Is this guy for real?

[Captain Chickenpants]

http://blugg.com/stuff/foxs_view_of_the_bbc_player.htm

Apparently so!
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,110172,00.html

It seems he has completly misunderstood the whole point of the Hutton enquiry (which you can read for yourself here http://www.the-hutton-inquiry.org.uk/ )
and has taken the opportunity to slag off the BBC and the British people as well.

Would be interested to hear the opinion of any Americans out there...

CC

 

[Gerry]

Since when has the BBC been known as "mother"? I think perhaps he may mean "auntie".

Anyway, the Hutton enquiry was specifically about events regarding the naming of David Kelly and his subsequent suicide. It wasn't really about whether the BBC was biased or not.

 

[London Geezer]

Is that guy real?

Oh, that's the title of the thread....

 

[epicstruggle]

three things
-didnt watch bbc (not carried by my cable service), so cant comment on whether bbc was biased during war coverage. Im assuming it did, since they tend to lean towards the left.
-if the bbc did nothing wrong why did the 2 head guys resign
-its his show(the guy your talking about) and he can have any opinion he wants. I do agree with some of his points on this though.

later,
epic

 

[Captain Chickenpants]

That the BBC were wrong is not in dispute. The reason the two head guys resigned is because they failed to properly handle the story which turned out to be wrong. The fact that the story had serious allegations against the goverment etc, means that it's validity should have been checked more thoroughly than it was.

What is irritating about this guys story is that he is reporting this, and yet is not even mentioning the reasons for them quitting. Instead he insinutates it is because they were caught lying about the way the war in Iraq was going, instead it was because of the way they handled a domestic scandal. The guy obviously has an anti-British agenda and is using his position as a journalist to push this. That is his right, however he should get his facts straight.

CC

 

[Roger Kohli]

That is his right, however he should get his facts straight

... or his bosses should resign.

 

[Mariner]

The problem with Gilligan's report was that he openly said that the Prime Minister and Government were lying to the country. This was foolish in the extreme.

If he'd said the Goverment had 'exaggerated' in their WMD dossier then the BBC would have got away scot free. Dr Kelly was obviously never going to stand and confirm Gilligan's story so it was essentially impossible to prove any lying was occuring. If you're going to call the Prime Minister and Government liars, you'd better have some good proof!

The BBC backed Gilligan to the hilt and when his story couldn't be proved all his bosses could do was fall on their swords. The Hutton report itself only came about because Kelly was a bit loopy and topped himself.

 

[epicstruggle]

That is his right, however he should get his facts straight

... or his bosses should resign.

The segment in question is entitled "My word", its his opinion and not a piece of news. So should we make sure that everyones opinion is grounded in fact??
later,
epic

 

[Captain Chickenpants]

That is his right, however he should get his facts straight

... or his bosses should resign.

The segment in question is entitled "My word", its his opinion and not a piece of news. So should we make sure that everyones opinion is grounded in fact??
later,
epic

If they intend to be taken seriously as a good journalist then it should be up to them to verify their facts opion or not.
Andrew Gilligan story was found to be not factually accurate and he lost his job over it, his story was at least newsworthy rather than a 'we are better than you' piece. It is his opinion, but it is being aired by his news company presumably at their behest.



It just seemed to me that this was nothing more than a cheap shot, and that if he would have been as well keeping that opinion to himself.

CC

 

[Simon F]

three things
-didnt watch bbc (not carried by my cable service), so cant comment on whether bbc was biased during war coverage. Im assuming it did, since they tend to lean towards the left.

I thought most of the Beeb's coverage of the actual war itself was more-or-less neutral - pretty much just describing what was occuring.

 

[nutball]

three things
-didnt watch bbc (not carried by my cable service), so cant comment on whether bbc was biased during war coverage. Im assuming it did, since they tend to lean towards the left.

I thought most of the Beeb's coverage of the actual war itself was more-or-less neutral - pretty much just describing what was occuring.

It was. But that doesn't stop the right-wingers thinking it was biased.

 

[StefanS]

three things
-didnt watch bbc (not carried by my cable service), so cant comment on whether bbc was biased during war coverage. Im assuming it did, since they tend to lean towards the left.

You're kidding right? Why hadn't I noticed the leftist guerilla in the BBC BBC offers the most objective coverage you'll ever get...

-if the bbc did nothing wrong why did the 2 head guys resign

They showed, how to handle things with dignity and responsibility, two attributes that some politicians don't seem to have...

EDIT: missing /

 

[Gerry]

They showed, how to handle things with dignity and responsibility, two attributes that some politicians don't seem to have...

Although, to be fair, Greg Dyke did seem to offer his resignation in the expectation that the board of governors would reject it and officially back his position. I think it came as a surprise to him when they opted 2-1 to accept it.

As someone said above though, if only the BBC (and in particular Gilligan) hadn't used the word "lie" most of this wouldn't have happened.

 

[epicstruggle]

BBC offers the most objective coverage you'll ever get...

So they handled this whole affair objectively???

later,
epic

 

[Humus]

I don't have BBC at home, but at the time of the war (when I was in Canada) I had BBC, and I didn't find them to be particularly anti-war or anti-american. In fact, rather the opposite.

 

[Legion]

BBC offers the most objective coverage you'll ever get...

So they handled this whole affair objectively???

later,
epic

heh their defense of his bullshit speak volumes...

he really said the Iraqi gov was holding off US troops and he is still a reporter today? Why?

 

[Simon F]

BBC offers the most objective coverage you'll ever get...

So they handled this whole affair objectively???

The coverage of the actual war? Yes.

The coverage/accusations on the validity/alterations to the intelligence dossier? That's a different matter.

 

[StefanS]

BBC offers the most objective coverage you'll ever get...

So they handled this whole affair objectively???

For somebody who didn't watch BBC during the war, you're making a lot of claims and allegations. At least you should know what you're talking about

EDIT: Typo

 

[Captain Chickenpants]

BBC offers the most objective coverage you'll ever get...

So they handled this whole affair objectively???

later,
epic

heh their defense of his bullshit speak volumes...

he really said the Iraqi gov was holding off US troops and he is still a reporter today? Why?

I don't recall the BBC ever saying that, and certainly not the journalist who got into trouble over the David Kelly interview.
What I suspect Mr Gibson saw was footage of the Iraqi minister for information who built up quite a following http://www.welovetheiraqiinformationminister.com/ with his outrageously over the top claims of Iraqi successes in the war. Al jazeera broadcast his information, and the BBC did rebroadcast that footage to show what news the Iraqi people were getting.

Mr Gibson has managed to confuse people (intentionally?)by combinging two seperate issues
1) The reporting of the war, which was generally very good and reasonably un-biased.
2) The David Kelly interview, which was about the way the British Goverment justified going to war, and if they modified information to justify going to war. This was handled badly and this is the reason that the BBC heads quite and a journalist was fired. This is what the Hutton Enquiry was about.

CC

 

[THe_KELRaTH]

I'd say the real problem with the BBC is they were outbid by the Government for the Hutton result.... oddly it's the same pattern with sports coverage