Anything else comes from Reuters or AP newswires. Which may be honourable fro breaking news but I have been staggered by the lack of issue expertise at the BBC. Even in the political department most of the journos are entirely disinterested in politics, only giving a damn about who's up or who's down; personalising everything. No wonder we are Celerity culture obsessed, even politics is all about the messanger not the message. Understanding policy or how it has changed, or even that some ideas might have been implemented before; who cares ? Who gives a damn ? It's only infotainment.
I've been on a BBC training course. We were supposed to create a news segment. I jokingly opened the paper and said let's fake something about this story. A week later the very same story appeared on the 6 o'clock.
BBC News. I sh!t 'em keep to the Fen Causeway
"The Ten O'Clock News, Newsnight, Panorama and the Today programme are still our flagships and they still have devoted audiences.
BBC News is still, by far, the most trusted source of news in the United Kingdom, as the recent Press Gazette survey showed; and it still attracts the biggest audiences.
...There has been no seismic change in our audiences' attitudes to us; and in the industry our reputation rides high.
Last week (2005) at the Royal Television Society Journalism Awards, the BBC won 10 out of 16 categories - including two awards for Newsnight; three for Panorama, produced by our colleagues in current affairs; and the News Programme Of The Year award for the Ten O'Clock News."
http://news.bbc.co.uk/newswatch/ifs/low/newsid_4310000/newsid_4319400/4319429.stm
"February 27th, 2009 Posted by Judith Townend in Broadcasting, Event:
"As Tony Burman predicted, the `news channel of the year' award at last night's Royal Television Society awards didn't go to Al Jazeera. Instead, it went to the BBC - who did rather well on the night in several categories."
http://blogs.journalism.co.uk/editors/2009/02/27/royal-television-society-journalism-award-winners-i n-full/
"When asked if this means the BBC is attempting to set a standard for British journalists, Ray suggests it's not journalism per se which needs an image make-over: "In the last YouGov survey [measuring trust], 'journalist' was broken down into tabloid, broadsheet and broadcast journalist. Whereas the single word 'journalist' was sub-estate agent, when you split them up tabloid journalist was at the bottom and broadcast journalist was almost at the top."
Ray goes on to say that the reputation of a journalist is largely dependent on the openness and accountability of the organisation they work for, and the BBC's revamped complaints procedure and NewsWatch, which allows viewers to challenge editors, means both these areas are being addressed."
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/media/bbc-sends-its-staff-back-to-school-516272.html
"The report states that the BBC's performance in reporting the UK is seen as consistently superior to that of other broadcasters and nearly 70 per cent considered that the BBC accurately and fairly represented their nations and communities to the rest of the UK. However, it highlighted concerns that BBC news and current affairs programmes are not reporting some areas with the same high standards. Political coverage was seen as unduly focused on Westminster and there was evidence that stories from the nations were not taken up by the network."
http://www.nuj.org.uk/innerPagenuj.html?docid=836
"BBC scoops Emmys for Wild China and Storyville Date: 22.09.2009
Last night's 30th News and Documentary Emmy Awards in New York saw the BBC win awards for both the highly-acclaimed Storyville documentary strand and for BBC Bristol's Natural History Unit six-part landmark series, Wild China.
...
Storyville also scooped three awards at the ceremony. Taxi To The Dark Side, an in-depth look at the suspicious death of an Afghan taxi driver in US custody during the War on Terror, triumphed in two separate categories - Best Documentary and Outstanding Individual Achievement in a Craft: Research.
The film was commissioned by Storyville's Nick Fraser and was shown on BBC Two as part of the Why Democracy? season, exploring the state of democracy in the world.
Meanwhile, The Chuck Show picked up the award in the Outstanding Arts and Culture Programming category. ...
Storyville also had a successful night at the Primetime Emmy Awards on 20 September.
Roman Polanski: Wanted And Desired won two awards - Outstanding Directing for Non-Fiction Programming and Outstanding Writing for Non-Fiction Programming.
... George Entwistle, Controller, BBC Knowledge Commissioning, says: "I'm delighted that the BBC's creativity and excellence in documentary film was recognised with such fantastic success at the Emmy Awards - well done to all involved."
http://www.bbc.co.uk/pressoffice/pressreleases/stories/2009/09_september/22/emmys.shtml Maybe it's because I'm a Londoner - that I moved to Nice.
And the BBC stood so solidly behind Andrew Gilligan after he blew the whistle on the sexed up Saddam scoop that he's now working for Iranian TV.
I've had professional dealings with the BBC - they hired me to consult and do a very short expert slot on one of their shows - and they were indeed hopelessly shambolic and disorganised.
The BBC has always been the blandified voice of the establishment - occasionally authoritative, but utterly toothless in the face of real corruption, for the tragically obvious reason that it can't criticise governments aggressively when it relies on those governments for its income.
As for awards - the media are never self-congratulatory, of course.
Rather too much of the top BBC reporting and editorial talent makes the NYT op-ed team look expert.
Oh well, I wonder why ? Could it possibly be that the BBC is more financially vulnerable, given British libel law, to well-paid libel specialists than are a multitude of bloggers ?
"And the BBC stood so solidly behind Andrew Gilligan after he blew the whistle on the sexed up Saddam scoop that he's now working for Iranian TV."
As you well know, a very complicated case which proves little about the BBC in general.
"I've had professional dealings with the BBC - they hired me to consult and do a very short expert slot on one of their shows - and they were indeed hopelessly shambolic and disorganised."
Oh sure, on the basis of your personal - completely objective of course - account - the BBC must be "hopelessly shambolic and disorganised." That's how they get out widely respected world-wide news coverage in a variety of forms every day.
"The BBC has always been the blandified voice of the establishment - occasionally authoritative, but utterly toothless in the face of real corruption, for the tragically obvious reason that it can't criticise governments aggressively when it relies on those governments for its income."
Oh it's SO easy and self-congratulatory to mock from the sidelines and the fact is that despite its vulnerability to government funding it has been critical and many politicians can only wish, while they're being grilled by Paxman, Humphreys, etc., that your caricature were true.
"As for awards - the media are never self-congratulatory, of course."
Maybe; but they have choices and the awards tend to reflect the BBC's general reputation.
"Rather too much of the top BBC reporting and editorial talent makes the NYT op-ed team look expert."
Generalised jeering is unconvincing. Maybe it's because I'm a Londoner - that I moved to Nice.
I greatly appreciate the BBC. Their existence keeps the rest of the media honest. When Rupert has his way with the government, there will be nothing to stop Sky News becoming the same right wing lying trash that Fox News has become. Even the Daly Mail has to keep one foot in reality, however much the BBC tracks it.
But that doesn't mean I don't lambast it for that which it does badly. And it is very much stuck in a comfort zone. With honourable exceptions such as Panorama and some sections of Newsnight (both of which have suffered in recent years; Panorama has been all but cancelled, Newsnight is constantly under a budget constraint other depts seem to avoid) their jounalism has withered.
Uninterested, disinterested ? Ms Truss, it doesn't matter. They don't care. Really. People who report on politics for the BBC don't care about policy, aren't intrigued by implications, don't see contradictions. They just go for quotes and scuttlebutt about who's up or who's down.
This matters. Don't you see ? Really !! This is exactly why blogs came into their own, because the trad med were doing such a f-ck awful job of looking at what was going on, reducing it down to an ongoing series of "I'm a politician, get me outta here". keep to the Fen Causeway
"So a bunch of luvvies tell another bunch of luvvies that they were marvellous dahling kissie kissie mwah mwah. And that proves .. what precisely ?"
Just that, as usual, you prefer jeering to argument and evidence - a luxury the BBC doesn't have. The "luvvies" have choices and their choices coincide with the opinions of the majority of Brits and many people in other countries. You ignore the survey results.
"I greatly appreciate the BBC. Their existence keeps the rest of the media honest."
One one hardly have thought so from your diatribe. I welcome your more considered statement.
"But that doesn't mean I don't lambast it for that which it does badly. And it is very much stuck in a comfort zone."
Oh sure, it must be terribly comfortable to be the subject of government attempts to control what you say and left and right wing complaints of bias, not to mention the complaints of special-interest groups such as the Zionist lobby.
"With honourable exceptions such as Panorama and some sections of Newsnight (both of which have suffered in recent years; Panorama has been all but cancelled, Newsnight is constantly under a budget constraint other depts seem to avoid) their jounalism has withered."
Nobody claims the BBC is perfect, nor that it hasn't suffered from cuts.
"Uninterested, disinterested ? Ms Truss, it doesn't matter."
Can you imagine the BBC giving a reply like that.
"They don't care. Really. People who report on politics for the BBC don't care about policy, aren't intrigued by implications, don't see contradictions. They just go for quotes and scuttlebutt about who's up or who's down."
Totally ridiculous generalisation based on a few personal experiences evidently seen in an extremely biased way - pretty much par for your comments on many groups you don't happen to like.
"This matters. Don't you see ? Really !! This is exactly why blogs came into their own, because the trad med were doing such a f-ck awful job"
Oh really, based on what evidence ? The fact is that, as indicated in the quotations I cited, the majority of the population still relies on and trusts the BBC. But of course they're all fools and you know better. Maybe it's because I'm a Londoner - that I moved to Nice.
