The BBC in action

[Steve Harrison]

We've discussed the way the BBC have become another truth twisting, headline seeking tabloid outfit. Here's an interesting and very immediate example.

You may have heard the "Budget airlines cut safety corners" scare on the news this morning. Try comparing the BBC report

http://news.bbc.co.uk/hi/english/uk/newsid_2050000/2050777.stm

with the original on www.chirp.co.uk/

Note how

"Failing to fully comply with arrival noise abatement procedures"

becomes

"Pilots are also said to be ignoring longer flight paths which bypass residential areas and instead flying directly over villages and towns, increasing noise pollution"

Similarly

"...and an aggressive attitude on the R/T when given the explanation..."

becomes

"some pilots react "aggressively" when instructed by controllers to do something that could delay their flights"

and

"Failure to comply with assigned intermediate and final approach speeds"

translates as

"trying to save time by approaching airports too fast"

Oops, there's that speed thing again.

Actually, if you read some of the other reports on CHIRP there are FAR scarier things than the one the BBC have decided to turn into a major issue.

W@nkers

[Roadrunner]

Kill your speed, not a pigeon.

[JMorgan]

On R4 they were quoting a Times story
www.timesonline.co.uk/article/0,,2-330444,00.html
Until I read this article I wondered why Easy Jet were commenting on R4. Sounds more like one having a go at the other.

[Neil Menzies]

Cut your speed! A little maryjane does the trick.

[Neil Menzies]

I have to say I find the BBC reporting these days becoming much more "telling you what to think" instead of the uninvolved "telling you what's happened", and letting you come to your own conclusions.

I used to enjoy listening to the R4 Today program, but Mr. Humphrys has just become another mini-Paxman, and tries to jump down the throat of anyone putting forward a point of view he disagrees with.

[pbrettle]

I must admit that I am becoming increasingly dismayed by the media in this country. I 100% agree in that they are preaching to us and telling us what to think / believe / do which is totally contrary to what we are supposed to be about in a democracy.

Maybe I am getting old (31, 32 soon) but it is just ridiculous now. The BBC new website is a joke. They post up news items about "Housing market plunges" and "UK economy on brink", yet the same day the TV new is completely different with "Housing market still on increase" and "UK economy fairing well". If they were different companies then OK - but they are supposed to be telling the same news for christs sake.....

And the one that pi55es me off is when the media (papers & TV) go on and on about drug taking celebs.... Saying how wrong it is and how they are setting a bad example, and that it just completely fcuks up your life. Well, anyone met, know or been anywhere where there are these journos? They are all wacked out cocaine pissheads who could give a toss - two faced lying toe-rags...

Cheers,

Paul

[yertis]

Some things about the BBC that annoy Yertis:

1 Declaring as "News" things that have yet to happen - ie "The Government is expected to announce today"

2 Calling jet fighters "fighter-jets". Don't really know why that gets up my nose so much...

3 Using inch marks instead of quotation marks in captions.

4 Apparently believing that the world exists for the sole benefit of the BBC.

I'm surprised they let Jeremy Clarkson within hailing distance of a microphone however - the Beeb can't all be bad...

[JMGS4]

Re-Quoting someone in the american Press "never let the truth get in the way of a good story" applies here perfectly..........

[CarZee]

quote:I must admit that I am becoming increasingly dismayed by the media in this country. I 100% agree in that they are preaching to us and telling us what to think / believe / do which is totally contrary to what we are supposed to be about in a democracy.

If we're being honest, is it just the media in this country? I suspect that the same goes on in every country.

Psychologists, sociologists, psychiatrists and economists all contributed to a vast pool of knowledge built up in the 20th century. What they collectively found out, putting it simplistically, was how to manipulate people in a way that could be made (relatively) agreeable to them.

This knowledge is applied in marketing, advertising, media and politics - all areas which are so nebulous as to rely on creating a perception and doing so in a way that the majority will understand and approve of.

In short, the psychobabblists have discovered how to deliver the result desired by which ever minister, media magnate or whoever, whilst appealing to our more powerful and base urges.

Hence the duplicity we perceive in our media and from our politicians. It's the same age-old idea of the few controlling the many, just in a much more agreeable (less barbarous) way than practiced in previous eras and indeed practiced today in some non-western parts of the world.

>> Edited by CarZee on Wednesday 19th June 10:27

[135sport]

I heard on BBc news this morning a report about a bunch of MPs who are angry with the government because of the new rules with regards the painting and location of speed cameras. This bunch of MPs are saying the new guide lines are wrong and have issued a statement that they want to increase the number of cameras, reduce speed limits, etc, amongst other things.

But the strangest thing is that the MPs think that the BBC (uh? why?) should play a larger part and take more responsibility for getting the message across that speeding is an anti-social crime.

Why should a TV station become a political voice? Does that not go against democracy?

They also state that the UK has the worst accident rate involving pedestrians in any country in the EU. Not surprised when you get numpty pedestrians trying to cross a 50mph 3 lane carriage way, when 200 metres down the road is a pedestrian bridge that probably cost around £0.5 million to install.

[JohnL]

quote:
They also state that the UK has the worst accident rate involving pedestrians in any country in the EU. Not surprised when you get numpty pedestrians trying to cross a 50mph 3 lane carriage way, when 200 metres down the road is a pedestrian bridge that probably cost around £0.5 million to install.

Interesting if true becasue the UK has the lowest road rate in the EU.

>> Edited by JohnL on Wednesday 19th June 12:40

[marki]

The BBC were the worst after the latest Israeli thing in Jenin , they were reporting non stop about "Up to 1500 KILLED" as it turned out there were about 50 mostly terrorists who got it

[mattc]

quote:
The BBC were the worst after the latest Israeli thing in Jenin , they were reporting non stop about "Up to 1500 KILLED" as it turned out there were about 50 mostly terrorists who got it

Isn't "...up to..." the most abused phrase in journalism/advertising?

"House prices rose in May by upto 15%..."
"Our product will increase productivity by upto 58%..."
"Buy a lottery ticket and win upto 15 million!"

Such phrases are ALWAYS (upto 90%) misleading.



>> Edited by mattc on Wednesday 19th June 13:04

[whatever]

quote:

quote:
The BBC were the worst after the latest Israeli thing in Jenin , they were reporting non stop about "Up to 1500 KILLED" as it turned out there were about 50 mostly terrorists who got it

Isn't "...up to..." the most abused phrase in journalism/advertising?

"House prices rose in May by upto 15%..."
"Our product will increase productivity by upto 58%..."
"Buy a lottery ticket and win upto 15 million!"

Such phrases are ALWAYS (upto 90%) misleading.



>> Edited by mattc on Wednesday 19th June 13:04

You're right -- it's only outdone by "up to X or more" which is surprisingly common once you start to look for it, but conveys no information whatsoever.

[Neil Menzies]

TVRs and accessories for sale! Prices start at £1!

(Um - I'll sell you a paper TVR badge for £1 - the cars start at £40k...)

[whatever]

The problem with most journalism these days, imho, is that for whatever reason (time pressure, laziness?) many stories seem to end up as regurgitated press releases from whatever pressure group (whether reclaim the streets or greenpeace or new labour) is driving the story. These seem to be mixed with the current editorial direction that the paper/site/broadcaster is currently committed to and then dished out as apparently well-researched, balanced reporting of fact.

Has it always been like that? Or am I just getting cynical in my old age?

[marki]

quote:

Has it always been like that? Or am I just getting cynical in my old age?

I dont think it has always been like this , in the good old days i think the Beeb and the like were more cautious , now its just a free for all to be the first to break the story even if it is wrong, as someone said they just regurgitate a statement as fact even if it comes from one of the protagonists

[McNab]

Unfortunately the worst has happened here. The connection between the BBC and the Government now qualifies for only one descrption:

SINISTER

I base this conclusion on three factors. First, the BBC's version of events about which I have factual knowledge. Second, the increased scepticism expressed towards the BBC in other sectors of the media. Third, the Editorial which appeared in the 13th June edition of The Economist.

The Economist is no lightweight, and they don't indulge in speculative reporting, or statements which will lead to litigation. The heading of their Editorial was this:

THE BBC's COUP
The incestuous relationship between the BBC and the Labour elite is unhealthy.

The body of the article leaves no shadow of doubt over the degree to which the Government now influences BBC reporting, and is very disturbing indeed.

[GregE240]

I think that Labour and the Beeb are pretty close in terms of limp wristedness and mediocrity that they're bound to get on. Not long after Labour came to power they realised that they had to put some influential people in the right places in the media to ensure their continued success.

Certainly for the BBC, it appears to have worked. I think a lot of the newspapers have followed suit to a greater or lesser degree (I'm surprised the Guardian isn't on brown tinged paper these days, it's so far up Blair's arse).

That's political parties for you. In other countries, they just send the army in to the TV station, kill them all and take over.

>> Edited by GregE240 on Wednesday 19th June 15:12

[Bodo]

quote:

quote:I must admit that I am becoming increasingly dismayed by the media in this country. I 100% agree in that they are preaching to us and telling us what to think / believe / do which is totally contrary to what we are supposed to be about in a democracy.

If we're being honest, is it just the media in this country? I suspect that the same goes on in every country.

[...]

CarZee, same here in Germany and in Switzerland! The public broadcast stations are a bit more serious, but they're decreasing

BTW: Is the BBC public or private?
Wasn't it public in the beginning??