By a Newsnet reporter
 
It’s happened again.  A story relating to Abdelbaset al-Megrahi appears to have been manipulated by BBC Scotland.
 
Yesterday Reuters released an interview with Megrahi in which the Libyan protested innocence saying the truth over Lockerbie would soon be released.

The man convicted of the Lockerbie bombing described those responsible for his conviction as ‘liars’ and complained that his name had been ‘exaggerated’ by the west.

However journalistic integrity once more vanished when the phrase “exaggerated my NAME” became “exaggerated my ROLE” as the halting words of a dying man speaking a second language were blatantly manipulated by firstly Reuters and then the BBC.  Compounding the distortion, it has emerged that the Arabic word used by Mr Megrahi in the interview was اخترع which translates, not as "exaggerate", but as "invent, concoct, contrive, think up, manufacture, fabricate".

The online misinformation was followed by radio and TV broadcasts claiming that Mr Megrahi had complained that “his role in the bombing had been exaggerated” and “his role in the attack had been exaggerated”.

Megrahi had said no such thing and by the time Reporting Scotland was broadcast the online article had dropped the ‘exaggerated my role’ headline.  However the Reporting Scotland item still managed to insert three blatant pieces of misinformation when the reporter claimed that:

i. There is no mention of guilt or innocence in Megrahi’s interview
ii. Celebrations swept Libya when Megrahi arrived home
iii. Megrahi had been given three months to live

Let’s deal with these three claims in order.

There is “no mention of guilt or innocence in these dying man’s words”
This statement defies belief.  Megrahi calls those responsible for his conviction “liars” and clearly claims never to have harmed anyone and that the facts will come out.  Channel Four News insisted that Megrahi claimed innocence in the TV interview.  So why did the BBC Scotland reporter (Laura Bicker) claim otherwise?

Megrahi had been “given just three months to live”
This piece of misinformation has been repeated ad-nauseum by many news outlets including BBC Scotland.  It is untrue and is demonstrably so.  Why BBC Scotland cannot state, again as Channel Four did last night, that Megrahi was given “an estimated three months to live” is unknown.

One would have thought that a BBC Scotland reporter could at least get the basic facts correct given that the release of Megrahi is one of the biggest stories ever to hit Scotland.

“Celebrations swept through Libya” when Megrahi arrived home.
Nonsense and again easily demonstrated as such.  The airport celebrations that met Megrahi when he emerged from the plane that took him home were initially described by BBC Scotland’s Glenn Campbell as the “defining moment” of the SNP’s first term in office.  Mr Campbell also helpfully described the Scottish Justice Minister Kenny MacAskill as “the toast of Tripoli”.

The ‘crowd’ welcoming Megrahi home were to be expected, Libyan culture includes a strong sense of tribal belonging, those people were mostly members of Megrahi’s tribe.  There were indeed national celebrations going on that week, an annual student event that had nothing whatsoever to do with Mr Megrahi.  These same celebrations had taken place every year prior as Megrahi languished in a Greenock jail.

Any hopes though that the BBC had corrected their 'exaggerated role' misinformation were dashed this morning (06:59) when Radio Scotland's Gary Robertson described Mr Megrahi's words as "some kind of admission of guilt".  Quite the most appalling misinterpretation on what the dying Libyan actually said and one that Mr Robertson should be called upon to explain given that his BBC colleague claimed that there was "no mention of guilt or innocence".

This latest ‘mishap’ involving BBC Scotland is in keeping with the broadcaster’s coverage of the Megrahi affair since Mr Megrahi was released from Gateside Prison in Greenock.

Those who are unfamiliar with BBC Scotland’s handling of the Megrahi release should read our series ‘Megrahi, the media and the myths’ that deconstructed the state broadcaster’s coverage and exposed what we believed to be a not so subtle agenda.

More examples of the BBC’s growing credibility gap?

BBC Scotland’s questionable coverage is not restricted to Megrahi though.  Below are some recent examples of BBC Scotland editorial decisions that we feel calls their credibility into question.

The Scotland Bill
Newsnight Scotland covered the Scotland Bill last Tuesday (27th), or rather the Holyrood Committee scrutinising the Bill.  The introduction to the studio debate that followed was presented by Catriona Renton who described the reasons for the SNP opposition to the tax powers in the Bill as:

“But the SNP say the Bill doesn’t offer enough” and “they believe the Scotland Bill doesn’t go far enough”

This is not the reason for the SNP objecting to the Scotland Bill as it stands.  The core reason for the objection to the Scotland Bill is that the tax powers it contains will damage the Scottish economy.  In her first sentence, SNP MSP Joan McAlpine had to correct this appallingly ignorant misinformation.

The scrutiny of the Scotland Bill was not even covered by the ‘flagship news programme’ Reporting Scotland who instead decided that a Labour scare story (Abertay merger discussions) was more important so showed video clips of a Lord Sutherland who criticised the merger negotiations.

Al Gore
Former Vice president of the United States visited Scotland last Wednesday.  The Nobel Laureate and Oscar winning environmental campaigner was speaking at the International Renewable Conference in Edinburgh praising Scotland’s approach to green energy.

Reporting Scotland ignored the story completely and instead spent time on old firm fans displaying anti-SNP banners in protest at proposed anti-sectarianism legislation.  Someone called Dr Stewart Waiton of Abertay University (Yes Abertay again) was shown criticizing the Scottish government’s proposed legislation.

Dr Waiton’s appearance on Reporting Scotland was followed by an appearance yesterday on ‘Call Kaye’ where the programme again covered the opposition to the SNP’s proposed legislation on tackling sectarianism.  Some of the views expressed by this gentleman were extraordinary to say the least.  Quite how this nondescript man has managed to persuade the BBC to provide him with two platforms in order to attack the SNP may be explained by the blog he set up called takealiberty.

The blog was created late last year in protest at the SNP’s minimum price for alcohol proposal, or as Stewart Waiton called it “seeking to increase the price of cheap booze”.

Online ‘campaigns’
BBC Scotland’s fondness for providing a platform for new websites that attack the SNP continued last Friday when another ‘campaign’ was allowed airtime in order to attack the SNP.

One dynamic nation appeared from nowhere to receive ‘promotion’ in the form of an insipid interview from Gary Robertson.

To date we are not aware of any new website/campaign group with pro-SNP leanings being given the same level of access to these publicly funded platforms.

Comments  

 
# mealer 2011-10-04 07:17
A fine simple question for first thing in the morning.
The answer is,of course,TIL AFTER INDEPENDENCE.
And now I'll go and read the article.
 
 
# mealer 2011-10-04 07:29
Excellent article.I'll make an extra effort today to encourage a few more folk to log on to newsnet.
 
 
# clootie 2011-10-04 15:35
Your first assessment was correct - they will have to be dragged kicking and screaming from their offices post independence. They can then re-join the "new union" or media wing of the Labour party. They will still be around but at least the will no longer be able to pretend they are providing news coverage.
 
 
# Independista 2011-10-04 17:46
Will everyone using this website please do as I do and put the Newsnet web address under their signature on ALL their emails?
I know for a fact that at least 12 people now read this site form this one action. DO IT NOW!!
 
 
# hiorta 2011-10-04 07:31
Just more 'creative' verbal acrobatics from a corrupt foreign organisation.
 
 
# Achnababan 2011-10-04 07:47
There is also the other bias - more passive but possibly a more harmful bias, that occurs on a daily, routine basis, when we Scots living in Scotland get inundated with English news masquerading as British news! Time and time again we get misinformed about whats going on in Scotland because the BBC can't be bothered to create an English opt out or are told not to do so by the UK government.
 
 
# Wedge Antilles 2011-10-04 08:03
This comes under the culture brief of Fiona Hyslop. I would like to think that Hyslop has been quietly building a solid case against BBC Scotland quietly. Otherwise i dont see the point of her government position.

If there was ever a good time strategically for Salmond and Hyslop to pick a fight with BBC Scotland this is it. It would allow the majority of ignorant BBC Scotland viewers to see the true colours of the BBC.


Its time to bring BBC Scotland's controller Ken Macquarrie beofre a Holyrod committee and broadcast it over the internet to the world.
 
 
# UpSpake 2011-10-04 08:08
We get what we pay for !.
 
 
# RandomScot 2011-10-04 08:28
If we are to follor Dr Walton's reasoning, saying that all left handed blonde pogo-stik enthusiats are inferior and should be driven into the sea by packs of rabid squirrels is brave, will be seen as the new orthodoxy in years to come and.is just as valid and correct a viewvas saying that shouting abuse at someone based on race, creed or colour.

I'd call him an idiot, except here seem to be three, or 4 if you include Abertay, anti-SNP causes the man is espousing, which suggests he s less fired by issues, and more anti-SNP

I suppose the Beeb had to get someone after McTernan announced moving to Australia
 
 
# gus1940 2011-10-04 08:33
No - we get what we are FORCED to pay for.
 
 
# Exile 2011-10-04 11:45
Actually, Gus, no-one's forced to pay. You're told to pay, but not forced to. Just stop paying FFS. They won't/can't do anything about it.
 
 
# hiorta 2011-10-04 08:35
Wasn't there some notion that competition was the effective cure for this sloppiness being passed off as 'News'?
 
 
# Aucheorn 2011-10-04 09:04
I paid my last propaganda tax 13 months ago.

A large letter (7 pages and counting) containing snippets from here and other sites is waiting for their demand for this tax. This article is added to that letter.

I'm NOT paying this tax I WANT them to take me to court.


Apparently I can watch TV for free in prison.
 
 
# hiorta 2011-10-04 09:17
I ceased paying a licence fee some 15 years ago, but I no longer have a set.

BBC use self-employed 'agents' to hint at 'sanctions' after a repeating cycle of threatening letters - which I just ignored - then some visitors from said agents, with whom I declined to discuss anything. They will not take your word for anything and demand to be allowed to inspect your house to 'verify' matters.
I asked where was their Court Order and of course they dont have one, but'we can get one'. 'Do so', I reply.

Then they start all over again.
 
 
# whitburnsfinest 2011-10-04 16:38
If I ever work up the courage to stop paying for this nonsense and they show up at my door, I'm going to demand they produce two things:

1. A search warrant, and
2. A female police officer in attendance
(well hey, a girl living alone can't be too careful these days, right?)
 
 
# Arbroath1320 2011-10-04 18:09
Go for it whitburn.

Like you we are also trying to build up the courage to stop paying for all this s***e!.

Stopping the payment is easy enough. It is how best to word the notice to the licencing authority that we are no longer going to be paying for the garbage that preports to be "informative" news.
 
 
# Blanco 2011-10-04 18:32
Don't forget, when they do turn up with a search warrant, you are only obliged to let the polis in, leave the tv goons fuming on your doorstep :)
 
 
# dak 2011-10-04 15:40
Actually you'll be subsidised to watch TV in prison.

tpdrsl.org/.../...
 
 
# rolfh 2011-10-04 09:52
I really would like to speak to an SNP minister and ask what they think of what's going on at BBC Scotland. The corporation is the British state's propaganda tool, and whilst many of us reading this site know that, but much of the general public do not. "Aunty" has a reputation for cosiness and impartiality, which is nothing short of a joke.

Come the referendum campaign, the likes of David Cameron and Jim Murphy won't have to worry about sharing a campaign platform, the Beeb will be doing all the work for them.
 
 
# Aucheorn 2011-10-04 10:38
Fiona Hyslop will be at a Conference Fringe meeting in Inverness on Fri 21st October.

If I get a chance I will be asking the same question.
 
 
# Blanco 2011-10-04 18:36
Everyone knows the BBC are labour biased. It has been a perennial complaint of Tories. James Murdoch also wants to do the BBC down, so there is less competition for News Corp.

A strange group an anti-BBC alliance would be with Murdoch, Tory and SNP supporters.
 
 
# Barontorc 2011-10-04 10:03
I can purchase a TV to watch every OTHER channel with Freeview AND even though I have no desire or intention of watching ANY BBC program with it - I MUST pay the BBC licence.

In other words if I purchase and own a TV in Britain I can only use it if I pay the BBC licence - even though I have no intention of watching any BBC program at any time.

I buy the TV and pay VAT to this UK government but cannot legally use it unless I pay further "tax" in the form of a licence. Why is there not a one-off tax collected at purchase time to watch it over all channels?

There really must be zips going up the backs of our heads!
 
 
# rog_rocks 2011-10-04 10:58
This isn't entirely true Barontorc, I have 6 TV’s and do not posses a TV license, I use all 6 TV’s legally to watch any TV I might watch on demand players after it has been broadcast (even the BBC), 1080P flat screen TV's make fantastic PC and game consol monitors, they can also be used as radios and for watching DVD's Vids and Blu Ray with no license. All the license is for is to watch broadcast TV as it is broadcast, if you don't do that then legally you don't need one. You can have as many TV's as you like and do something different with them other than watch the broadcast crap we get.

Can pay, Won't pay!
 
 
# Stevie Cosmic 2011-10-04 11:05
I think you're on very shaky legal ground there mate. As far as I can remember, the license covers any equipment that is capable of receiving broadcast TV and radio, which covers all forms of TVs, radios and indeed some mobile phones and computers too.

Like a lot of legislation, it simply wasn't designed with modern technology and choice in mind, so it is woefully inadequate as a one size catch-all.
 
 
# rog_rocks 2011-10-04 11:25
This is wrong it is for the act of watching or recording broadcast TV as it is broadcast only they try to confuse missrepresent etc etc "If you own a TV or other TV recieving equipment you may be breaking the law" letters designed to scare, it's called terrorism and you prove it works.
 
 
# Stevie Cosmic 2011-10-04 11:36
It's never worked on me, as I have never paid for a license in my life. What is of interest to me is the real, rather than imagined, legal position that non-payers put themselves in.

Quote:
The licence is required to receive any live television transmission, whether it is received via terrestrial, satellite, cable, or the Internet. A licence is not, and never has been, required simply to possess a TV set, for the purpose of watching pre-recorded content, or use as a monitor for video games or computers. Although income from the licence is primarily used to fund the television, radio and online services of the BBC, a licence is needed to view all broadcast channels, including commercial services.

en.wikipedia.org/.../...

So as you can see, it's not at all cut and dried.
 
 
# rog_rocks 2011-10-04 11:49
Glad to hear you don't pay :-) that does seem pretty cut and dried to me, I even called them and told them what I was up to and they were fine with it, they kept sending letters right enough but even they had to agree that I was correct.
 
 
# zedeeyen 2011-10-04 11:59
It is absolutely, unambiguously cut and dried. I really can't even figure out where you are seeing the possibility of confusion. You need a license to watch or record television broadcasts as they are being broadcast, and for nothing else. The end.
 
 
# rog_rocks 2011-10-04 12:03
:-)
 
 
# ubinworryinmasheep 2011-10-04 20:25
The letters from tv licensing are handy for lighting the fire ! If they dont know your name for gods sake dont tell them. I dont watch tv and after this mornings misinformation am thinking about not listening to Radio Scotland anymore as well so the BBC can GTF with their license.
 
 
# Scotsfox 2011-10-04 18:15
Nope rog_rocks is entirely correct. You only need a licence to watch live TV as it is broadcast. Don't believe the propaganda - just like their "detector" vans that have absolutely NO capability to detect anything.
 
 
# Barontorc 2011-10-04 22:45
I'm with you, but is this more scaremongering pap from TV Licensing?

More than 214,000 TV Licence evaders caught

TV Licensing today revealed that more than 214,000 people were caught watching TV without a licence across the UK during the first six months of 2009.
The cities with the highest number of evaders were London (19,260) followed by Glasgow (11,941) and Birmingham (4,831).
Approximately 5,000 more licence fee evaders were caught in the first six months of 2009 compared to the same period last year. The average evasion rate is currently just over five per cent, meaning that almost 95 per cent of properties are correctly licensed.
Additionally in the period 2008/2009 TV Licence collection costs fell to 3.4 per cent of total income collected from 3.6 per cent the previous year.
The areas where the most TV Licence evaders were caught in the UK were:
Area Evaders caught (Jan - Jun 2009)
London 19,260
Glasgow 11,941
Birmingham 4,831
Liverpool 4,387
Manchester 3,656
Nottingham 3,161
Belfast 3,114
Bristol 2,419
Hull 2,385
Leeds 2,213
 
 
# rog_rocks 2011-10-05 09:37
Well just to add to all this, do you know how these "Evaders" are caught, as far as I know there is only one way;

A BBC terrorist will knock on your front door, and if you don’t have or want a TV license, ask for or demand entry into your property to check your equipment.
Remember this; these people have no right of entry, they should be asking you very politely if you would like to use their services, however instead of that they threaten you, don't let them in, just tell them you have no need of their services or a license and shut the door and that’s it.

However if you give them the time they will then demand that you listen to something they wish to read to you "Under Caution", and when they finish they will ask you to sign that you understand; This is NOT a caution you have just signed, it is a CONFESSION, a confession that you watch broadcast TV without a valid license; YOU HAVE NOW BEEN BUSTED. It is just a matter of procedure after that.

Only the stupid can be fined, as only a stupid person would confess to something they don't do.
Don't sign and you'll be fine; and not fined :-)
 
 
# rog_rocks 2011-10-05 09:40
I see that Glasgow has 11,941 stupid people, I'll bet they voted Labour :-)
 
 
# rog_rocks 2011-10-05 11:57
Scotsfox; Actually there is a thing called Van Eck phreaking, which can be used to spy on both CRT and flat screen monitors, however I believe it is very expensive and not the sort of thing I think the BBC would have fleets of patrolling the streets, something usually reserved for military and government intelligence agencies.

I have heard it has been used to spy on electronic election events in the past.
 
 
# pa_broon74 2011-10-04 11:06
I was under the impression it was not to do with whether you watched TV as it was broadcast but whether you had the equipment to do so, so any TV signal reciever on the premises required a TV license.

I don't pay it any way, no skin of my nose. In a sense the BBC shot themselves in the foot by getting a private company to enforce it, Scottish Law is even less conducive to Capita being able to actually do anything if you have no license. You just need to know your rights in the issue.

All they have is a database of addresses, they routinely harass any address that has no license attached to it.

I don't even open the envelopes from them, they go straigh in the bin.

No way am I subsidising BBC news output, no way ever.
 
 
# rog_rocks 2011-10-04 11:27
"I was under the impression it was not to do with whether you watched TV as it was broadcast but whether you had the equipment to do so, so any TV signal reciever on the premises required a TV license."

Exactly what they want you to think. ;-)
 
 
# rog_rocks 2011-10-04 11:34
For example;

From; tvlicensing.co.uk/.../...

"Is a TV Licence required for listening to digital radio broadcasts?

A TV Licence is required to watch or record TV programmes as they are being shown on TV, regardless of the channel and device being used (e.g. TV, computer, laptop, mobile phone, game console, digital box or DVD/VHS recorder), and how it is receive (terrestrial, satellite, cable, via the internet or any other way). You do not need a TV Licence if you only use this equipment to listen to digital radio broadcasts."

I could go on but I've done all this before, I know for a fact that I stand on solid legal ground.
 
 
# pa_broon74 2011-10-04 12:49
"You do not need a TV Licence if you only use this equipment to listen to digital radio broadcasts"

Not that I'm defending the BBC or anything, but they are refering to listening to digital radio broadcast on a digital radio, not through a set top box. You never needed a license for a radio, digital or otherwise.

The TV licensing website is long on hyperbole and short on details. It's the wording of the law itself you need to look at and I've linked to it below.

(www.legislation.gov.uk/.../4) This is the actual wording of the law.

As I said though, its moot. You won't end up in court either way. It's just that you are mistaken on the actual law.

Paragraph (1) of part 4 of the act states:

"(1)A television receiver must not be installed or used unless the installation and use of the receiver is authorised by a licence under this Part."

And a television receiver is defined as:

"9.—(1) In Part 4 of the Act
(licensing of TV reception), “television receiver” means any apparatus installed or used for the purpose of receiving (whether by means of wireless telegraphy or otherwise) any television programme service, whether or not it is installed or used for any other purpose."

That's basically it.
 
 
# pa_broon74 2011-10-04 11:46
I'm no lawyer but on reading the legislation, it does seem that way.

Its moot anyway because it's rarely if ever inforced, they just threaten and cajole, if you continue not paying the system reverts to the start point and they start with the letters again.

FYI: From an FOI request made to the BBC/TV Licensing. This was the reply and sits in with the 'act' (which if you go with freeman of the land stuff is not enforcable anyway.)

...the Communications Act 2003 (the Act) makes it an offence to install or use a television receiver
to watch or record any television programmes as they are being shown on television without a valid TV
Licence.

Crucially '... to install or use...'

And from The Communications (Television Licensing) Regulations 2004

9.—(1) In Part 4 of the Act (licensing of TV reception), “television receiver” means any apparatus installed or used for the purpose of receiving (whether by means of wireless telegraphy or otherwise) any television programme service, whether or not it is installed or used for any other purpose.

But its like anything, they can make up any old law but if they don't have the infrastracture or process in place to enforce it then its all for nothing.

Like I said, its moot. Just don't pay it.

*Quick edit. Actual wording of part four of the act here:
www.legislation.gov.uk/.../4

I reiterate though, it isn't economically viable for Capaita to take you to court over it, they get enough people caving in & paying at the 'scary letter' part of the process.

;-)
 
 
# rog_rocks 2011-10-04 11:52
"Crucially '... to install or use...'"

You're bang on there, so the secret is to install or use it for other purposes :-)
 
 
# Scotsfox 2011-10-04 18:19
Also crucially - "as they are being shown"
 
 
# Exile 2011-10-04 11:47
If you actually pay for their propaganda, then yes, there must be (a zip, that is).
 
 
# Wee-Scamp 2011-10-04 10:34
Why the surprise that the BBC would show old firm fans displaying anti-SNP banners in protest at proposed anti-sectarianism legislation.

Through their extensive coverage of football as against others sports the BBC are of course complicit in ensuring the continuity of the hysteria and vulgar triumphalism that is so much a part of the modern game. In doing so they are of course providing the opportunity for sectarianism to continue to thrive.

As it happens I'm a motorsport fan but of course BBC Scotland provides almost no cover of this sport. In fact the BBC have now hived off most of their coverage of Formula 1 to Sky Sports which means I won't be watching much of that anymore either because I refuse to buy a Sky Sports subscription to be able to watch less than half the races.
 
 
# zedeeyen 2011-10-04 10:44
I haven't had a TV license for about 14 years. In that time I've had hundreds of letters from the licensing goons, which get ritually binned without even being opened let alone responded to, and only two (count 'em) visits to my home (at least when I was at home to receive them). On both occasions I simply said "I don't need a license mate but feel free to keep coming back, it's your time you're wasting" or words to that effect and then closed the door, and then I heard nothing for months until the cycle of auto-harassment junk letters started again.

It really is trivially easy to evade this tax if you're so inclined. If you simply ignore them they are powerless, and if you square up and say "I dare you take me to court" they tend to back down (see Vladimir Bukovsky's very public dealings with them to see how for they go out of their way to avoid prosecuting someone for refusing on political grounds).
 
 
# GrassyKnollington 2011-10-04 10:47
Quote:
How long must we wait before something is done about BBC Scotland?


until independence.
 
 
# Seagetagrip 2011-10-04 10:50
An accusation against BBC Scotland suggesting that they deliberately distorted the quotations of Megrahi`s statement altering "name" to "role" has been posted on todays Herald as a comment on the Megrahi story.
 
 
# Training Day 2011-10-04 10:52
The BBC are becoming ever more explicit about the central role they will play in the pro-Union campaign. Ed Milliband was good enough to let the cat out of the bag in his 'a third candidate has also put himself forward' interview last week, when he talked about 'our shared institutions' binding us together. The BBC were of course right up there. Milliband's statement about the BBC was dutifully reported on the BBC by ex-Labour councillor Catriona Renton (a nice squaring of the circle there).

The BBC will be the fulcrum of the disinformation war in the lead-up to the referendum.
 
 
# EdinScot 2011-10-04 10:52
Quoting mealer:
A fine simple question for first thing in the morning.
The answer is,of course,TIL AFTER INDEPENDENCE.
And now I'll go and read the article.


Got it in one mealer. The Goebels broadcasting corporation on behalf of the Unionist Labour party wont give up until its mathematically impossible and they're driven out of Scotland following a yes vote to Scotland's independence.

Why oh why are the SNP not holding the Pacific Quay presenters to account when they get interviewed? As another poster said, the time is right. Expose their agenda for what it is to the people who still have their eyes wide shut in Scotland. Joan McAlpine could have easily dropped into the conversation with Catriona Renton, her connections with Labour, i.e, standing as a Labour councillor. They can give it out but it would be a whole new ball game when they're forced to take it back. Maybe Pathetic Quay needs rocked to its foundations and reminded that they're there to report the news not distort it.

As it stands, there is not one organisation in this land that can bring the BBC to heel. I really think the SNP has nothing to lose by taking them head on. It would make the BBC go over the edge and become even more hysterically blatant in their agenda, thus waking up even more people to their propaganda.

I really beleive that the BBC is a cancer that needs to be cut out of Scotland. I long for that day.
 
 
# Seagetagrip 2011-10-04 10:54
Perhaps the time is fast approaching when there needs to be some positive action by means of demonstration against the behaviour of a publicly funded news media.
 
 
# Mark MacLachlan 2011-10-04 11:04
A suggestion to appease the fermenting hordes...

.../pro-independence-world-is-in-tizzy-this.html
 
 
# Saltire Groppenslosh 2011-10-04 11:06
I have said it before, the only way to take the BBC on is by setting up an online TV channel.

I believe that there is enough of a reason now for NNS who tried a "dabble" to call for experienced people to give up their time and get it off the ground.

It wouldn't even have to be a 24 hour a day channel, just 2 or 3 hours initially.

It is time for our voice to be heard.

If we set up a protest like the students in London over tuition fees, we become the "barmy nationalists", that's just how it is. And it wouldn't be aired by the media anyway.

But, if we set up in direct competition with the likes of STV and BBC and are prepared to deal with their deceit and lies on a blow by blow basis and air the real stories that are taking place everyday on the streets of our country then perhaps when it comes to the run up to the referendum, Cameron and Murphy wont have it all their own way.

By being web based, the transmission can be made from several sites (or several hundred fo that fact).

I now say that the time for talking is over and that sensible, shrewd action on this is absolutely necessary.

I am a decent audio engineer who has carried out design of audio systems and carried out installations in football stadiums and large arenas and therefore present my credentials for sound until someone better in the broadcast side can be found.

I'm willing to have a go....who's with me? I feel certain that NNS will contact me personally by email to get a team together to progress this.
 
 
# Mei 2011-10-04 11:06
BBC Scotland should be treated like the neighbours from hell that they are and served with an ASBO.
If they do not comply with the terms of the ASBO they should be evicted from their 'Home' at Pacific Quay.
Pacific Quay was built with money from the Scottish People who therefore have the right to tell them to leave.
 
 
# pa_broon74 2011-10-04 11:21
On TV licensing and whether you should have one.

On the TV licensing website there is a 'news' piece* worth a read since its quite telling about how TV licenses work and they're ability or motivation to actually prosecute evaders.

The say they 'caught' 197,000 evaders between January and June 2011. True or false? Its false, they got that figure from the Royal Mail's Postcode Address File, (from all distinct addresses inc business, schools and private homes, they just subtract the number with license from the number without.) That figure would include empty properties, properties that had no TV's (factories for example) it may even include properties not even built.

They didn't prosecute 197,000 people, what they did was send letters out, the number of people that responded with payment is not mentioned either way.

These are just scare tactics and should be ignored.

The idea of TV detector vans went out the window in the 70's. Capita Business Solutions Ltd have no right of entry, they try and get so-called evaders to sign what is essentially a two fold statement; that you give permission for them to inspect your premises and that you have a TV.

For me it's fun. Capita have economic considerations that the BBC didn't have, so before enforcement was privatised, the BBC did take people to court. Capita on the other hand have to take into consideration whether its worth it or not.

It used to be that having a criminal record for non-payment of TV license was a bit embarassing, frankly these days; its a badge of honour in Scotland.

* tvlicensing.co.uk/.../...
 
 
# Seagetagrip 2011-10-04 11:31
I am prepared to take part in a vigil at the doors of Pacific Quay as suggested by Universality of Cheese. Not sure how to organise this but would be open to suggestions
 
 
# Mark MacLachlan 2011-10-04 11:53
Nice one Seagetagrip.

What's required is comfy chairs, a piece of public property adjacent to or in view of Pacific Quay,on which to place a democracy tent or porta-cabin and access to a public loo. Oh and a group of people willing to spend their time highlighting the state broadcaster's perfidious ways...

nms.ac.uk/.../...
 
 
# GrassyKnollington 2011-10-04 12:05
not the comfy chair!!!

can we start with Glenn?
 
 
# Mark MacLachlan 2011-10-04 12:22
What camp outside Glenn's comfy pied a terre?

If there's no comfy chairs...I'm no coming!

Given the vast improvement in camping oot equipment an inflatable sofa and tent is now viable, particularly to elicit ease of movement when Strathclyde's finest come a calling on behalf of the state broadcaster...
 
 
# GrassyKnollington 2011-10-04 12:44
"If there's no comfy chairs...I'm no coming!"

lol fair enough although I was thinking more of the Pythons and Glenn being first in the chair.....

www.youtube.com/.../
 
 
# Mark MacLachlan 2011-10-04 13:06
Arf!
 
 
# Arbroath1320 2011-10-04 13:02
As long as it's not the comfy chair from the "Darkened Room!":D
 
 
# Robabody 2011-10-04 14:37
Me too
 
 
# Mark MacLachlan 2011-10-04 17:14
...for, as long as but a hundred of us remain alive on comfy chairs, never will we on any conditions be brought under British broadcasting rule. It is in truth not for glory, nor riches, nor honours that we are fighting, but for freedom of honest new reporting – for that alone, which no honest man gives up but with life or control of his remote control itself.
 
 
# Arbroath1320 2011-10-04 18:13
LOVE IT MARK. :D

ROFLMAO! :D
 
 
# Mad Jock McMad 2011-10-04 11:56
The Independent has no coverage of this Reuters translation failure .... so it clearly matters zip in the great scheme of things London and the M25.

There was this, though:

"A British oil explorer today revealed a push into Libya despite ongoing uncertainty over the battle-weary country's future.

Jersey-based Heritage Oil said it had paid 19.5 million US dollars (£12.6 million) for a 51% controlling stake in Benghazi-based Sahara Oil Services, which runs onshore and offshore fields."
 
 
# chiefy1724 2011-10-04 12:01
Since we're on an Anti-Beeb rant this morning, why not Compare and contrast the following stories

bbc.co.uk/.../...

"The nurse arrested in connection with the contamination of saline at Stepping Hill Hospital has been speaking about her "horrendous" experience."

with

bbc.co.uk/.../...

"A Scottish nurse may have been wrongly convicted of the murders of four women, a BBC investigation suggests."
(My Bold)

I note that the first story doesn't talk about an "English Nurse" ?

Now, perhaps I'm just being a bit sensitive this morning.

But when was the last time that anyone saw the word "English" associated with a negative story on the BBC ? Or Possibly even the word "Scottish" with a positive one ?
 
 
# Pete The Jakey 2011-10-04 12:07
I don't think it is just you being sensitive, I think it is done on purpose.
 
 
# Lianachan 2011-10-04 12:54
English Riots.

(Eventually)

:-)
 
 
# Pete The Jakey 2011-10-04 12:02
OT

Angus Ogg posted a link to a very good blog, then Arbroath1320 posted more links of previous pages on the blog.

I have started reading them, but haven't finished yet. It is very good so far.

I just want to bring it to the attention of more people. So here are the links:

Annexation
rueclementmarot.blogspot.com/.../...

Step by Step 1
rueclementmarot.blogspot.com/.../...

Step by Step 2
rueclementmarot.blogspot.com/.../...

Step by Step 3
rueclementmarot.blogspot.com/.../...
 
 
# Arbroath1320 2011-10-04 12:11
Sorry for being O/T here but I thought this was appropriate, on so many levels.

electricscotland.com/.../...


As you can see this link is about the unveiling of a mural in Wallaceburg in Ontario, Canada in 2005. It is nice to see that at least in some places he is remembered. Apparently the town is indeed named after the great man himself.

I didn't put this link up just because of the connection this town has with Scotland however. If you scroll about one third of the way down there is a very interesting photo on the right hand side.

I don't want to spoil the surprise so I aint going to say what is in the photo but I think you'll enjoy it.

ALBA GU BRÀTH !
 
 
# src19 2011-10-04 12:24
:-)
 
 
# nchanter 2011-10-06 12:24
Quoting Arbroath1320:
Sorry for being O/T here but I thought this was appropriate, on so many levels.

electricscotland.com/.../...


As you can see this link is about the unveiling of a mural in Wallaceburg in Ontario, Canada in 2005. It is nice to see that at least in some places he is remembered. Apparently the town is indeed named after the great man himself.

I didn't put this link up just because of the connection this town has with Scotland however. If you scroll about one third of the way down there is a very interesting photo on the right hand side.

I don't want to spoil the surprise so I aint going to say what is in the photo but I think you'll enjoy it.

ALBA GU BRÀTH !

Mel is that you?
 
 
# sneckedagain 2011-10-04 12:16
I suggest everybody should go down to their local newsagants and have look at the front page of the Scotsman, under no circumstance buy one and then go home and contact the rag to express disgust

telephone number 0131 620 8620
 
 
# Taldor83 2011-10-04 12:21
Sorry guys I've skipped straight down to comment (I'm in work so won't get round to the comments till later!) But the Metro had the article, with much the same innacuracies, in it so I emailed the following to them...I wonder if I'll get a reply! I'll be emailing a complaint to the BBC shortly along the same lines.

"To whom it may concern,



There was an article in your paper today (4/10/2011) reporting on what Megrahi had said in an interview. Unfortunately what was reported was slightly inaccurate. He didn't once say that "His role had been exaggerated.." He said that his NAME had been exaggerated. The article then went on to say that he denied he had any role in the Lockerbie bombing and again, as he always has, maintained his innocence.



To say in one sentence he gave a confirmation of his guilt and then later maintained his innocence is inaccurate at best, lazy at worst. I do suspect that the original Reuters interview hadn't been accurately reported and that the writer of your article had read as information (or part of information) the BBC reports which were blatantly inaccurate.



Many thanks for taking the time to read this email and I look forward to your reply.



"
 
 
# SEUMAS31 2011-10-04 12:38
I would like to relate an almost unbelieavible tale.
I e mailed Fiona Hyslop asking why the S.N.P. are not responding to the blatant bias of the B.B.C.
I received a reply from a secretary saying,as this was a "political" matter, it was not within the remit of the M.S.P.
I rest my case, and I am a member of the party.
 
 
# Jimbo 2011-10-04 14:15
Hi Seumas,

Did the reply you received from the secretary go into further detail as to why a political matter is outside the remit of an MSP?

A political matter is outside the remit of a politician - Surely there has to be some mistake here on the part of the secretary?
 
 
# Robabody 2011-10-04 14:32
Well it better be in someones remit.
 
 
# john__ 2011-10-04 16:01
Of course, if you sent it to the office of the minister, then it is outside the minister's remit (as broadcasting is devolved). However if you sent it to her as an MSP, then it will be within her remit (as she is a politician). The two are seperate. Which office did you send your email to?

John
 
 
# John Souter 2011-10-04 14:09
It has to be accepted that the BBC is a tool of the Westminster establishment.

As such, truth to the BBC will be a moveable feast presented in a manner that suits the establishments purpose.

Allied to this is the incontrovertibl e fact that by insidious exposure to distorted cause and effect, presentation and subsequent performance politics in general are regarded by the general public as something best ignored while they get on with making the best they can from whatever chalice life has given them. The Westminster establishment are well aware of this and exploit, in fact rely on it, constantly.

As political anoraks through our commitment to Scotland's independence we have to acknowledge that apathy is equally applicable to the values politics is awarded in Scotland. Within this context I regard the crude attempts by the BBC and the MSM in particular to distort through manipulation, negativity and obfuscation, will reach a point where it's counter productive and will act as a catalyst that will crack that apathetic shell.

Westminster is built on arrogance. It uses that arrogance to substantiate its dominance. A dominance that is being challenged and the shoogly peg it relies on exposed by Scotland's drive for independence. The exposure Westminster fears is not the simple act of Scotland leaving the Union. Were that to happen and Scotland was - as they would have it - to become an economic and social basket case, they would, in order to bulwark their control of the rump UK encourage the break.

But knowing as they do that Scotland with a competent and aspirational government and her people empowered by a democratic mandate would thrive and prosper; which would then expose the incompetency inherent in their comfort zone, terrifies Westminster beyond reason. It's by analysing the tactics and strategies they adopt that we can measure that terror.

So for the present I would advocate leaving the BBC and the toadies it employs as they are. We can make a fire sale offer for the facilities (exclusive of toadies)when they've run up the white flag.
 
 
# Fearghas MacFhionnlaigh 2011-10-04 14:25
From head article of thread:
Quote:
Any hopes though that the BBC had corrected their 'exaggerated role' misinformation were dashed this morning (06:59) when Radio Scotland's Gary Robertson described Mr Megrahi's words as "some kind of admission of guilt". Quite the most appalling misinterpretati on on what the dying Libyan actually said and one that Mr Robertson should be called upon to explain given that his BBC colleague claimed that there was "no mention of guilt or innocence".



Gary Robertson's "BBC colleague" was Laura Bicker. Her report on Reporting Scotland is available until 6.59 this evening (Tues 4 Oct) on iPlayer. The Megrahi interview is the first item in the program, and the precise quote mentioned above is 3.36 mins in:
bbc.co.uk/.../...

Laura Bicker's report is followed up by Jackie Bird talking to Richard Colebourn (BBC News Middle East Producer) in Tripoli. Colebourn says of the new information promised by Megrahi that Megrahi is "incredibly vague about what he is talking about...which as he sees it might either demonstrate his innocence or at the very least that his role has been exaggerated in the Lockerbie plot" ... "there is plenty of skepticism here about quite what he means about this evidence that is about to emerge"..."or alternatively maybe there IS new information that may come out...maybe information about other characters in Libya who may have been involved in the plot".

As to why the media have been allowed in to interview Megrahi, Colebourn suggests that perhaps his family are seeking "to allow him to speak of his innocence as they see it", but repeats that "however there is plenty of (kind of) skepticism here about why the media are being allowed in in this way".

In regards to Megrahi's condition, Colebourn muses "I think this interview raises some questions over the state of his health. The BBC were allowed in about 4 weeks ago when Megrahi certainly seemed to be more sick then than he is now based on the pictures which have been released today. Then he was said to be slipping in and out of a coma, and certainly was too ill to speak, now today at the very least he does seem to be able to speak to the media although clearly he is still being treated in his bed at home"
 
 
# Arbroath1320 2011-10-04 14:53
With regards to sorting out the blatant bias on the BBC I think this one area where the SNP MUST tread very carefully.

As a result of the BBC being under Westminster control, in more ways than one, I think if the SNP were to jump around shouting about bias and misinformation from the BBC then that gives the unionists an open goal to shoot at. On the other hand if they "appear" to do nothing then that also plays into their hands as well as giving their supporters a few restless nights. It is an unfortunate position but with regards to what can be done from Holyrood regarding the despicable behaviour of the BBC I feel the Scottish Government are in the position of being "Damned if they do and Damned if they don't."

This whole sickening situation is ridiculous, unfortunately until Holyrood can get its hands on Broadcasting Controls in Scotland I fear there is not a lot the SNP can do. It is a very, very, very frustrating position to be in but this is where we are at and because Westminster know this they will never give over these controls freely.

I certainly feel that the Scottish Government does feel as aggrieved as we do but they have to stick to the rule book they have been given. Maddening I know but this is my take on the "political" situation regarding Broadcasting in Scotland.
 
 
# Alx1 2011-10-04 17:58
Then the SNP could & should be gathering all the instances of perceived biased broadcasting and presenting this as evidence.

I'm not too sure of this, but although the BBC is a reserved matter, I do think that the Scottish Government can change the law to make the non-payment of the licence fee a non criminal offence!
Just think of the consequences in that.
 
 
# Arbroath1320 2011-10-04 18:19
If they could do that Alx, wouldn't that be a major achievement in itself. Not only that but a MAJOR kick in the teeth for the establishment. :D
 
 
# Scotsfox 2011-10-04 18:32
Well I'm not the Government and I object...Please sign and pass on...

epetitions.direct.gov.uk/.../...
 
 
# Alx1 2011-10-04 19:14
Scotfox,

Keep it up!

Have you tried posting this link over on the TAMB, facebook etc.
 
 
# Edna Caine 2011-10-04 22:57
An amendment to the Scotland Bill when it comes before the Scottish Parliament?

Could the Scotland Bill become a can of worms for the Westminster bwanas?
 
 
# Arbroath1320 2011-10-04 23:44
Almost certainly, in my view, particularly if we (Scottish Government) keep firing off demands for alterations to the Scotland Bill.
 
 
# Seagetagrip 2011-10-04 15:33
There are enough of us who support Newsnet to do something about BBC Scotland.
It occurs to me that perhaps if the above were printed as a flier and distributed by volunteers on the streets of our major cities it might just make the point. Distributed also at Inverness on 20th October where I hope Newsnet might have a presence.
I am will to cough up some dosh towards printing and contribute my time and shoe leather for nothing.
If Newsnet thinks that there is mileage in this idea please say so either here or by e mail.
 
 
# mato21 2011-10-04 15:58
Oh dear,oh dear,oh dearie me
Today it is the BBC
That fine upstanding institution
Who's ever nearer dissolution
The people now see through all their lies
As the mist has been lifted from off of their eyes
The wails that we'll hear are not so far off
So while today at their desks they may sit and scoff
It soon will be quite a different tale
When Pacific Quay goes up for sale
Oh no,oh no they then will cry
Just one more chance and we will try
The truth to tell from dawn till night
And keep our own thoughts out of sight
No more dugs nor rampant rabbits
Nor polar bears with uncouth habits
Oh please,please let us try once more
On hands and knees they will implore
We'll all be how this land would like
You're too late now so on your bike
No bike you say then burn shoe leather
In this new land by deed or blether
We'll stomach none who'll do us down
Not even who should wear the crown
For we're a' the bairns of that man Jock
And there's no way we're buying a pig in a poke
 
 
# Macart 2011-10-04 16:02
The Bard O' Newsnet strikes again! Great stuff. :D
 
 
# Caadfael 2011-10-04 17:28
Wonderful!
LMAO!
 
 
# Weegiewarbler 2011-10-04 17:58
I shared this story to Facebook. Here is one of the comments I got back. Any more for calling this number and complaining?

Quote:
If you phone 03700 100 222 and go through a couple of options you get to speak to someone at the BBC. I read out the Newsnet Scotland article to him and he was typing it down. I also gave him the URL to the site. Hopefully they will do something about that corrupt lot in that glass box at Pacific Quay.
 
 
# Scotsfox 2011-10-04 18:34
I fear they will get an anodyne reply along the lines of "how seriously the BBC take their responsibilitie s" Blah Blah Blah. Complaining TO the BBC is a pointless waste of energy and very frustrating to boot. Do Ofcom not have a role here?
 
 
# Scotsfox 2011-10-04 18:02
Please sign and pass on, time for action...

epetitions.direct.gov.uk/.../...
 
 
# nipper 2011-10-04 18:31
Hi Folks,seen this at Oil Of Scotland thought you might want a wee read..

Anti-Scottish, Biased British Broadcasting Corporation.

You do not need a TV Licence to own a TV

We at oil of Scotland have felt quite disgusted at blatant bias shown towards Scots on what is supposed to be an impartial public service broadcaster. In our view there is a prevailing negative spin placed on stories involving the SNP and it is apparent that the corrupt British Labour Party are the BBC’s party of choice. This breaks the BBC’s royal charter and no one challenges them.

A good example of this would be “Scottish” Question time in Glasgow on 28 th October 2010 where basically Nicola Sturgeon was told to be quiet and not talk of issues concerning the people of Scotland.

In order to combat the hostility towards Scots shown by this organisation we feel that the best action possible is to hit them where it hurts; in the pocket. With this in mind we issue this advice;

People who work for the TV licensing authorities actually work for a private company called Consignia PLC and have no more rights than a double glazing salesman. You need only tell them you are not interested in their product, bye. They can only have you fined with this offence if they can prove that you watch broadcast TV as it is broadcast. i.e. should they come to your door, they will read you a caution and ask you to sign it. Beware this is not a caution, this is a confession that you watch broadcast TV as it is broadcast without a TV licence. Now you wouldn’t do that, would you, especially if you are not.

However Section 363 of the Communications Act 2003 only makes it an offence;



"To install or use a television receiver to watch or record any television programmes as they’re being shown on television"



If you do not use your TV equipment ( "e.g. TVs, computers, mobile phones, games consoles, digital boxes and DVD/VHS recorders" ) for that purpose then you are not committing a criminal offence.



You don’t have to; for example "If you are using the BBC iPlayer to watch programmes on-demand i.e. after they have been shown, you do not need a TV Licence."



All this equipment has many, many other uses doesn't it? Even an ordinary TV can be installed and used to listen to the radio.



You wouldn't want to use your own equipment to beat yourself up with, would you, so why bother?



Bribery, Corruption and Fraud at the BBC - Stop paying your TV Licence fee NOW!
 
 
# mealer 2011-10-04 18:44
I reckon the only way to tackle the BBC is for all of us with Scotland at heart to big up the rumour that the BBC is biased.Word of mouth is our greatest,perhap s only,weapon.
The BBC just say what London tells them to say.Its Scotland v London.I dont believe anything that comes from London.
 
 
# govanite 2011-10-04 18:59
Quoting mealer:
I reckon the only way to tackle the BBC is for all of us with Scotland at heart to big up the rumour that the BBC is biased.Word of mouth is our greatest,perhap s only,weapon.
The BBC just say what London tells them to say.Its Scotland v London.I dont believe anything that comes from London.


quite correct, we cannot allow the myth that the BBC is an honest and objective commentator - it clearly isn't
On Radio Scotland's 10pm news last night, the implication was clealry given that Cameron is the only politician on the stage. Well as far as I know there is another politician with big plans for the UK and this man has unprecedented levels of popularity among his electorate.
Suck it up BBC.
 
 
# Fearghas MacFhionnlaigh 2011-10-04 19:38
Article by David Cowan posted on STV site at 17.33 (4 Oct)

Police ask for a copy of Megrahi's television interview
Dumfries and Galloway Police will carry out their own translation of the interview conducted by Reuters.

"...The process could take some time. It's standard practise for British television stations to decline to hand over their footage unless ordered to do so by the courts."
news.stv.tv/.../...
 
 
# velofello 2011-10-04 21:56
A BBC protest vigil- there is no need to hang around there for hours and sleep in blow-up beds. Just arrange a collection of blow-up persons - I almost said dolls. A few wigs a black and white telly rescued from the coup and away you go home.

In our wee town a paper boy reported to the police that the woman upstairs at the window of a house by his paper round appeared to be dead as she hasn't moved in a week. Yes the qwner, on holiday, had a "blown up granny" knitting at the window day and night. The polis were not amused. We sure were.
 
 
# mato21 2011-10-04 22:47
The paper boy should have been commended for his observation
My daughter had her neighbours door knocked in by the police as her curtains were still closed into the afternoon As it turned out the elderly lady had gone off the evening before and had forgotten to open them Everyone felt it was better to be wrong than for her to be found lying dead days later
 
 
# Independista 2011-10-04 23:42
I have posted this on another thread, but Im so mad Im repeating it here.
I have just watched yet again another example of BBC Scotland's anti SNP bias on Newsnight Scotland.
Gordon Brewer should be ashamed of himself at the way he treated Neil Stewart,of Scottish Renewals by constantly interupting him when Brewer asked him to comment. Not so Brian Wilson, who was given free reign to slag off Alex Salmond. Why was there no Scottish Government Energy minister to give balance to the discussion. I am absolutely raging. If anyone wants to organise a demo outside Pacific Quay, Ill be there
 
 
# Arbroath1320 2011-10-04 23:46
Becoming mad after watching Brewer and his "buddies" will do that to you Independista. :D
 
 
# chinacatalba 2011-10-05 04:48
I too watched the interviews on i-player. Brian Wilson was pretty much given free reign to attack Alex Salmond. Brewer seemed more interested in rubbishing the whole industry and was more interested in focussing on England having more off shore wind farms than Scotland.

Scant regard was given to the issues like the unfair connection charges or the Crown Estate.

If Brewer is typical of the Unionist mind set we shouldn't even bother. Another slant on "too wee, too poor, too stupid"?
 
 
# km 2011-10-05 01:47
Britain in a Day aims to provide a snapshot of the country on 12 November. The documentary will form part of the BBC's Cultural Olympiad, which will showcase British life and culture during the year when London hosts the Olympic Games.

guardian.co.uk/.../...

Key word: London.
 
 
# cokynutjoe 2011-10-05 08:42
BBC Scotland, in the absence of any alternative, regards itself as the "Opposition".
Last nights Newsnicht offering was pathetic, dragging that "Mrs Mac" of Scottish politics, a MacHasbeen if ever there was one, Brian Wilson, from the peat fire flame, for some snide remarks about the FM, is hardly cutting edge stuff. The "experts" turned out to be just that, and Brewer struggled to whip up anything detrimental to the industry. Time for the cash-strapped Beeb to save itself a few bob and lighten the load. This smarmy self-satisfied former Marxist, who obviously thinks he's in Paxo's class, should, like the equally smarmy self-satisfied Gary Robertson, get his jotters. Anybody any idea what kind of salary we are paying to these clowns and how much would Mrs Mac get for popping in? plus travelling expenses of course.
 
 
# SEUMAS31 2011-10-05 08:50
Answer to John 1601 4/10/11
Here is part of the answer received. I have shown this to Fiona, unfortunately, because it is so political, if I pass this to her Government Office they are not able to deal with it. I am happy to pass this to Mr Gibson for you, alternatively, you can resend this email without the SNP references and I can pass it on and hopefully they will be able to respond with regards to her broadcasting brief.


It would appear the reference to S.N.P. is the problem---looks like a wee bit of semanticism.
 
 
# tartanfever 2011-10-05 09:50
I would love to know who edits and produces BBC Scotland's News coverage. They are the people who decide the tone of the reporting along with what they report, but their names never appear as credits on any programme, in fact their names never appear anywhere on the BBC website.

Ken MacQuarrie is known as the 'head of BBC Scotland, but I would doubt he has anything to do with the production of the news.

So, rather conveniently the BBC have this black hole in their senior editorial news staff.

Channel Four have always credited their editor, Jim Gray. His name appears at the end of the main programme daily.
 
 
# J Wil 2011-10-05 10:57
How could Ken McQuarry be excused from any support for BBC Scotland's political activities? At best he would look incompetent and not in control of his own organization and it would be a resigning case.

We should remember the BBC Scotland banned Ian McWhirter from being invited onto the channel for political commentary after he gave evidence to the Broadcasting Commission and said things that the BBC didn't like to hear. It was only after an intervention by Alex Salmond that he was allowed to be invited back. So there has been political involvement by the head of BBC Scotland.
 
 
# Seagetagrip 2011-10-05 10:29
Tartanfever.
I am sorry, but to suggest that Ken McQuarrie has nothing to do with news content is naive beyond belief!
Seriously, we know that we had a result in May despite four years or more of anti SNP rants at Pacific Quay. However, the victory was due more to the support SNP voters who turned out rather than to the overall turnout.
In an Independence referendum, the turn out will be high and there is no doubt whose side the MSM will be on.
It is vitally imoportant now that the prejudice of BBC Scotland is tackled NOW!
We need a positive reaction. Sofar it is all talk and no action.
 
 
# Dowanhill 2011-10-05 16:53
Quoting Seagetagrip:
Tartanfever.
I am sorry, but to suggest that Ken McQuarrie has nothing to do with news content is naive beyond belief!
Seriously, we know that we had a result in May despite four years or more of anti SNP rants at Pacific Quay. However, the victory was due more to the support SNP voters who turned out rather than to the overall turnout.
In an Independence referendum, the turn out will be high and there is no doubt whose side the MSM will be on.
It is vitally imoportant now that the prejudice of BBC Scotland is tackled NOW!
We need a positive reaction. Sofar it is all talk and no action.


I agree with this 100%. You will never get proper unbiased reporting from BBC Scotland or proper redress. I've read many articles on this website complaining about what we have witnessed and heard on Radio + Television the night before, the BBC being the biggest culprit. Collectively this is an issue that all of us feel very frustrated about. It is time to stop talking and take collective action against the BBC[and I don't mean breaking the law].
After the polls have closed in the independence referendum and the Unionists have claimed a narrow victory and the claim ' It was the BBC what won it'. I'd feel cheated & disappointed that I never stood up to be counted
 
 
# Seagetagrip 2011-10-05 11:34
Tartanfever.
Sorry! "naive beyond belief" is a symptom of my ageing impatience with BBC Scotland. No offence intended!
 
 
# Dowanhill 2011-10-05 13:32
I watched Newsnight Scotland last night also. It was vague, irrelevent and seemingly pointless in the overall political context of things to come. Why isn't Newsnight Scotland discussing the vacumn in the Labour leadership. I totaly agree that something now, really has too be done. Can you imagine the tripe and mis-information that messers Campbel, Brewer, Rentin & Robertson will be spouting as the time nears the independence referedum. Any suggestions what could be done to collectively address the BBC Scotland bias?????
 
 
# west_lothian_questioner 2011-10-05 16:54
OFF TOPIC:

Sorry for the off topicness, but I couldn't find a suitable article to put this on;

guardian.co.uk/.../bert-jansch

Bert Jansch passed away this morning in a London hospice. Sad news.
 
 
# Arbroath1320 2011-10-05 17:04
O/T. Sorry folks. :D

I've just had an outside the box moment. Yes the "DARKENED ROOM" beckons, again! :D

With all the O/T posts that are appearing I wonder if the NNS Moderators have give any consideration to having a place permanently on the main page where people can put O/T posts.

I think this might help where people find interesting news items but there is no direct story currently running on the front page of Newsnet.

Just a thought.

Going for my lie down now! :D
 
 
# Lianachan 2011-10-05 17:07
I've said it here countless times. It's a forum we need.
 
 
# mato21 2011-10-05 17:41
Have you got a woman in there?? or a bottle or both?

The darkened room that is
 
 
# Arbroath1320 2011-10-05 17:47
Nah, just me. :D The bar is still getting built. :D

My brain keeps hurting. :D
 
 
# mato21 2011-10-05 17:50
The extension will be needing an extension
 
 
# Arbroath1320 2011-10-05 17:51
Are you offering your services? :D
 
 
# mato21 2011-10-05 17:57
Just so that there is no misunderstandin g what services would that be?
 
 
# Arbroath1320 2011-10-05 17:58
Why, what services are you offering?
 
 
# mato21 2011-10-05 18:01
I could be the resident poet in the darkened room (if you could afford me that is)
 
 
# ButeHouse 2011-10-05 22:54
"...they will have to be dragged kicking and screaming from their offices post independence". says clootie.

Trouble is clootie if we don't hammer these guys now there might not be any Independence.

The media in Scotland is using the old Chinese water trick of drip drip drip.

If their lies and misinformation is allowed to go unchecked they could eventually succeed in turning enough people away from Independence to make a difference to the referendum vote.

I'm all for action now which draws attention to their outrageous and blatant deceit.
 
 
# pa_broon74 2011-10-05 22:57
I thought McTernan was away in Oz. I see his pinch-faced noggin is on Newsnight.

I won't lie, I got a fright.
 
 
# ButeHouse 2011-10-05 23:01
Yes, he doesn't improve with age does he pa_b?
 
 
# Roll_On_2011 2011-10-06 03:04
The BBC axeman cometh:

dailymail.co.uk/.../...

But I doubt it will affect the political arm of the BBC in their so called ‘news’ coverage, especially at a time when the Empire is under stress.
 
 
# Seagetagrip 2011-10-06 12:17
I do think an organising protest initial group is needed prior to burning down Pacific Quay.
Suggest interested might meet at Shell Central Station at 7pm Tuesday next. Identified by angry expressions? We could repair to suitable hostelry or tea room to discuss next steps? If there are no replies I will try to think of something else!
 
 
# Arbroath1320 2011-10-06 12:39
Does any one think the message is finally getting through to the top bosses at the BBC?

bbc.co.uk/.../...
 
 
# Arraniki 2011-10-06 12:40
Looking back through the postings here.
I notice a gap from 18.01 to 22.54 yesterday.
I recall several posts appearing during this period.

Where did they go? Anyone?
 
 
# Gaavster 2011-10-06 13:03
Hi Arraniki

If the original poster(top of a thread) deletes his comment, all associated responses underneath are also deleted...

Maybe thats what has happened...

Hoppas allt ar bra med dig :)
 
 
# Seagetagrip 2011-10-06 12:43
I now note that deolution of broadcasting is a subject at a fringe meeting in Inverness which I will attend. Maybe that is a starting point to make use off. Open to suggestions.
 
 
# Briggs 2011-10-06 12:47
"Someone called Dr Stewart Waiton of Abertay University (Yes Abertay again) was shown criticizing the Scottish government’s proposed legislation.

Dr Waiton’s appearance on Reporting Scotland was followed by an appearance yesterday on ‘Call Kaye’ where the programme again covered the opposition to the SNP’s proposed legislation on tackling sectarianism. Some of the views expressed by this gentleman were extraordinary to say the least. Quite how this nondescript man has managed to persuade the BBC to provide him with two platforms in order to attack the SNP may be explained by the blog he set up called takealiberty"

Because someone expresses doubt about SNP legislation shouldn't make Dr Waiton a target for common abuse, at least not in a free and just Society.

The writer is as guilty of subjective distortion as the folk at the BBC.

I watched Waiton before the Justice Committee and his was a valuable contribution.

He has more of value to say than some of the folk who profit from the promotion of the Sectarian 'Industry' in Scotland.

Mr Waiton is Sunderland born and is perhaps more able to see that the Emperor is indeed naked.
 
 
# Robert Louis 2011-10-06 12:59
In your extensive quote, from the article in bold text, it is interesting that you chose to omit the very next sentence. So, for clarity, and the even handedness you seem to crave for this man's views, let me complete the section which you ommitted.

To be fair, I'll include the last sentence of the passage you quoted in bold;


QUOTE

"......Quite how this nondescript man has managed to persuade the BBC to provide him with two platforms in order to attack the SNP may be explained by the blog he set up called takealiberty.

The blog was created late last year in protest at the SNP’s minimum price for alcohol proposal, or as Stewart Waiton called it “seeking to increase the price of cheap booze”.


ENDQUOTE
(my bolding)

I do wonder, 'Briggs', why you forgot to include that last bit??? hmmmm....

What was it you were saying about "subjective distortion"??
 
 
# Arbroath1320 2011-10-06 13:12
As an amendment to my post above.

bbc.co.uk/.../...

There is hope yet folks.

I know 2017 is a few years away yet but hey we can all hope and dream can't we? :D

The only question is do they start shutting down Dis Reporting Scotland first or Newsnight Scotland.
 
 
# Arraniki 2011-10-06 13:22
Takk for det, Gaavster.
Alt er bra på øya.

Hvis ikke for været!!
 
 
# Briggs 2011-10-06 14:11
Quoting Robert Louis:
In your extensive quote, from the article in bold text, it is interesting that you chose to omit the very next sentence. So, for clarity, and the even handedness you seem to crave for this man's views, let me complete the section which you ommitted.

To be fair, I'll include the last sentence of the passage you quoted in bold;


QUOTE

"......Quite how this nondescript man has managed to persuade the BBC to provide him with two platforms in order to attack the SNP may be explained by the blog he set up called takealiberty.

The blog was created late last year in protest at the SNP’s minimum price for alcohol proposal, or as Stewart Waiton called it “seeking to increase the price of cheap booze”.


ENDQUOTE
(my bolding)

I do wonder, 'Briggs', why you forgot to include that last bit??? hmmmm....

What was it you were saying about "subjective distortion"??


Just saw that bit and grabbed it.

Totally innocent of any subjectivity I promise you.

The 'nondescript' comment was petty and uncalled for.

I like the good Dr Waiton ... the author and you apparently don't.

Life is tough intit?
 
 
# Keep UTG 2011-10-06 19:12
I may have missed any reference to UEFA`s sanction regarding Sectarianism,..."Rangers football club have already seen their fans banned from European matches after Europe’s governing body Uefa found the club’s supporters guilty of sectarian chanting"....they deem it a problem,this Dr Walton doesn`t,who am i more likely to listen to?

Life is tough,even harder with witless fools who grandstand their own ignorance.
 
 
# Roll_On_2011 2011-10-06 14:53
Robert Louis

Please be careful here Dr Waiton’s blog has a massive following.

Going back to 18 June 2011 he had a massive response to his blog…. 8 comments… and it went from strength to strength…. downwards from there.

No wonder the BBC wanted such a high profile blogger on their program.


takealiberty.blogspot.com/


Saturday, 18 June 2011

Alex Salmond’s proposed new ‘anti-sectarian’ laws - 8 comments


Thursday, 23 June 2011

Sign The Petition Against The Offensive Behaviour In Football Bill - 1 comments


Wednesday, 6 July 2011

The Offensive Behaviour at Football Bill - 1 comments


Wednesday, 31 August 2011

Index on Censorship & the Old Firm Anti-Sectarianism Bill - 1 comments


Wednesday, 14 September 2011

Sign the petition against the 'Anti-sectarian Bill' - 2 comments


Tuesday, 27 September 2011

Celtic And Rangers must unite to beat the ‘Sectarianism Bill’ - 2 comments


Friday, 30 September 2011

Sign the petition against the 'Anti-sectarian Bill' - 0 comments

Free speech in football T-shirts - 0 comments

'Sectarianism Bill' debated in the Scottish Parliament - 0 comments
 
 
# Lianachan 2011-10-06 18:33
Driving home from work, with BBC Radio Scotland on the radio talking about the BBC budget announcements, I heard somebody saying that the SNP should intervene to protect BBC Scotland! Hilarious stuff.
 
 
# mato21 2011-10-06 18:47
Of course they should after all look how helpful the BBC have been to the SNP I mean they might not have won the election without their endorsement Payback time I would call it
 
 
# Arbroath1320 2011-10-06 19:00
It's a cracker! :D

It's the way they tell them!

They consistently put down Scotland, consistently attack the SNP and now because their jobs are at risk they plead and beg for the Scottish Government to help preserve their jobs.

WELCOME TO THE REAL WORLD BBC! :D

The only question on my mind is which BBC Scotland programme is going to fold first.

Is it Dis Reporting Scotland, Newsnight Scotland, Good Morning Scotland or another Scotland put down show.
 
 
# roboftheburnawn 2011-10-06 18:46
See the bbc are making a 20% cut from their budget, approx. 2000 people will lose their jobs almost immediately

- No sorry my mistake, - was thinking about the armed forces, Public sector employees,nurse s etc. THE BBC ARE MAKING THESE CUTS OVER 5 YEARS.

Will bet my last dollar, any payoffs will have comfortable pensions or their personnel with be given jobs in other areas. I have nothing whatsoever against the hardworking staff that work there, but the cowboys parading as journalists and newsreaders make me sick.
 
 
# macdoc 2011-10-06 18:48
Slightly off topic

But some interesting results which I think just shows the extent of media bias.

If we type in the words ".......... accused" into the google search engine and go to advanced search and make it apply to only the past year and only within the UK these are the startling results.

"SNP accused" 13800 results
"labour accused" 954 results
"conservatives accused" 135 results
"tories accused" 488 results
"liberals accused" 40 results
"democrats accused" 151 results.

Remember only the SNP stand in scotland the rest are UK wide parties. Also conservatives,d eocrats etc could be used in the context of political parties outside the Uk i.e in the USA

I think this is astonishing and I hope this information is made public.
 
 
# cjmasta 2011-10-06 22:04
WOW, Could there be a story here for newsnet? Get this out there for people to know. Truelly astounding.
 
 
# snowthistle 2011-10-07 18:17
macdoc, can we steal your work and post it elsewhere?
 
 
# davidferguson1 2011-10-07 05:00
"How long must we wait before 'something is done' about BBC Scotland?"

Newsnet and its readership keep asking this question, again and again and again.

Done by whom? Who is the 'somebody' that you think is going to 'do something' on your behalf? There isn't 'somebody'. There's only you.

The answer to the question is obvious. It's: "Forever, unless and until you out there decide to do something about it".

The BBC is the mouthpiece of the established order. The established order is The Union. Therefore the BBC is the mouthpiece of Unionism.

So get off your bloody knees and stop paying the BBC Tax. Do 'something'. Or keep paying the BBC Tax, and for God's sake quit whining.
 
 
# cjmjr 2011-10-07 12:45
How about the Snp banning the BBC from Hollyrood they have the majority vote and dont give them any interviews and do it with style by informing the world press stateing thier reasons of biase.
 
 
# madpiratedad 2011-10-07 15:19
Went to the bank today (and not before time) and cancelled standing order!
 
 
# Seagetagrip 2011-10-07 17:45
Lianachan

I Think that it was the NUJ rep who said that perhaps the FM might make representations re redundancies of journalists as he, the FM, wished for broadcasting to be devolved by the Scotland Bill.
Quite interesting. We may have more support at Pacific Quay than we know about!
 
 
# TOHILL 2011-10-11 21:36
Quoting Seagetagrip:
I do think an organising protest initial group is needed prior to burning down Pacific Quay.
Suggest interested might meet at Shell Central Station at 7pm Tuesday next. Identified by angry expressions? We could repair to suitable hostelry or tea room to discuss next steps? If there are no replies I will try to think of something else!

Seagetagrip !
I have been away for a few days, did anything come of this ? is there anything in the pipeline ? any updates on this particular subject then I am always interested.
 

You must be logged-in in order to post a comment.

Donate to Newsnet Scotland

Banner

Latest Comments