I wrote recently, not expecting any landslide of rubbled response, but in order to add my observations to the many in the bloggesphere at the disgraceful manner in which the BBC deliberately sides with leftist agendas, in almost all the serious reporting that it outputs. My earlier post titled: “Pictures Representing Mood” set out the blatant abuse by the BBC of its charter obligations in respect of its reporting and commenting on all matters associated with the Earth’s climate, and in particular the shoddy treatment of a lone blogger, Tony Newbury, who had attempted to obtain information about a meeting held by the BBC to set future policy on its climate reporting. After much time, over 5 years, and a great deal of taxpayers money, the outrageous “Auntie”, aided by some heavyweight lawyers, avoided the freedom of information request to reveal the attendees of the aforesaid meeting. A pyrrhic victory indeed as soon after the judge had found in favour of the monster broadcaster an intrepid blogger called Maurizio Morobito or omnologos to use his handle revealed that the agenda had been posted years before by a partner in the meeting, the ITB, thanks to the Way Back Web Archive.
Of course I expected that the story would be buried by the mainstream media, and aside from a few who have put their heads above the parapet, the majority have indeed left the story well alone, but then today I read in The Scotsman an excellent contrasting article of the likely outcry had the subject under discussion been of the matter of Scottish Independence, excerpt below:
Imagine for a moment that it was discovered, by chance, that six years ago the BBC had a high-level meeting of its executives and a group of “the best constitutional experts” to determine the policy of the BBC in reporting the ongoing debate about Scotland’s future governance Imagine that body said – unanimously – that maintaining the United Kingdom with Scotland as a member is the only model that should shape its editorial approach.
Even more unbelievable (surely) would be if the group consisted of only those who supported Scotland remaining in the union. It would (surely) be incomprehensible that the BBC would behave in such a way.
If such a meeting came to light, there would be justifiable outrage across the political spectrum. Nationalists would rightly feel that the BBC had taken a partisan political stance that would prejudice its campaigns and challenge its raison d’être, contrary to the BBC’s own charter and in conflict with the public concept that Britain enjoys an open, pluralistic and free press
A great piece by Brian Monteith. Will his insight be enough to get the thing out into the mainstream media?