Tuesday 26th of November 2024
Home » Blogs » John Richardson's blog

ideology as truth .....

ideology as truth .....

An extraordinary document has been sent to the BBC - a carefully detailed and forensic-like analysis of the transcript of the Panorama programme "Death on the Med", broadcast on 16 August 2010.

Below is the transcript of this programme, together with the resulting dissection and complaint of bias and lack of impartiality which is now in the hands of the BBC.

The complaint vindicates all earlier complaints of bias on the part of the BBC. This bias is so consistent and now blatant as to make the BBC guilty of fraud and deception. It has beguiled the British public, its media and establishment into believing that there is not much wrong with the behaviour of the State of Israel that is not justified by the misbehaviour of Hamas.

Evidence of Israeli misbehaviour is so well documented but the fact that it passes largely unnoticed by the British public can only be attributed to the skill of Israeli propagandists, to a large extent aided and abetted by the BBC.

It is now time - at this crucial period in the Palestinian-Israeli conflict - that Israel be made to see that it is in its own best interest for there to be a fair and just solution. Presently, it can flout with impunity 65 UN resolutions, decisions of the International Court of Justice, the condemnation of every humanitarian organization that is involved with Palestine, and it can destroy neighbouring infrastructure, as in Lebanon and in Gaza, at will.

Analysis of BBC Panorama "Death on the Med" exposes blatant pro-Israel bias

meanwhile, in the hallowed halls of academic freedom .....

Between the 23rd and the 25th of August, Yale University held a conference on "Global Antisemitism: A Crisis of Modernity." It was sponsored by the Yale Initiative for the Interdisciplinary Study of Antisemitism. Therefore, this was a university event and not one brought in from the outside to use Yale facilities. On the surface there is nothing wrong with this. Anti-Semitism is an age-old form of racism and it calls for ongoing academic study. The problem is that this particular conference approached the subject from the ideologically driven position of radical Zionism. In other words, many of the assumptions upon which the conference was built were unfortunately tainted with bias. Indeed, in at least one instance (a panel on the "self-hating" Jew), one might suggest that the event was itself promoting a particularly virulent form of anti-Semitism. Very odd indeed.

The way you initially judge an academic conference is from the reputation of its participants and the nature of its panels. Philip Weiss, the co-editor of the blog Mondoweiss, has looked at both these categories and he concludes that this conference was "dedicated to the idea that any criticism of Israel is anti-Semitic." It appears he is largely correct. Many (though not all) on the participant list are the sort of strident supporters of Israel who confuse Zionism with Judaism and criticism of Israel with "demonization." Some of the panels were dedicated to problematic issues as "Jewish Self-Hatred" and "Confronting and Combating Contemporary Anti-Semitism in the Academy." Itamar Marcus, who was a conference keynote speaker and is also a leader of the West Bank settler movement, lectured the participants on "The Central Role of Palestinian Anti-Semitism in Creating the Palestinian Identity." Putting many of the participants (regardless of their academic credentials and affiliations) into the context created by these panels, what you get is not an academic conference in toto. Parts of it were more like an attempt to assert ideology as truth.

Yale University and Anti-Semitism

blancmange as TV entertainment...

Stephen Fry has said there is a culture of fear at the BBC which is creating "incredibly bland" programmes.

The host of BBC Two's QI told the Radio Times executives with "cold feet" were shying away from taking creative risks.

"A lot of the adventure and excitement have gone out of television programming and a lot of it is just down to fear."

Anti-BBC rhetoric in some newspapers was compounding the situation, he said. The BBC was not immediately available to respond to Fry's comments.

Fry said: "It's distressing because it's working - not by making people feel any less loyal to the BBC, but by affecting the culture of the BBC.

"There is this thing, I call it interfearing."

Compliance systems

He said: "I do know of so many cases where executives would say 'What we want is something new, something different, something extraordinary!'

"And they're brought something new, different and extraordinary and immediately the executive gets cold feet, falls back on something else and we end up with something incredibly bland."

He added executives were more inclined to play it safe but "for a creative institution, that's death".

The BBC strengthened its compliance systems in 2008 after a series of rows over taste and decency including the Jonathan Ross and Russell Brand prank calls and complaints over comments made by comedian Frankie Boyle on BBC Two's Mock the Week.

Talking about the forthcoming series of QI, Fry said unlike other panel shows the celebrity contestants were not in on the answers - apart from one panellist.

"There's only one regular guest who always insists on seeing the questions beforehand and prepares for them. I won't tell you his or her name," he said.

"It really annoys me. In fact, one day, I'll make sure that person is given a list from another programme because they don't need them."

---------------------

The same critique applies to our ABC to a smaller extent... Because the ABC has to appear to be "fair, balanced or even-handed", the ABC has to air, in the same amount of time, the wrong views, the lies or distortions of proper views... Thus, these days, we end up with a confusion of ideas where the most skilled spruiker of the sexy porky gets the top bunk — mostly opposition capers or anti-science concepts. Reality takes a back seat, quietly, but often gets attacked as well by the ABC... I could tell you of program makers who ...

Panoraganda .....

Panoraganda

in breach of its contract...

Moyles opened the show after the 6.30am news bulletin sounding downcast and launched into a long diatribe: "Do you know what, I wasn't going to come in today. I hate the fact I've been put into a position by Radio 1 and the BBC that I don't want to be in.

"I'm very, very angry, very, very angry at being put into this position. I can't tell you how furious I am. I haven't been paid since the end of July and no one cares about it. No one's bothered."

After being quizzed by his team about why he was feeling so low, Moyles said: "Yesterday I thought why should I even bother hauling myself out of bed at 5.30am, 5.45am. Why should I bother if they can't be bothered?"

He continued: "They can't be bothered to pay me. Why should I come in? It's a two-way street. What annoys me is the fact I mentioned it to people this week. Fix it, just get it fixed. It's a huge lack of respect and a massive FU to me. 'It doesn't matter'? Really? It's for free? I love my job, don't get me wrong I love my job."

Moyles claimed the reason he had not been paid was due to administrative issues around his new contract. He recently signed a new one-year deal.

The BBC is understood to be technically in breach of its contract with Moyles by not paying him while he is still working.

However, sources said the BBC is working to rectify the problem and that he should be paid within the next 24 hours or so. One BBC insider said: "It does not look great that we are not paying someone who is working for us."

http://www.guardian.co.uk/media/2010/sep/22/chris-moyles-rant-radio-1