The Disgusting Broadcasting Corporation, or why are we paying £145.50 per year to be lied to?

With today’s publication of the new report into child sexual abuse I decided to compare the coverage of this story on two separate media outlets, SKY news and the BBC.

Now I haven’t yet seen the full Berelowitz report myself, but the cynic in me suspects that it will contain a considerable amount of PC whitewash when it comes to the problem of Islamic sexual grooming gangs. However, that is an issue for another time and another post.

What concerns me is the gross differences between how SKY handled this story and how the BBC News Channel (20:00 evening news edition) covered this story.

SKY to its credit did cover the story in depth and did mention that imbalance in the number of Muslims of Pakistani descent who were involved in the organised grooming of vulnerable young women for sexual abuse. They also gave the headline figure which itemised sexual abuse cases according to the ethnic origin of the offender. Naturally these headline figures showed that White Britons or White other made up the majority of the offenders.

The BBC, an organisation that every Briton who owns a television reception device is obliged to fund at the cost of £145.50 (US $232.12), on pain of imprisonment or a fine, covered this story very differently.

The BBC’s Alison Holt covered the story but didn’t mention at all the specific problem of Pakistani Muslims acting as organised rape gangs. The BBC only gave the headline figures broken down by ethnic group of offender. Using only these figures plays down the problem of organised Muslim rape gangs, targetting vulnerable young women.

The BBC did NOT mention, which SKY did, the fact that out of 56 men prosecuted for organised on street sexual abuse grooming, 53 were Muslim and 3 were not. I think that sort of imbalance should have got any reasonable and responsible journalist thinking ‘here is a vital part of this story’. SKY managed to get this vital fact into the story but the BBC did not.

Have the BBC exchanged reporting of the news for acting as a propaganda outlet for the political Left? Sadly it seems like that to me on the basis of the way they have covered this story.

I’m utterly disgusted with the BBC over this. This is not spin, something which all news outlets do, this is outright lying on the BBC’s part. First the Jimmy Savile/Newsnight scandals, now the BBC appears to be covering up the extent of a particular type of sexual abuse problem, purely to fit in with the BBC’s own internal political culture.

Read this and weep, we are paying £145.50 to be lied to.

2 Comments on "The Disgusting Broadcasting Corporation, or why are we paying £145.50 per year to be lied to?"

  1. The BBC hasnt been trustworthy about these issues for years,their left wing PC bias and barely concealed sneering at native British(esp English) people and culture is so clunkingly obvious now that its almost becoming a those 30s era propaganda films extolling the joys of the USSR.

    • The great shame is the BBC could and should be better than it is.

      I’ve worked in very PC environments (similar to the BBC) and you do end up with groupthink where people feel inhibited from expressing a contrary point of view (even when backed up with evidence). This is what has happened to the BBC. Couple that with the fact that ‘like hires like’ and lefties will hire other lefties and you get the creation and perpetuation of an internal organisational culture that is very inward looking and self referential.

      The BBC needs a good purge of senior and middle management.

      The BBC, nation now speaks faeces unto nation.

Comments are closed.