the BBC lies. again and again and again and.....

Lying  is a staple diet with the beeb.  Its booboos  sometimes catch up with them./ this tall tale was about being the first to see proof of tigers in the high himalayas.  i remember a member of the extended royal family  talking about they used to see them on their  fishing and hunting trips . and he had actually told the beeb crew  about it.

Yet none of the Bhutanese tiger researchers who pioneered the discovery of tigers at high altitude and who advised the BBC on camera-trap locations appeared in the documentary. Instead, the BBC chose to portray Bhutan as a remote and under-developed country, and lacking local research expertise under the guidance of effective conservation policy. The only Bhutanese input aired in the documentary came from rural people in the remote regions visited by the BBC crew.


http://theconversation.edu.au/tall-tales-misrepresent-the-real-story-behind-bhutans-high-altitude-tigers-8963

the crew were just replicating the old  colonial masters role. they  just could not and cannot escape the old  mindset, it seems. great white explorer and hunter game.

what is scarier is their attitude to truth when it really matters . its kowtowing to power.

they refuse to put up a statue of  an old employee  because he was a 'lefty"

http://www.guardian.co.uk/books/2012/aug/22/bbc-george-orwell-statue-left-wing?newsfeed=true

their one sided commentaries and coverage  of the Palestinians and  Israelis is frightening.


"They’re running scared of the Israeli authorities," he said. He gives an example, detailed in his book, In Your Eyes a Sandstorm: Ways of Being Palestinian, of the Israeli embassy calling the BBC radio newsroom where he then worked. The Israel government asked a news editor not to run the Palestinian side of a particular news story, implying that doing so could involve an accusation of "terror collusion." The Palestinian statement, sent by the Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine to the BBC, was dropped.

http://www.uruknet.info/?p=m90593&hd=&size=1&l=e


I personally refuse to listen to their so called world service. i find their spinning of everyday news  just sickening.  they are such an obviious propaganda arm . even their funding for the world services used to come from their foreign office. it now gets grants from the us  state department and even the  EU

and to think i used to look up to it when i was doing my journalism course  !

update 

Not surprisingly, if you watch the bbc account of the events,(http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-middle-east-19384229) you get the idea that the Syrian army is directly responsible for the massacre. Listening to it again after reading this account, I noticed that they don't actually say that directly. Instead, they show images of the Syrian army while talking about the bodies, and they mention that the army had operations there to crush rebel forces, thereby implying that they crushed civilians in the process. Another example of journalistic media formulating a misleading narrative without actually lying.

http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article32320.htm


 update - a flashback

In more than 80 years as a publicly financed broadcaster with an audience of millions at home and around the world, the BBC has rarely been buffeted as severely as it has in recent days over its decision not to broadcast a television appeal by aid agencies for victims of Israel’s recent military actions in Gaza.

Some of the sharpest criticism of the BBC’s decision on the Gaza appeal came from within its own ranks, from unions representing its newsroom staff and from retired editors and reporters.

Sir John Tusa, a former head of the BBC World Service, said the scenes of distressed children and families in Gaza captured in the video appeal were a matter of “common humanity.”

“Nobody, surely, in their right mind, can say that is being partial towards the victims, as if somehow they deserved the fate they got,” he said in a BBC radio interview.

“The thing that worries me,” he added, “is that there is now an overcomplication of regulation and compliance and policy, and that in the course of that, common sense, and, I regret to say, humanity, seem to have been left behind.”

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/01/27/world/europe/27britain.html
update  

Partway through this interview, the BBC presenter, Martha Kearney, made this astonishing claim: “Clearly Rachel Corrie was one of the casualties of what happened that day, and I know Israeli soldiers died too.”

In fact, Israeli human rights group B’Tselem lists no Israeli soldiers as being killed on 16 March 2003 (“Israeli security force personnel killed by Palestinians in the Occupied Territories, 29.9.2000 - 26.12.2008,” B’Tselem).

Despite this, a BBC presenter decided to introduce the deaths of Israeli soldiers into the narrative of the day Corrie was killed, a completely false claim which altered the actual reality and set a framework for BBC audiences in which several Israeli soldiers and one activist had died.

http://electronicintifada.net/content/bbc-rachel-corrie-coverage-omits-facts-lets-lies-go-unchallenged/11633