BS: In Memoriam BBC

Subject: BS: In Memoriam BBC
From: Doktor Doktor
Date: 30 Jan 04 - 01:58 AM

Cabinet office sources were Cock a Hoop last night over the sacking of Greg Dyke, BBS Director General. "Tony's delighted" she said "This clears the way to put a much more positive Government case on so many things".

Subject: RE: BS: In Memoriam BBC
From: Doktor Doktor
Date: 30 Jan 04 - 02:05 AM

Doktor's Muslim chums are also chuffed - "this is proof that the BBC is now the official Government Radio Station" said Hussein 29, a radical from Edmonton. "The news has gone out through the world that the BBC can no longer be trusted. It is a great advance for our cause"

Subject: RE: BS: In Memoriam BBC
From: John MacKenzie
Date: 30 Jan 04 - 05:18 AM

Have you been reading Private Eye again?
John

Subject: RE: BS: In Memoriam BBC
From: Bobjack
Date: 30 Jan 04 - 05:39 AM

BBC2 is god's own channel! As Rowan Atkinson once said - "I would willingly sell my house and all it's contents to pay for the BBC"

Subject: RE: BS: In Memoriam BBC
From: Geoff the Duck
Date: 30 Jan 04 - 05:59 AM

I'm waiting to hear what Greg Dyke has to say now that he is not constrained by being the public fron for the BBC.
Let us face the facts. Blair appointed his own judge and set the terms of reference to exclude any and all information which might have reflected badly on him.
With that level of support would Crippen ever have been found guilty?
Quack!!
GtD.

Subject: RE: BS: In Memoriam BBC
From: Gareth
Date: 30 Jan 04 - 08:11 AM

On the contary Geoff, the BBC woul have lead a campaign to "proove" his innocence.

Gareth

Subject: RE: BS: In Memoriam BBC
From: mooman
Date: 30 Jan 04 - 11:02 AM

It would have been a lot better, more efficient and less of a burden on the taxpayer just to have purchased a rather large can of whitewash....

Peace

moo

Subject: RE: BS: In Memoriam BBC
From: GUEST,Frank Hamilton
Date: 30 Jan 04 - 01:08 PM

Hutton was a Blair appointee. Fox guarding the hen house?

Frank

Subject: RE: BS: In Memoriam BBC
From: GUEST,Claymore
Date: 30 Jan 04 - 03:06 PM

Well from this side of the pond it looks like the haughty leftists of the BBC got pimp-slapped for lying. If it was a white-wash why did the senior eschelon of the BBC immediately resign after the report was issued? 'Cause they knew that at the end of 700 pages was the conclusion that their man lied, and they knew it all along.

If we could only get the same oversight on NPR...

Subject: RE: BS: In Memoriam BBC
From: John MacKenzie
Date: 30 Jan 04 - 03:44 PM

Well Claymore, as with most things, truth is in the eye of the beholder. The senior echelon of the BBC resigned [rightly or wrongly] because there is still a small percentage of people in authority in this country who behave honourably when held responsible [rightly or wrongly] for breeches of etiquette. Would that more people would share the same sense of responsibility.
John

Subject: RE: BS: In Memoriam BBC
From: Linda Kelly
Date: 30 Jan 04 - 04:05 PM

As we all know there are many truths in this world. We need to accept that the editorial integrity of the BBC was breached, and this seriously exposes the credibility of the organisation, and greg dyke was in my view right to go. It should not affect the nature or direction of journalism in the BBC, but the integrity of their reports needs to be maintained or what's the point. If Alistair Campbell ad decided to sue, as license fee payers we might all have a different position on the matter if they had had to cough up millions in a libel action. The defence that much of Gilligan's report is right is no defence in my opinion because clearly in other areas he was gravely wrong.

Subject: RE: BS: In Memoriam BBC
From: DougR
Date: 30 Jan 04 - 05:23 PM

John: "breech of etiquette?" Is that how you would describe the falsified interview with Kelly? Odd viewpoint in my opinion.

Claymore: You suspect that NPR presents the left-wing point of view? Horrors! :>)

DougR

Subject: RE: BS: In Memoriam BBC
From: harvey andrews
Date: 30 Jan 04 - 06:23 PM

But who is Alastair Campbell answerable to?

Subject: RE: BS: In Memoriam BBC
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 30 Jan 04 - 07:10 PM

"If it was a white-wash why did the senior echelon of the BBC immediately resign after the report was issued?"

Basically because the BBC's charter is up for renewal pretty soon from the Government, so in the circumstances they've got to try to butter the bastards up.

And sure enough, the Culture Secretary Tessa Jowell has now come out with a statement to reassure the BBC about its future funding." A quid pro quo, if ever there was one.

Polls in the UK papers today indicate that, given a choice, three people trust the BBC, for everyone who trusts the Government. I'd have thought that is a poll finding which rather flatters the Government.

Subject: RE: BS: In Memoriam BBC
From: Peter T.
Date: 31 Jan 04 - 10:37 AM

As far as I can tell, the only thing that Gilligan can plausibly be accused of getting wrong is inferring from his interview with Dr. Kelly that the government knew it was lying, when in fact it seems they wanted desperately to believe their own intelligence reports. They certainly "sexed up" the report, there is much evidence of that. And after the press got hold of it, no one in the government ever clarified that the conclusions the press and public were reaching were far beyond the evidence. They wanted people to believe the threat on the flimsiest of evidence, which turns out to be hopelessly wrong.

It was a reasonable inference that Blair and Campbell were lying as usual, since they desperately wanted the British public to support the war. The interview with Kelly suggested that manipulation had been going on. The inference of lying (as far as the available evidence goes) turns out to be wrong. An accusation of stupidity and foolishness would, it turns out, have been more accurate.

yours,

Peter T.

Subject: RE: BS: In Memoriam BBC
From: GUEST,Amazed
Date: 31 Jan 04 - 11:54 AM

Linda Kelly,

You really don't get it, do you?

Are you one of Blair's poodles or just naturally stupid?

Subject: RE: BS: In Memoriam BBC
From: Gareth
Date: 31 Jan 04 - 03:28 PM

No guest Amazed - Linda gets it. Which part of the Hutton report don't you understand ????

Gilligan lied ?

The BBC/Daily Mail did not check its facts ??

Whilst nobody of any intelligence could ever accuse the Daily Mail of accurate or objective reporting we expect better of the BBC.

I think the verdict must be "Self Inflicted Wound"

Rember, Hutton heard the evidence, saw the witnesses. You and I can only go on the reported evidence. My conclusions on the reported evidence may well be different from yours - but then I try to be objective.

Gareth