BBC raps reporter over Arafat report

[alexz]

LONDON: BBC governors yesterday upheld a complaint against a reporter who said she was tearful following the death of Palestinian leader Yasser Arafat. The BBC's head of editorial complaints initially rejected complaints against Barbara Plett.

A listener then appealed that decision to the governors.

In the broadcast on October 30, 2004, she described watching a helicopter carry Arafat from his West Bank headquarters on his way to a French hospital, where he later died. "When the helicopter carrying the frail old man rose from his ruined compound, I started to cry," she said. The governors ruled that Plett's mention of her tears "breached the requirements of due impartiality."

[cut]

bbc canes all


what I mean by that is that about a year ago when this report came out I acknowleged that this was a bbc screw up (rare) so I respect them even more that they agree with that. Can someone give me an example of fox/sky news admitting mistakes in the name of fairness and impartiality?

[ogukuo72]

No. Maybe because Fox/Sky isn't so ****e to making such mistakes! :P

[sickofpretenders]

I love how so many poms all think the BBC is some kind of near perfect news supply with little to no bias, and that all other news viewers must be stupid.

The rest of the world is laughing at you.

[Olybrius]

I love how so many poms all think the BBC is some kind of near perfect news supply with little to no bias, and that all other news viewers must be stupid.
The rest of the world is laughing at you.

The rest of the world ? lol , are you speaking from this small bunch of people looking Fox News Entertainment in North America ? ;)

[sickofpretenders]

No. I havent met many people from the rest of Europe who rate the BBC as source of unbiased news. There are more networks than FOX and BBC out there, not that any are massively better. Although its appropriate you should mention FOX because its the only other network that attracts such a dedicated group of followers (as opposed to viewers) as the BBC.

Personally I think if you want less political spin in your news you should watch buisiness news.

[Violet Fashion by Mindy]

Our ABC is not to bad.

[sickofpretenders]

Are you kidding? the ABC is a disgrace, I used to think they were good until I joined the army but then I realised anytime they talk about the military they have absolutely no idea. The fact that they hired david marr to head up mediawatch is reason enough to boycott that channel. Anytime we used to train somewhere public the ABC would do a whole story that they completely made up.

SBS is good as far as news goes

You should read a book about the Australian media called "the electronic whorehouse".

[Violet Fashion by Mindy]

Then again the ABC is anti Liberal Party which you can't really blame them for.

:)

[ogukuo72]

I would like to relate a little incident about half a year ago, with a BBC journalist. She was with this bunch of local Singaporeans, and she was really LOUD. Apparently, she was unhappy about the treatment of foreign maids in Singapore. She related two incidents. One, one of her friends was detained at our airport on something which turned out to be a mistake. Two, another of her friends (her friends seem to be always in trouble) was asked at a fancy restaurant whether she was a maid, which she assumed was because her friend was Filippino. Then, loudly and self-righteously, she bragged about how she would make do this story about racism in Singapore.

Now, I'm not saying that we are perfect, but she was really being obnoxious. She struck me more as a self-righteous and arrogant foreigner who instead of reporting news objectively, seems to be drunk with her own power as a journalist of the BBC, and sees her role as crusader, judge and punisher, all rolled into one.

Her conduct truly opened my eyes to the BBC. Once my eyes are opened, I began to see how all BBC reports on Asia are always patronising, arrogant, critical, self-righteous, and how the typical BBC journalist on the ground - even as they pretend to sympathise with the locals - actually set themselves up as some sort of omniscient demi-gods passing judgements on the poor natives, showering us with their pity.

It's enough for me to think that we are still a British colony.

[cut]

I would like to relate a little incident about half a year ago, with a BBC journalist. She was with this bunch of local Singaporeans, and she was really LOUD. Apparently, she was unhappy about the treatment of foreign maids in Singapore. She related two incidents. One, one of her friends was detained at our airport on something which turned out to be a mistake. Two, another of her friends (her friends seem to be always in trouble) was asked at a fancy restaurant whether she was a maid, which she assumed was because her friend was Filippino. Then, loudly and self-righteously, she bragged about how she would make do this story about racism in Singapore.

Now, I'm not saying that we are perfect, but she was really being obnoxious. She struck me more as a self-righteous and arrogant foreigner who instead of reporting news objectively, seems to be drunk with her own power as a journalist of the BBC, and sees her role as crusader, judge and punisher, all rolled into one.

Her conduct truly opened my eyes to the BBC. Once my eyes are opened, I began to see how all BBC reports on Asia are always patronising, arrogant, critical, self-righteous, and how the typical BBC journalist on the ground - even as they pretend to sympathise with the locals - actually set themselves up as some sort of omniscient demi-gods passing judgements on the poor natives, showering us with their pity.

It's enough for me to think that we are still a British colony.


that sounds like it was a documentary, rather than news, documentaries usually reflect more the authors p.o.v., having said that the documentaries I've seen on the bbc have been both right and left wing.

[sickofpretenders]

Thanks for the post ogukuo. Sadly BBC's bias is not limited to the on the ground reporters either. Several of BBC's own reporters grew angry during the ground war that the their reported stories were twisted beyond recognition and that losses were always maximised while gains minimised.

[Violet Fashion by Mindy]

This is an observation so to speak.

That wether you are a conservative or liberal shows means that your view on wether a media outlet is biased towards one group?

I mean if you were a die hard conservative you would see unbiased news as having a left leaning approach.

[alexz]

bbc canes all


what I mean by that is that about a year ago when this report came out I acknowleged that this was a bbc screw up (rare) so I respect them even more that they agree with that. Can someone give me an example of fox/sky news admitting mistakes in the name of fairness and impartiality?

I think you missed the larger point here. Plet (and the BBC) was accused
for years for having a strong anti Israel bias; which lead Isreli officials
to boycutt the BBC. Although the BBC appointed someone to look at
the Issue and there was less anti Israeli bias for a while. This admition
proves that the report were made by someone who ha a strong bias
against one side of the stroy she soupose to be (as a reporter)
neutral about. I think the BBC in founded by the tax payers and not
a corporation that has a buisnes bias of some sort.

[walford]

Can someone give me an example of fox/sky news admitting mistakes in the name of fairness and impartiality?Can you provide examples of them making such mistakes or are we to take your empty characterizations thereof as the Gospel?

[cut]

Can you provide examples of them making such mistakes or are we to take your empty characterizations thereof as the Gospel?

Nothing they would consider mistakes, hence the difference.

[walford]

In other words, you are simply parroting the Leftist talking points concerning Fox and have nothing to back up your claims.

[cut]

In other words, you are simply parroting the Leftist talking points concerning Fox and have nothing to back up your claims.

You could say that, but then I'm not really a leftist. I am left of you, but then so is just about everyone, i'm sure you'll agree.

If you insist on boxing me up like that I'm sure, you won't mind me returning the favour... i.e., you are simply parroting the rightist talking points concerning anything and everything, backing it up with SPAM.

Basically, I could find a lot of "proof" on the internet of the same ilk and quality as yours from leftist sites, but I choose not to.

[cut]

I think you missed the larger point here. Plet (and the BBC) was accused
for years for having a strong anti Israel bias; which lead Isreli officials
to boycutt the BBC. Although the BBC appointed someone to look at
the Issue and there was less anti Israeli bias for a while. This admition
proves that the report were made by someone who ha a strong bias
against one side of the stroy she soupose to be (as a reporter)
neutral about. I think the BBC in founded by the tax payers and not
a corporation that has a buisnes bias of some sort.

you're right but the editor did call that article a mistake shortly after it was printed, which is think is honorable. The BBC is funded by fee payers (not tax payers), the difference being that the government doesn't touch the money it goes straight to the BBC. I think it's a good thing that the BBC doesn't have business bias, because all channels do being private.

[walford]

...If you insist on boxing me up like that I'm sure, you won't mind me returning the favour... i.e., you are simply parroting the rightist talking points concerning anything and everything, backing it up with SPAM.

Basically, I could find a lot of "proof" on the internet of the same ilk and quality as yours from leftist sites, but I choose not to.The results of a Nexis search is spam? Beautiful bit of Orwellian sophistry. I substantiate my assertions, you characterize my sources rather than actually dealing with the substance. Then you top it off by implying moral superiority by having the good taste and sense of only offering empty claims. If you aren't a Leftist, you certainly are doing a good job of emulating their rhetorical methods.

[sickofpretenders]

The results of a Nexis search is spam? Beautiful bit of Orwellian sophistry. I substantiate my assertions, you characterize my sources rather than actually dealing with the substance. Then you top it off by implying moral superiority by having the good taste and sense of only offering empty claims. If you aren't a Leftist, you certainly are doing a good job of emulating their rhetorical methods.

Solid gold.

[cut]

The results of a Nexis search is spam? Beautiful bit of Orwellian sophistry. I substantiate my assertions, you characterize my sources rather than actually dealing with the substance. Then you top it off by implying moral superiority by having the good taste and sense of only offering empty claims. If you aren't a Leftist, you certainly are doing a good job of emulating their rhetorical methods.

I don't imply moral superiority, I always take your views on board, you have never shown sides of reciprocating in that respect. Of course I'm not just talking about the nexis search whatever thet is, you know full well I'm talking more generally. You like everyone else that has blogs on the internet (the lefties included) quote a shed load of sources which support your views to substanciate it. And write anything that isn't staunchly conservative as bollocks.

Now you may say what you want about me but when it comes to foreign policy, I'm conservative to, the difference between you and me is that I'm not set in my ways. Maybe I should do like you a write off everything you say as extremist, quote a load of left wing rubbish to "substanciate" my point and maybe have this discussion take place on a prodominatly left wing site so that I can have lackeys (yes, sickofpretenders you are my inspiration) to lick my arse the way you do.