Ho Ho! BBC threatens academic – demands 'raw data' for study

Derek Bateman reports:

Fascinating to see the BBC’s priorities revealed so nakedly tonight when Pacific Quay management contacted the University of the West of Scotland to object to the UWS Bias in Broadcasting report  which, as far as I can see, they didn’t have the courage to broadcast.

Instead of doing what any self-confident public service broadcaster should do and producing a news item out of a critical report from one of our own universities, they seem to have hidden it from the licence-fee paying public who bankroll them and then mounted a sabotage operation against the author.

I understand they are demanding to see the raw data such is their fury at being found out misleading viewers. But even without seeing it, they themselves are reaching conclusions saying they doubt the “factual accuracy of a significant number of the contentions contained within the report and with the language used in the report itself.”

In a letter from Ian Small, the head of public policy, which came to me via a third party source, they say: “many of the conclusions you draw are, on the evidence you provide, unsubstantiated and/or of questionable legitimacy.” You may detect the irony of this statement given what the report revealed about the BBC’s reporting and presentation of referendum news.

Read the whole sordid story here: http://derekbateman1.wordpress.com/2014/01/22/breaking-newsbbc-threatens-academic/

This reminds me of the famous Climategate email:

date: Wed Dec  8 08:25:30 2004

from: Phil Jones <p.jones@uea.xx.xx>

subject: RE: something on new online.

to: “Alex Kirby” <alex.kirby@bbc.xxx.xx>

At 17:27 07/12/2004, you wrote:

Yes, glad you stopped this — I was sent it too, and decided to

spike it without more ado as pure stream-of-consciousness rubbish. I can well understand your unhappiness at our running the other piece. But we are constantly being savaged by the loonies for not giving them any coverage at all, especially as you say with the COP in the offing, and being the objective impartial (ho ho) BBC that we are, there is an

expectation in some quarters that we will every now and then let them say something. I hope though that the weight of our coverage makes it clear that we think they are talking through their hats.

—–Original Message—–

Prof. Phil Jones

Climatic Research Unit

0 0 votes
Article Rating

Discover more from Watts Up With That?

Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.

97 Comments
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
Ken Hall
January 23, 2014 10:35 am

The paedophile protecting, anti-scientific, anti-business, and anti-British BBC needs to be shut down. It is not fit for purpose.

Robert W Turner
January 23, 2014 10:40 am

Ken Hall says:
January 23, 2014 at 10:35 am
The paedophile protecting, anti-scientific, anti-business, and anti-British BBC needs to be shut down. It is not fit for purpose.
As long as Top Gear is still on television.

January 23, 2014 10:42 am

Imagine the British Broadcorping Castration requiring the data!!! I think Steve McIntyre could now get a 500,000GBP/yr job with this newly enlightened media giant.

January 23, 2014 10:44 am

Whatever its faults, the BBC remains head-and-shoulders above any other major TV broadcaster in the English-speaking world. What would you prefer — Fox News??!!!

Reply to  Frank McDonald (@frankmcdonald60)
January 24, 2014 9:55 am

McDonald
What would you prefer — Fox News??!!!
yes, you got a problem with that?

January 23, 2014 10:44 am

We have an expression for that kind of behavior. it is called “stompy feet”. Think of a child that is told “no”.

January 23, 2014 10:45 am

Aaand Doctor Who!

cnxtim
January 23, 2014 10:45 am

Tony [Abbott] should follow suit with the ABC

cnxtim
January 23, 2014 10:47 am

typo Abbott

Sheffield Chris
January 23, 2014 10:48 am

Jezza for D G

Tom
January 23, 2014 10:48 am

Alex Kirby? The best you can expect from him in a weather forecast is “bright early, becoming dark later”.
A blinkered, on-message pawn.

martinbrumby
January 23, 2014 10:56 am

Someone remind me….
What is the BBC’s typical response to any request for information?
Remember 28gate?
Liars, incompetents, agit-prop pushers.
Close ’em down.

January 23, 2014 10:57 am

Not the BBC’s greatest fan but I’m all for research being explored and reports drilled down to the raw data.
Long may this new vigilance continue.

Gail Combs
January 23, 2014 11:00 am

philjourdan says: January 23, 2014 at 10:44 am
We have an expression for that kind of behavior. it is called “stompy feet”….
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
We call it a temper tantrum. image

Reply to  Gail Combs
January 24, 2014 9:52 am

@Gail Combs

We call it a temper tantrum. image

Yep! Same thing.

mpaul
January 23, 2014 11:01 am

As a non-UK resident, I’m having trouble decoding this story. What exactly happened? Who or what is Pacific Quay? “I understand they are demanding to see the raw data” — who is “they”? “In a letter from Ian Small, the head of public policy…” public policy for whom? “[T]hey say: “many of the conclusions you draw are …” who does “you” refer to?

Spillinger
January 23, 2014 11:09 am

“. . . .Alright. But apart from Top Gear, Doctor Who, Dancing with the Stars, Fawlty Towers, Only Fools and Horses., and Match of the Day, what has the BBC ever done for us?”

Reed Coray
January 23, 2014 11:15 am

Frank McDonald (@frankmcdonald60) says:
January 23, 2014 at 10:44 am
Whatever its faults, the BBC remains head-and-shoulders above any other major TV broadcaster in the English-speaking world. What would you prefer — Fox News??!!!

<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<
Yes!

Stephen Richards
January 23, 2014 11:18 am

Frank McDonald (@frankmcdonald60) says:
January 23, 2014 at 10:44 am
Whatever its faults, the BBC remains head-and-shoulders above any other major TV broadcaster in the English-speaking world. What would you prefer — Fox News??!!!
You are talking of dwarfs, of course. Aren’t you?

MD
January 23, 2014 11:20 am

Yes, Fox would be preferable

Stephen Richards
January 23, 2014 11:20 am

Spillinger says:
January 23, 2014 at 11:09 am
“. . . .Alright. But apart from Top Gear, Doctor Who, Dancing with the Stars, Fawlty Towers, Only Fools and Horses., and Match of the Day, what has the BBC ever done for us?”
You appear to have forgotten that most of BBC programming is done by private companies. Don’t need the BBC

Ashby Manson
January 23, 2014 11:20 am

You forgot Monty Python!

January 23, 2014 11:24 am

Well, he didn’t forget Monty Python; he remembered Monty Python when they weren’t BBC anymore.
Also, can anyone think of a good BBC comedy from this century (except Top Gear)?

Reply to  M Courtney
January 24, 2014 9:59 am

@M Courtney
Also, can anyone think of a good BBC comedy from this century (except Top Gear)?
Yes, their newscasts.

Todd (Northern Virginia)
January 23, 2014 11:24 am

Frank McDonald (@frankmcdonald60) says:
January 23, 2014 at 10:44 am
Whatever its faults, the BBC remains head-and-shoulders above any other major TV broadcaster in the English-speaking world. What would you prefer — Fox News??!!!
<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<
Your attempted shot at Fox News, says nothing about them, and much about you.

albertalad
January 23, 2014 11:25 am

Frank McDonald (@frankmcdonald60) says:
January 23, 2014 at 10:44 am
Whatever its faults, the BBC remains head-and-shoulders above any other major TV broadcaster in the English-speaking world. What would you prefer — Fox News??!!!
====================
Lol – Yes, Fox News, the guy on the corner, the local gossip busybody, comic books, etc., all do a better job of telling a grain of truth once in awhile.

Ronald Hansen
January 23, 2014 11:27 am

Frank McDonald (@frankmcdonald60) says:
January 23, 2014 at 10:44 am
Acutally, Fox News is reasonalby fair and balanced.
BBC has some great programs, but none of them are News programs.

MD
January 23, 2014 11:30 am

“Your attempted shot at Fox News, says nothing about them, and much about you.”
Standard response from any BBC lover. If [cornered] resort to attacking Fox News or the Daily Mail.

1 2 3 4