Skip to content or view screen version

BBC Censorship Shame - Simon McCoy & Dale Farm

Jen Smith | 19.09.2011 09:32 | Anti-racism | Repression

BBC Censorship Shame - Simon McCoy & Dale Farm



In a shameful act of political censorship, at 10:13 this morning BBC News 24 anchor Simon McCoy cut off a representative of the Dale Farm action group mid-sentence when she tried to talk about the bailiff's company having a reputation for violence, and bailiffs having broken travellers' arms etc at previous evictions etc.

Simon McCoy interrupted the speaker mid-sentence, and said these were claims "the BBC can't verify" - the BBC don't have to verify them as they were being made by an interviewee and not by the BBC themselves, and then the interview went dead. In contrast to this sudden passion for verifiable facts, the BBC have constantly reported that Dale Farm residents built homes without planning permission, when in fact it turns out 50% of Dale Farm residents DO have planning permission to build on what is, in all cases, their own land, and land that was a former scrap yard as well.

Meanwhile the BBC News 24 has widely reported 3 people being arrested after a banner drop outside the Lib Dem conference, but confined all reports of the 1,500 people who marched against Lib Dem treachery to a few lines on the BBC website.

Jen Smith

Comments

Hide 8 hidden comments or hide all comments

Hidden Comment

This posting has been hidden because it breaches the Indymedia UK (IMC UK) Editorial Guidelines.

IMC UK is an interactive site offering inclusive participation. All postings to the open publishing newswire are the responsibility of the individual authors and not of IMC UK. Although IMC UK volunteers attempt to ensure accuracy of the newswire, they take no responsibility legal or otherwise for the contents of the open publishing site. Mention of external web sites or services is for information purposes only and constitutes neither an endorsement nor a recommendation.

"Interviewee" not "interviewer"

19.09.2011 10:02

Typed is haste - that should have said "interviewee" not "interviewer" and "BBC" not "BCC"

Indy mods please move up as an addition ;)

Jen S

Verification

19.09.2011 10:12

Like the BBC had to "verify" whether Dominique Strauss-Kahn was actually a rapist or not before reporting that that allegation had been made against him

The Unreal McCoy

Hidden Comment

This posting has been hidden because it breaches the Indymedia UK (IMC UK) Editorial Guidelines.

IMC UK is an interactive site offering inclusive participation. All postings to the open publishing newswire are the responsibility of the individual authors and not of IMC UK. Although IMC UK volunteers attempt to ensure accuracy of the newswire, they take no responsibility legal or otherwise for the contents of the open publishing site. Mention of external web sites or services is for information purposes only and constitutes neither an endorsement nor a recommendation.

Not censorship - obvious libel avoidance.

19.09.2011 13:28


There is an obvious reason why the BBC had to halt that interview. You can't broadcast nasty allegations about someone unless you have the evidence to back it up - otherwise you have your backside sued off for libel. The BBC didn't have the evidence; all it had was someone blurting out the accusations. Whether or not the accusations were true, and whether or not the accuser had a box-file of evidence tucked away at home, the only thing the BBC could do was halt the interview.

This is totally different to the DSK case. The BBC could report the guy had been arrested and accused of the crime... because he had been. Whether or not he actually carried out the crime is immaterial: he was arrested and accused for it, which is what the BBC reported. There are also laws surrounding the coverage of criminal cases.

Norvello

Hidden Comment

This posting has been hidden because it breaches the Indymedia UK (IMC UK) Editorial Guidelines.

IMC UK is an interactive site offering inclusive participation. All postings to the open publishing newswire are the responsibility of the individual authors and not of IMC UK. Although IMC UK volunteers attempt to ensure accuracy of the newswire, they take no responsibility legal or otherwise for the contents of the open publishing site. Mention of external web sites or services is for information purposes only and constitutes neither an endorsement nor a recommendation.

Agreed

19.09.2011 14:05


Good editorial reporting requires that you report what has happened, not heresay.
There is obviously a grey line inbetween, but you can't just report what someone has said because you would never get the truth, it would just be:
party A said: "Yes they did"
party B said "No we didnt"

That would just be shit. Hence they don't do it that way.

Suggest you train and become a reporter if you dont like how you see people doing the reporting. Ie. rather than criticise - replace if you can do better job

anon

Hidden Comment

This posting has been hidden because it breaches the Indymedia UK (IMC UK) Editorial Guidelines.

IMC UK is an interactive site offering inclusive participation. All postings to the open publishing newswire are the responsibility of the individual authors and not of IMC UK. Although IMC UK volunteers attempt to ensure accuracy of the newswire, they take no responsibility legal or otherwise for the contents of the open publishing site. Mention of external web sites or services is for information purposes only and constitutes neither an endorsement nor a recommendation.

Yes it's censorship

19.09.2011 14:25

"You can't broadcast nasty allegations about someone unless you have the evidence to back it up?"

They did with Dominique Strauss-Kahn, hundreds of times (and with every other famous person who's ever been alleged to have committed any form of misconduct or crime before their guilt or innocence has been established by a trial). Allegations are reported by the media ALL THE TIME

G6

Better job

19.09.2011 14:31

The way to do a "better job" in situations like this is to point out that the claims are unproven allegations, and then continue the interview without cutting the interviewee off mid sentence..... interviews going suddenly silent because they happen to expressing a controversial opinion is something you associate with dystopian sci-fi films about authoritarian states. If the screen had suddenly gone blank mid-interview rather than it being sound only, with Simon McCoy speaking over the break, this kind of censorship would never be accepted, and it shouldn't be, because it's a disgrace

Stroll on

BBC Control Order.

19.09.2011 15:03

I think you are all giving the BBC far more credit than it deserves.

The BBC is looking at the whole situation and making judgements based on audience figures and business logic. They are not concerned with who is right or what X says about Y and why Z might therefore be offended.

They simply see a large operation to run the travellers out of Basildon and they see scope for an audience while that is going on. The BBC will look at any given situation and will simply back that which promises revenue and an audience. If Adolph Hitler were to emerge in this country and he had enough supporters behind him, the BBC would back him. They take the same approach as government. Always back the strongest contender. Its usually where the money is.

There is no moral or legal reason why this woman should have been cut-off. After all, if she makes accusations that are unfounded, then it is the business of the accused to come forward to seek redress through the law. The BBC play no part in this.

The reason this woman was cut off, is because it flies in the face of the interests the BBC have already decided they are going to back. And nothing more.

The BBC are simply a subjective corporate entity that very rarely concerns itself with the reporting of the truth, unless that thruth coincides with the interests of its sponsors and ideological backers.

Just another fine example in the long litany of BBC prejudice, mindless opportunism and sponsored bias that is the culture of the BBC.

I don't watch the BBC's output anymore because I don't consider it reliable or accurate. I consider it the British TASS.

A decent journalist.

BBC are still lying

19.09.2011 16:29

The BBC are still describing Dale Farm as "the UK's largest illegal travellers site", without bothering to point out that the majority of the homes at Dale Farm are, even within the scope of the existing law, 100% legal

 http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-14978942

Stalactite

Hidden Comment

This posting has been hidden because it breaches the Indymedia UK (IMC UK) Editorial Guidelines.

IMC UK is an interactive site offering inclusive participation. All postings to the open publishing newswire are the responsibility of the individual authors and not of IMC UK. Although IMC UK volunteers attempt to ensure accuracy of the newswire, they take no responsibility legal or otherwise for the contents of the open publishing site. Mention of external web sites or services is for information purposes only and constitutes neither an endorsement nor a recommendation.

travellers

19.09.2011 22:48

the BBC is also lying in saying they are travellers too..........

They are building and seem pretty permanent to me. Thye have indicated that they want to stay ther.



not a traveller

Hidden Comment

This posting has been hidden because it breaches the Indymedia UK (IMC UK) Editorial Guidelines.

IMC UK is an interactive site offering inclusive participation. All postings to the open publishing newswire are the responsibility of the individual authors and not of IMC UK. Although IMC UK volunteers attempt to ensure accuracy of the newswire, they take no responsibility legal or otherwise for the contents of the open publishing site. Mention of external web sites or services is for information purposes only and constitutes neither an endorsement nor a recommendation.

@ G6

20.09.2011 13:11

"They did with Dominique Strauss-Kahn, hundreds of times (and with every other famous person who's ever been alleged to have committed any form of misconduct or crime before their guilt or innocence has been established by a trial). Allegations are reported by the media ALL THE TIME "

Err. No. Let's look at how the BBC covered the Dominique Strauss-Kahn case. Here's the start of one of their articles:

"IMF chief Dominique Strauss-Kahn has consented to a medical examination over allegations of serious sexual assault. Mr Strauss-Kahn, who was arrested in New York, denies charges of attacking and attempting to rape a hotel maid..."

They've not just broadcast someone saying "He did it!". More significantly, there is special protection for reporting about an arrest or trial. Without that, it's just the BBC effectively making the accusation, so they'd be sued.

What happens when media organisations like BBC make nasty accusations without the evidence? Well, if you visit Tabloid Watch you'll quickly find dozens of cases of pay-outs by the Daily Mail, Daily Star and others because they've been sued.

Norvello

Hidden Comment

This posting has been hidden because it breaches the Indymedia UK (IMC UK) Editorial Guidelines.

IMC UK is an interactive site offering inclusive participation. All postings to the open publishing newswire are the responsibility of the individual authors and not of IMC UK. Although IMC UK volunteers attempt to ensure accuracy of the newswire, they take no responsibility legal or otherwise for the contents of the open publishing site. Mention of external web sites or services is for information purposes only and constitutes neither an endorsement nor a recommendation.

The real censorship

22.09.2011 09:01


OK - so someone puts up a posting accusing the BBC of "censorship" simply because a journalist cut someone off when they were making an on-air accusation that the BBC would have to treat as potentially libellous. (Google "libel" - learn how it works) (really).

In contrast I put up a factual comment, explaining why, legally, the BBC obviously had no choice in the matter.

That comment got pulled by the moderators. On a forum complaining about media "censorship". Oh the irony.



Norvello

Hidden Comment

This posting has been hidden because it breaches the Indymedia UK (IMC UK) Editorial Guidelines.

IMC UK is an interactive site offering inclusive participation. All postings to the open publishing newswire are the responsibility of the individual authors and not of IMC UK. Although IMC UK volunteers attempt to ensure accuracy of the newswire, they take no responsibility legal or otherwise for the contents of the open publishing site. Mention of external web sites or services is for information purposes only and constitutes neither an endorsement nor a recommendation.

@Stalactite

23.09.2011 09:24

I think you are referring to the neighbouring Oak Lane
The BBC's description is correct

anon

Hide 8 hidden comments or hide all comments