that their proposed plotlines of violent anti-abortionists and international rightwing extremist conspiracies were the stuff of liberal-left fantasy rather than any reflection of the real and vital work MI5 does in protection of our security and our democracy.

    These days he is an full-on ‘no-planer‘ conspiracy theorist and friend of David Icke, and says stuff like:

    Until the truth of 9/11 and other false flag operations are exposed, the shadow government will continue to murder in the name of profit and pervert the democratic process through its ownership of the media and control of political parties by donation.

    amd

    The only explanation is that they were missiles surrounded by holograms made to look like planes…I know it sounds weird, but this is what I believe

  39. sonia — on 1st November, 2006 at 11:35 am  

    he heh leon :-)

  40. Leon — on 1st November, 2006 at 11:35 am  

    I know it sounds weird, but this is what I believe

    Translation: “If I say this crap, these conspiracy theory idiots will lap it up and make me rich beyond my wildest wet dreams”

  41. sonia — on 1st November, 2006 at 11:36 am  

    problem is it’s v. hard convincing the tv license people they have the same reaction : what you don’t have a tv?! ( yah we don’t believe you…we’re coming round..)

  42. Kulvinder — on 1st November, 2006 at 11:55 am  

    Ok, I’ll say it; Spooks is shi**e! It’s about as good as Neighbours or that X factor crap.

    Neighbours has consistently been the best soap opera on british television over the last 20 years. Eastenders exists in a depressive parallel dimension of east london and has the most nerve jangling storylines, characters and dialogue i’ve ever seen. Coronation street is a little better but is still basically crap. Neighbours shits on them all.

  43. Kulvinder — on 1st November, 2006 at 11:55 am  

    …so yeah :|

  44. Jai — on 1st November, 2006 at 12:04 pm  

    Paul Robinson Zindabad.

    Hell, Mrs Mangel Zindabad, that foxy minx.

  45. El Cid — on 1st November, 2006 at 3:25 pm  

    well i like it so nah… must be the violence

  46. El Cid — on 1st November, 2006 at 3:28 pm  

    mind you, it ain’t half hot mum was far, far better

  47. Sajn — on 1st November, 2006 at 4:08 pm  

    But not as good as Mind Your Language.

  48. Kismet Hardy — on 1st November, 2006 at 4:15 pm  

    How I adored that chirpy negro fellow Chalky in Up the Elephant & Round the Castle by that comedy genius Jim Davidson…

Sorry, the comment form is closed at this time.

Pickled Politics © Copyright 2005 - 2010. All rights reserved. Terms and conditions.
With the help of PHP and Wordpress.