Media Defamation Monitor
BBC: Big Brother Conspiracy or British Bias Corporation?
Next Post

Press {{ keys }} + D to make this page bookmarked.


BBC: Big Brother Conspiracy or British Bias Corporation?


USA – March 8, 2019

Over the years the BBC, formerly the British Broadcasting Corporation, has been promoting highly biased, sometimes chauvinistic, often unobjective news.

It’s quite logical that now the BBC has such a low reputation – a reputation that has been in a downward spiral for many years, going back from the Iraq War onwards. No one really expects some sort of objective, dispassionate, impeccable news reporting from the BBC. Common people now think that the BBC is nothing more than just a propaganda outlet.

Stll, the BBC is one of the biggest state-funded media organizations in the world. Experts from the Office for Budget Responsibility expect total BBC spending in 2018-19 to amount to £4.0 billion (with £3.8 billion of current spending and £0.2 billion of capital spending). Just for comparison, RT’s budget in 2017 was 261 million euros.

BBC spokesman Mike Gardner said: "Although the BBC is funded by the UK government ... a fundamental principle of its constitution and its regulatory regime is that it is editorially independent of the UK government."

Allegations that the corporation is biased even against religious freedom and lacks impartial and objective journalism are regularly made by many observers. Thus, in 2008, the BBC's 50-year-old flagship weekly current affairs programme, “featuring interviews and investigative reports” Panorama aired a documentary claiming that Bangalore-based suppliers of Primark, a hugely successful retailer with 220 stores across Europe, were using child labor in their production. The claim has been found to be untrue and the BBC apologized to Primark, admitting its mistake. Responding to Primark's protest, the BBC conceded in a 49-page report that footage of three boys making garments for Primark was "more likely than not" "not genuine," after a three-year internal inquiry.

On May 27, 2012 the BBC News website used a photograph taken in Iraq in 2003 to illustrate a massacre which was reported as having taken place in Syria in 2012, The Telegraph reported.

Photographer Marco di Lauro said he nearly “fell off his chair” when he saw the image being used, and said he was “astonished” at the failure of the corporation to check their sources.

The picture, which was actually taken on March 27, 2003, shows a young Iraqi child jumping over dozens of white body bags containing skeletons found in a desert south of Baghdad.

It was posted on the BBC news website under the heading “Syria massacre in Houla condemned as outrage grows.”

“What I am really astonished by is that a news organization like the BBC doesn't check the sources and it's willing to publish any picture sent it by anyone: activist, citizen journalist or whatever. That's all,” di Lauro said.

In August 2013, the Telegraph reported a new study had found that the BBC “exhibits a left-of-centre bias in both the amount of coverage it gives to different opinions and the way in which these voices are represented.”

In the same month, on the very day of the Commons voted on military intervention in Syria, BBC News at 10 aired some dishonest footage on Panorama: Saving Syria’s Children. The full documentary, a shambolic piece of fiction designed to outrage the public into supporting the war, was aired just a month later.

In 2019, Robert Stuart did truly exceptional work in deconstructing the fakery and propaganda on which the BBC sees fit to spend taxpayers’ money.

However, BBC goes on with their proud boasting: “Our commitment to impartiality is at the heart of that relationship of trust. […] Research shows that, compared to other broadcasters, newspapers and online sites, the BBC is seen as by far the most trusted and impartial news provider in the UK.”

BBC is very biased against Russia, spreading a perception of the Russia as an international bully and a modern-day imperial power.

The BBC flagship documentary series Panorama has long been a stalwart of state-funded television propaganda. They can always be relied upon to tell us what we’re supposed to think.

When watching or reading BBC reports, one can easily see all the logical fallacies and non-sequiturs, all the distorted and factually wrong data presented as “facts,” and all the unending list of extraordinary omissions, which are now typical of Western reporting on Russia.

Panorama and David Dimbleby (scion of a famous family of BBC broadcasters extending back to the 1930s and who is seen by many people in Britain as a political commentator and broadcaster of unusual authority) really “love” Russia.

January 2016 brought us “Putin’s Secret Riches,” January 2017 “Trump: The Kremlin Candidate,” March of this year brought us two within a week, “Putin: The New Tsar” and “Taking On Putin!” As the titles suggest, none of them were especially objective or open-minded. That’s not in the BBC’s remit.

In 2018, just in the run up to the World Cup, Panorama aired another “documentary” about Russia, called “Putin’s Russia with David Dimbleby.” Very expectedly, it was full (again) of bias and factually wrong data.

“Russia has one of the most unequal economies in the world….20 million people live in poverty.”

This is technically true--there are 20 million people living under the poverty line in Russia, or 13.8% of the population. Before the sanctions it was less than 12%.

Meanwhile in the US, there are 45 million people living under the poverty line, or 13.8% of the population.

In the UK, there are 14 million people living under the poverty line, or 20.6% of the population.

Of course, where these numbers differ is that Russia’s number is coming down from 35%, and ours is going up. The makers of this program know this, because the numbers were published on the BBC’s own website.

In recent years they’ve had a number documentaries about North Korea being evil (“North Korea’s Secret Slave Camps” and “North Korea’s Nuclear Trump Card”). It is one of the oldest tricks in the US Imperial playbook: create a pretext for action against a country which they see as an “enemy.” Use this pretext to sanction a country with the aim of crippling their economy, and then use the fact that the economy is struggling to criticize the government of the target country. The US has been doing it to Cuba and North Korea for decades, to Venezuela for years, and Russia since 2014.

One of the BBC’s favorite topics is the “Russian troll farm,” which they have been pushing hard at least since 2015. BBC referred to a Radio Liberty article by Viktor Rezunkov, which, in turn, led to the MR7 local online newspaper website with a story in Russian. The author of the story was Andrei Soshnikov.

Andrei Soshnikov/Google+/PrtSc

Video posted on the MR7 website shows what Soshnikov says are employees sprinting into the building in the St. Petersburg suburb of Olgino. The story was widely repeated and distributed by U.S. mainstream media. Although NYT, Radio Liberty, and BBC claimed that there were around 400 Russian trolls working 12-hour shifts, we see only five (five!) people rushing early in the morning to a huge business center with dozens of companies sitting there.

The New York Times referred to Soshnikov as “the young investigative journalist at Moi Raion to whom Ludmila Savchuk leaked her documents. Soshnikov is an indefatigable reporter: During one investigation, he had gone so far as to create a 3-D computer model of a roadway in order to calculate how much asphalt had been stolen during its construction. He was one of the first journalists to expose the Internet Research Agency when he went undercover and got a job there in 2013. Since then, he had followed the agency’s Russian trolls.”

Speaking of NYT’s role in this phony “troll conspiracy,” we must admit that it was very significant.

This is how NYT’s “investigators” in tin foil hats describe their methods: “My translator and I approached a receptionist behind a desk and asked if we could speak with someone from Internet Research. (It dropped the ‘Agency’ on moving to 55 Savushkina.) She informed us that Internet Research was no longer a tenant. ‘A couple of months ago, we had to say goodbye, because it was giving the entire building a bad reputation,’ she said, matter-of-factly. She pointed to a board that displayed a makeshift directory of the building’s current occupants. The names were printed out on small scraps of paper, and none of them were Internet Research [SIC!]. But I did recognize one: ‘FAN,’ or Federal News Agency. I had read some news articles [SIC!] claiming that FAN was part of a network of pro-Kremlin news sites run out of 55 Savushkina, also funded by Evgeny Prigozhin. Former Internet Research Agency employees I had spoken to said they believed [SIC!] FAN was another wing of the same operation, under a different name. I asked to speak to someone from FAN. To my surprise, the receptionist picked up the phone, spoke into it for a few seconds and then informed us that Evgeny Zubarev, the editor in chief of FAN, would be right out to meet us.”

Here’s how NYT’s reporter Adrian Chen portrayed “Russian trolls” he interviewed in St. Petersburg: “She was a short young woman with midlength brown hair, dressed all in black: sweater, leggings, big wedge boots. She insisted on paying for my coffee. ‘You are a Russian guest,’ she said. He, by contrast, was a hulking skinhead with arms full of Nazi-themed tattoos, most prominent among them a five-inch swastika on his left biceps.”

In 2017 alone, BBC published some 10 articles about the Internet Research Agency and “Russian trolls.” On Nov. 4, the BBC told its readers how “Russian trolls promoted California independence,” then on Nov. 14, another piece appeared: “How Russian bots appear in your timeline.” On Dec. 6, the BBC wrote that “Researchers at the University of Edinburgh found more than 400 fake Twitter accounts attempting to influence UK politics out of 2,752 accounts suspended by Twitter in the US. The accounts were believed to have been run from the Kremlin-linked Russian Internet Research Agency (IRA).”

Only a very naïve reader would be surprised to know that Andrei Soshnikov is… a BBC Russian Service reporter, as clearly stated in another BBC piece from 2017 called “Facebook uncovers 'Russian-funded' misinformation campaign.”

Another BBC Russian Service reporter, who writes extensively on “Russian Trolls” is Andrei Zakharov.

Together with Soshnikov, Zakharov published an “investigation” (which is available only at the BBC Russian website) on the U.S. election and the Russian “troll farm” in November 2018. This time they “investigated” the USAIRA website. Quite amazingly, the BBC claimed that they were in contact with USAIRA before ThinkProgress first reported about USAIRA. The BBC wrote that a USAIRA employee provided BBC reporters with links to suspended Facebook accounts (Johnoliverexplains, Maga.people, Be.louder.with.crowder and with an exact number of friends. The BBC boasts that they have at least two “sources” at the “troll factory.” According to BBC sources, the Russian “troll factory” has 50 employees and is managed by Dzheykhun Aslanov, who was earlier among those indicted by Special Counsel Mueller.

In November 2017, the BBC Russian Service published a piece saying that the Russian media outlet Federal News Agency had been suspended by Google News service. When the BBC mentioned FAN, they referred to an “investigation” by the Russian media outlet RBC, which was published in March 2017. Guess who the author of the RBC article was? You got it – Andrei Zakharov.

However, the RBC piece uncovers the real causes of the well-planned and targeted information attack against independent Russian media. According to RBC’s calculations, in February 2017 the websites of FAN and it’s side projects (the now closed Federal Accident Agency and Economics Today) had over 36 million unique visitors combined, while FAN had 11 million visitors alon. In comparison, Zakharov wrote that the Regional Network of Hearst Shkulev Digital (part of Hearst Corp.) had only 25 million unique visitors. RBC claimed that they found 16 news websites that allegedly could be “coordinated” from one center. It’s worth noting that RBC’s “investigation” was enriched with links to… Soshnikov’s articles on the BBC website about the “troll factory.”

In 2018, the BBC published a few articles from Soshnikov, Zakharov and others about “troll farms” and the “Russian presence” on Twitter, the disinformation campaign against vaccination, the Russian firm charged by the Special Counsel Robert Mueller trial and others.

On February 27, 2019, the BBC published another editorial story about a recent cyber attack against Russia performed by the U.S. intelligence agencies, when U.S. Cyber Command (according to a WaPo report, the operation was led by General Paul Miki Nakasone who formed a special Russia Small Group, made up of 75 to 80 personnel from USCYBERCOM and the NSA), using e-mail intrusions with an attached poisoned word document and a downloaded via iPhone 7+ rootkit destructed a raid controller at a central server in FAN headquarters and the reformatting of FAN and USA Really’s server systems co-located at facilities in Sweden and Estonia. However, the USCYBERCOM's incursion attempt was quickly contained.

It’s quite evident that all these informational attacks from the BBC and other mainstream media which are supported by the U.S. regime and its intelligence and cyber warfare special agencies are aimed at disrupting the work of independent and honest Russian media which they see as more talented and thus more successful competitors with a larger audience.

There is a relentless war being waged here, not just at the BBC and not just against Russia, but throughout the Western world…and against reality itself, Off-Guardian wrote.

The BBC certainly no longer complies with its original charter to educate, inform, and entertain. It's a pompous and out of touch, bloated organization, riddled from top to bottom with greed, elitism, and the very worst traits of institutionalized corruption and cultural fascism.

Author: USA Really