Thursday
Nov152012
by 
Bishop Hill
Bishop Hill 28gate in the print media
Nov 15, 2012 BBC Delingpole has covered the 28gate story in his Spectator column.
You pay for this propaganda with your compulsory licence fee. You pay for it again — and how! — through the myriad costly measures which have been adopted by successive governments to ‘combat climate change’. If this doesn’t make you angry and disgusted and determined to see root and branch reform of this mendacious, incompetent and institutionally corrupt organisation, I should very much like to know why.
Reader Comments (32)
The rest of the MSM will be sticking their fingers in their ears and shouting 'la-la-la-la-la' in order to avoid making any mention of this tawdry affair.
Mad Mel hs written a very good piece on her blog at the Daily Mail :
http://phillipsblog.dailymail.co.uk/
pity it isn't in the print edition
Here is a wonderful story the BBC told about itself during the Iranian 'revolution'.
If you listen to the programme, it claims that two British, non Muslim employees engineered the whole scenario without the knowledge of BBC management, the Foreign Office or MI6. That included having posters plastered all over Tehran asking organisers of pro Khomeini demonstrations to phone the BBC and it would broadcast the place and time, and an interview with the great Mullah where he set the questions himself.
Mike uncovers papers which accused the BBC of biased reporting as Iran descended into revolution in 1978 and 1979. The documents show that the BBC's Persian Service found itself attacked on all sides, with the most vociferous critics claiming that the Corporation was not simply reporting events but influencing them in favour of regime change. As Ayatollah Khomeini sat in exile in Paris, the BBC stood charged with galvanising the radical cleric's supporters and acting as his mouthpiece in Tehran.
Featuring interviews with then Foreign Secretary Lord Owen, the then Iranian Ambassador, senior BBC figures and academic experts.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/b00j6lfk
I have already read the suggestion here that individual BBC employees set the AGW agenda themselves. To me, that is preposterous.
"If this doesn’t make you angry and disgusted and determined to see root and branch reform of this mendacious, incompetent and institutionally corrupt organisation"
Wish you would come straight to the point instead of beating about the bush James.
Sarc
Brilliant piece of reporting and love the book.
Maybe someone already reported this, but here it is again just in case and for a good measure.
Nothing personal between non-posh Dellers and commie BBC, I take it.
While we celebrated James Delingpole's announcement that he would stand as an independent candidate for the Corby by-election, it was in a 2-day old news item in the much maligned BBC that we get to learn Dellers had neither the money nor the cojones to follow through his promise.
BBC 1 Cucumber 0
Ah, the link.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-20330622
There is a secretly taped conversation about Delingpole's role in Corby by-election shenanigans, for those who are curious about these things.
Blimey sHx talk about two day old news. That was on sky, in the mail and addressed in Dellingpoles blog at the start of the week. 2/10 for crap diversion!
I am intensely curious about such things but can someone (sHx?) please tell me , clearly and in words of one syllable, what it is that Mr Delingpole has done that is wrong?
He is completely unapologetic as can be seen by his blog. Talking to ANY of our current crop of politicians is not something I would care to do myself or to have my friends find out about it but has this now become generally regarded as reprehensible? I do hope so! It would be a real step forward.
http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/news/author/jamesdelingpole/
Those of us that feel strongly about these things wish that Delingpole would stop sitting on the fence and tell us what he actually thinks.
I only watched some of secret film from the Tory conference by Greenpeace yesterday. It was very encouraging to hear what various people had to say about the expected move away from wind power (and the subsidies thereof) and I'd like to thank them for this. Let's face it, James Delingpole already had a gift for self-publicity but it's particularly generous of Big Green to help him with this.
Blimey sHx talk about two day old news. That was on sky, in the mail and addressed in Dellingpoles blog at the start of the week. 2/10 for crap diversion!
Nov 15, 2012 at 2:23 PM | Unregistered CommenterDuncan
I don't watch Sky, read the Mail or visit Delingpole's blog.
I do read Bishop Hill however and I do remember this post ("Delingpole to stand in Corby") very well.
So it was all mere puff, and I discover this less than an hour ago while outside having a cigarette and flicking thorugh the BBC news on my phone, not on BH as I would expect.
Mass Media 1 Blogosphere 0
I am intensely curious about such things but can someone (sHx?) please tell me , clearly and in words of one syllable, what it is that Mr Delingpole has done that is wrong?
...
Nov 15, 2012 at 2:27 PM | Unregistered CommenterJack Savage
He is a Cucumber; green, long and narrow outside white inside.
He is a Cucumber; green, long and narrow outside white inside.
Nov 15, 2012 at 2:49 PM | sHx
Oh You think he is green, do you. Well, I thought you were stupid but not a total, utter imbecile. Shucks, I was wrong again.
Wow. Didn't realise so many people died from fuel poverty in the UK... 2,700 people frozen to death, thanks to people like Al Gore, Phil Jones and Michael Mann. Thanks to orgs like IPCC, BBC, and MET office. All these buffoons should be dragged out from their homes in the middle of the night and hung from wind turbines for crimes against humanity. Just a matter of time before Al Gore gets beaten up with a hockey stick, mark my words.
In a departure from the usual rigorous policing of his blog, Andrew is allowing it to be used for a series of attacks on another blogger.
Strange, such 'visitors' normally receive the IDF treatment here.
Unless he wishes this quiet grove of sound commonsense to become an unruly playground for 'trolls' intent on disruption, I suggest that he reads the 'posts' from 'sHx' to decide whether they are relevant to
'28-gate' or just personal attacks on Delingpole.
I would imagine the BIshop is busy doing his day job or else preparing for his TV appearance with WUWT. Give the poor chap a chance.
@Toby
to be fair, not all the 2700 as a direct result of the CAGW scam, but surely some did,
and if Al Gore and the screamers can use their massive brains to link a single weather event to CAGW, surely they could help identify the poor souls who froze due to the scam.
Unless, of course, they dont care
There is one thing that I find very curious about this affair. It has received NO coverage at all from the mainstream media.
The Telegraph and the Spectator have covered it in blogs, as has the Daily Mail. But it has not been reported in the news. At all.
By way of contrast, the BBC's failings with regard to Newsnight led to resignations, and were widely reported in the press. And yet the Newsnight fiasco was about bad management; 28gate is about trying to cover up misleading statements. Which is a more serious offence?
Even more astonishing was coverage of the Heaton-Harris / Delingpole / Corby business. This was about allegations that an MP had been disloyal to his party. It was covered by the Telegraph as news (not merely in a blog), by the BBC, and by several other sources. So disloyalty to one's party by an MP is more serious than the BBC a) making misleading statements about their failure to provide balanced coverage of an important issue, and b) trying to cover up the misleading statement by refusing a Freedom of Information request?
Please will commenters calm down and moderate their language.
John Mann:
At the risk of stating the bleedin' obvious, this is precisely the point. For years, the MSM has dutifully constructed a narrative whereby Global Warming has been presented as a calamity in waiting, the end of the world as we know it, unimaginable horrors, etc, the whole not merely demanding instant action but backed by an unimpeachable scientific consensus with only a few obviously certifiable types opposing it, all anyway funded by a sinister conspiracy led by disturbed Far Right elements and Big Oil.
To backtrack now would amount to a major loss of face, to say nothing of instant, howling and hysterical derision from all right-thinking fellow travellers, the BBC very conspicuously leading the way.
Of course, were the situation reversed – had, for example, the BBC been found to have been leading an active campaign with, for example, the Heartland Institute to to skew its output against the supposed self-evident truth of AGW, the MSM would have been all over the story. The Delingpole non-story this week, splashed all over the Guardian, is a prime example of this self-evident bias.
Which is exactly why there is still such a long, long road to travel before you can expect any kind of even-handed treatment of Global Warming on the part of the MSM. But we should all plug on regardless. The truth will out one day.
A company is born ....
On the 31 October 2012 (Halloween) a brand new company was born. The new arrival is called "International Broadcasting Trust" (company number 08275287) which should not be confused with the charity called "The International Broadcasting Trust" (charity number 326150).
Directors of the company are:
Richard Anthony Sumray (A trustee of the charity)
Katerina Frances Phillips (A trustee of the charity)
Diana Rhiannon Thomas (A trustee of the charity)
John Nicholson Hartley Whitaker (A trustee of the charity)
What does all this mean?
I have no idea but thought you might like to know.
The fundamental problem with BBC unilaterally deciding upon an approach to a topic and only allowing that view to pervade all of its broadcasting media, is that it becomes self fulfilling. If their journalists are initially briefed with only that one view and that view is the only one which subsequently gathers material, it becomes hardened into the organisation. Any new material on that topic will only ever reinforce the original stance, and successive journalists covering the topic will only have that increasing mass of slanted source material as programme feedstock.
Thus, even with the emerging availability of counter-evidence, it becomes ever harder to penetrate and change BBC's singularly dogmatic and deeply entrenched opinion set. BBC then suffers from having what it sees as a solid case for the topic, carefully generated by itself as the expert source for an appreciative public, but where in reality the external mass of data, real life observations, informed analysis, and public awareness, increasingly shows completely otherwise. In this way, BBC makes itself irrelevant to the truth, but at the same time becomes dangerously misleading.
This surely does not conform to its Charter. We know the effect that their approved-line journalistic decision has had on the global warming debate. It must be the case that this same process of exclusion and isolation in the face of real external facts has distorted many other topics. It has only been through a continuing struggle that the extent of this damaging policy has been revealed via the success of '28gate', but the greater success will only come if it prompts a seismic shift in BBC's isolationist, pre-ordaining, and incestuously circular journalism.
AWM - I did not see all of your presentation on WUWT -TV, but enjoyed what I saw. Will you have a post on that experience and impressions?
I am nonplussed by the non-reactions. This thing is big enough to simmer and one day there will be another Court where the Lie will be exposed. The Spectator's piece means it will remain in libraries across the land.
One day it'll click with people that the bullying of Newbery and the abandonment of vulnerable teenagers to predatory celebrities are one and the same thing. And until it's all solved, more children will be raped, more reputations will be ruined, more viewers will be bullied.
ps not one defence, even if you call Chivers' a defence. He has no answer to "why all those lawyers". Because everybody knows the answer.
omnologos
I will make the same comment I gave to Anthony Watts on another thread:
Do not expect The Fourth Estate to rush to announce the arrival and power of The Fifth Estate.
To them you are alien and a threat. They will try to keep the agenda in their control. Inevitably they will fail, in the meanwhile, you, we, all experience frustration. Staying with the facts, the truth without spin and interpretation will eventually prevail.
The coincidental timing of the release of the 28 (or 30) names by Maurizio with the other travails at the BBC is a coincidence that sceptics must not allow to go to waste.
I am worried that in a few days time no-one will be writing about 29gate any more, most of the media will continue to ignore it, and the MPs wll continue to turn their backs and pretend they can't hear us.
How do we keep the topic alive?
Just finished reading IHT story of English lady abused by Savile for years alongside other girls at a school for difficult children.
She tried to tell her story to British newspapers for decades but nobody wanted to listen. Now they do. Useless gits the lot of them.
This is the company we keep, us pariahs of the MSM. We should be proud of ourselves, keeping in mind how much bigger in scale and suffering the lady's story is. And there are so many stories like hers.
Maurizio, firstly thanks for your presentation on Anthony's webcast. It was both informative and inspirational. I was especially impressed by the fact that the first thing you wanted to do (after 'jumping around like a kangaroo :) ) was ring the Bish and ask him to get in touch with Tony N. As you pointed out in your post above about the sex scandal at the BBC, it is a fightback against rich and powerful institutions and their members crushing ordinary punters.
The political class is so out of touch with real people that they have little conception of the implications. But in the case of the BBC, they are in the process of getting a reminder. It must be galling to British taxpayers that their failures have so far been rewarded at public expense.
Johanna: I'm sorry to have missed Maurizio on the webcast but on the rest I deeply agree. It is one and the same.
Johanna
The world, and the journalistic profession especially, is choke-full of perfect idiots who deal with humans pretending they are not human.
Perhaps it's a way to deal with the alienation of modern life.
Not sure where this should go, as it is O/T.
Don't get outraged by the headline - what is suggested as an alternative to cash would be far far far harder for the Moonbat. T may cheer your day...
http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/news/edwest/100190054/could-lord-mcalpine-just-forgive-george-monbiot/
AlecJ
As I said before, Monbiot's father was Deputy chair of the Conservative Party until circa 2006. I imagine George has met Lord McAlpine as was doing him a little favour by naming him. It has been implied the BBC did that. They didn't. Monbiot did.
A lively little discussion going on over at Booker's column
My wee friend (idiot) savant getting handed his testicles on a platter!