BBC's Atlantic Stirrings

I was amused by a story on the Today programme just before 7am this morning highlighting a new study in Nature that claims to show a link between the frequency and severity of Atlantic hurricanes and rising sea temperatures. Amused on three counts: Firstly, no attempt was made to ask how this study sits with contradictory claims made last week that actual records of hurricanes over the last 150 years show an inverse relationship between the two; i.e. that increasing temperature in fact results in fewer hurricanes.

Secondly, no attempt was made to ask how this study can be reconciled with another published also by Nature last year showing that there is little correlation between Atlantic hurricanes and temperatures in the Atlantic but that there is, again, an inverse correlation with El Niño-related warming in the eastern Pacific.

Thirdly, that the scientist interviewed categorically asserted that there was no demonstrable link to claims of anthropogenic global warming but rather the observed 0.7°C warming was within natural fluctuations known as the Atlantic Multi-Decadal Oscillation.

Thus the BBC's latest evidence in support of its position on human-induced global warming evaporated before anyone could even complain about the lack of rigour in its questioning...

A Royal Disgrace

As noted by the Telegraph and Archbishop Cranmer, Her Majesty the Queen today became the oldest monarch in British history, outliving her great-great grandmother, Queen Victoria.

Did the BBC make mention of this great cause for national celebration in its ten o'clock news? Of course not, it was too fixated on Diana.

God save the Queen.

Diana: The Soap Opera

As far as I am concerned, the birth of a son to Prince Edward and Sophie Countess of Wessex certainly ranks as news. But can anyone tell me why the BBC insists on inflicting on us daily installments of the Diana Soap Opera during its news bulletins? If I wanted to relive her final moments over and over, I would buy the Daily Express, not look to what is supposed to be a world leader in independent news coverage.

Why So One-Sided?

Last night, my wife missed the ten o'clock news and asked me if there had been any update about Pakistan. Strangely, given the day's developments, there hadn't.

The night before, the BBC had reported on the state of emergency declared by President Musharraf last Saturday and the subsequent arrest of lawyers and judges. Tonight, we were treated to scenes of police beating and arresting supporters of the former Prime Minister Benazir Bhutto, who was briefly placed under house arrest to prevent her from holding a rally. Yet yesterday we were told nothing of Pervez Musharraf's renewed pledge to hold parliamentary elections before 15 February, as planned, and to stand down as head of the army, if and when the Supreme Court validates his recent election as president for another term. Indeed, still no mention was made of this tonight.

The world is complex enough to understand without the media making it more difficult (and depressing) by only ever reporting negative circumstances. That said, on its website, the BBC does have an interesting analysis worth reading: Is Musharraf-Bhutto conflict all it seems? Just a shame they couldn't find a bit more space in their television news to present a more balanced report.

Conviction Politics & Media Spin

Having yesterday joined the international bloggers' day of silence for Burma (and also having spent the day catching up with life after the conference), I have now caught up with some of the news and comment that I missed over the past few days. More than anything else, I am amazed how coverage of highlights from the Conservative conference contrasts with what so many experienced and were saying behind the scenes at the time. Quite clearly, if we are ever to see a return of conviction politics, spin is a problem to be addressed as much by the media as by political parties. Credit then to Daily Mail blogger Ben Brogan for his honest appraisal of the IDS speech:

Something quite extraordinary happened in the hall a short while ago. Iain Duncan Smith gave a speech, without notes, about repairing Britain's broken society with tolerance. He finished it with a heart-stopping appeal to "make it your life". The response was a huge standing ovation, and this time it was real. In fact, it just went on and on. He just stood there looking deeply moved. At one point his face started to crumple and there was a distinct glint of tears in his eyes. Was he recalling the horror of four years ago in the same hall, when 17 staged standing ovations failed to save him from the chop? And was this a case of apology by applause? A telling moment in a conference that is turning into a triumph.

What was most striking was that Iain spoke not merely "without notes" (a feat that the media made much of when Cameron more or less repeated the act) but also with such great passion — he was truly inspiring, which is why both men and women were moved to tears. As one of Brogan's commenters says, "Unfortunately unless you were at Blackpool, you won't know anything about IDS's speech. The BBC haven't covered it at all - and apparently nor have Sky. I've been reading about it on blogs and am now feeling seriously deprived. How can anyone make an informed decision in an election if the media fix the news stories like this? It just isn't right."

See also: Quentin Letts' report in The Daily Mail: "Iain Duncan Smith, the 'Quiet Man' of politics, the former Tory leader so long trashed and traduced as a loser from another age, gave an absolute scorcher of a speech. No notes. No lectern. Packed with gestures and variety and oompf."

Planet Relief Update

Well, what do you know:

BBC switches off climate special

The BBC has scrapped plans for Planet Relief, a TV special on climate change.

The decision comes after executives said it was not the BBC's job to lead opinion on climate change.

Celebrities such as Ricky Gervais were said to be interested in presenting the show, which would have involved viewers in a mass "switch-off" to save energy.

The BBC says it cut the special because audiences prefer factual output on climate change... A BBC spokeswoman said the cancellation was not due to concerns over impartiality."

"This decision was not made in light of the recent debate around impartiality." Sure, and Iraq was full of WMDs and Father Christmas will bring me a new job later this year if I keep being a good boy...

Planet Relief

First there was Live Earth. Now, yet again, the BBC is unashamedly revealing its blatant environmentalist agenda. Today's Guardian reports:

BBC news chiefs attack plans for climate change campaign

Two of the BBC's most senior news and current affairs executives attacked the corporation's plans yesterday for a Comic Relief-style day of programming on environmental issues, saying it was not the broadcaster's job to preach to viewers.

The event, understood to have been 18 months in development, would see stars such as Ricky Gervais and Jonathan Ross take part in a "consciousness raising" event, provisionally titled Planet Relief, early next year.

But, speaking at the MediaGuardian Edinburgh International Television Festival yesterday, Newsnight's editor, Peter Barron, and the BBC's head of television news, Peter Horrocks, attacked the plan, which also seems to contradict the corporation's guidelines. Asked whether the BBC should campaign on issues such as climate change, Mr Horrocks said: "I absolutely don't think we should do that because it's not impartial. It's not our job to lead people and proselytise about it." Mr Barron said: "It is absolutely not the BBC's job to save the planet. I think there are a lot of people who think that, but it must be stopped."

Martin Durkin, producer of The Great Global Warming Swindle, possibly speaks for all who are tired of the BBC's bias: "The thing that disturbs me most is that the BBC has such a leviathan position in Britain. If it decides that it is going to adopt climate change as a moral purpose, I have got a lot of trouble with that. I don't think it is the role of the BBC to spend my money on a moral purpose."

Economic Competitiveness

I find the media coverage of John Redwood's economic competitiveness report, due to be released this Friday, rather amusing. Compare these headlines and see if you can match them to the papers on the right (reveal the answers by hovering over each headline):

1. Tories plan to make £14bn savings in radical move to slash red tape	A. Daily Mail
2. Cameron on offensive with call for tax cuts	B. The Guardian
3. Cameron would slash services to pay for tax cuts	C. The Telegraph

Meanwhile, as Iain Dale rightly notes, the BBC has consistently revealed its left-wing bias throughout the day by commencing each of its bulletins about the report with the words, "The Labour Party has today criticised..." Now, the Blair/Brown British Broadcasting Company wouldn't be just a tad upset at Redwood branding their treasured licence fee a "poll tax," would they?!

If you can't wait until Friday and want to find details about the report, the Sunday Telegraph has a summary of what Redwood describes as a "tax cut by any other name." Among other proposed cuts in red tape and regulation, it calls for a repeal of working time regulations, originally set by Brussels, along with all data protection laws, which it claims are an "expensive bureaucracy which fails to protect people's data." It also calls for the recently introduced Home Information Packs (Hips) to be scrapped and for Britain to opt out of the EU directive on food supplements.

A Lost Virtue: Excellence

"Primary tests results improving" reads the encouraging BBC headline ... the "best set of Key Stage 2 results we have ever seen," according to Schools Minister Andrew Adonis.

Now, I always thought that a headline was supposed to summarise the most significant point of what followed. Yet the article reveals "the overall results show that four out of 10 children have failed at least one part of the tests." Put another way, just 60% of the 600,000 11-year-olds about to enter secondary school next month are able to read, write, and count properly?! The headline should read "Education Failing Next Generation"!

What kind of foundation does this lay for the future? We are talking about the unfulfilled potential of hundreds of thousands of individuals — and the devastating impact of an uncompetitive economy for decades to come. And the head of the National Union of Teachers is right: it is not the fault of the teachers, who continue to provide the best service they can; Labour is to blame, with its unhealthy obsession with tests, targets and tables. This above all is surely why we need a new government — one "that is for excellence and opportunity for all." In the meantime, perhaps the only hope is for every parent to have their children join the scouts or some other such club where they might yet have a chance of learning to aspire for excellence.

NB. Of course, in the wider context of school examinations having got significantly easier since the end of the 1980s — as proven by a study carried out by Durham University’s curriculum, evaluation and management centre and summarised by Burning Our Money — even the claim that 60% are ready for secondary school should probably be questioned.

Human Rights Act Attracts Terrorists

In addition to Interpol's damning criticisms about British immigration procedures, The Times has an article on yet another immigration story that the BBC has failed to make any mention of at all. The paper quotes a report from Migrationwatch warning that unless we pull out of the European Convention on Human Rights, terrorist suspects will be able to remain in Britain indefinitely and at public expense, whether or not they are arrested or found guilty. The briefing paper begins:

"The UK’s continued adherence to the ECHR (European Convention on Human Rights) is an attraction for terrorists to operate in and from Britain, secure in the knowledge that, even if convicted, they can never be deported and that, if they come under suspicion, they cannot be effectively detained. We should therefore give six months notice to withdraw from the Convention and write our own Human Rights law with the same guarantees, except for terrorist offences.

Britain is now facing a security threat unparalleled in our history. Accordingly, we must amend our laws without delay. Suicidal terrorists (some from overseas and some born in Britain) do not operate alone; others encourage, finance and organise them. It is now essential that the latter be deterred by the certain prospect of immediate expulsion on completion of a sentence for a terrorist offence."

I wonder if Gordon Brown and Jacqui Smith agree with their predecessors that the Government has struck the wrong balance between protecting the safety of the public and the rights of individuals suspected of being involved with terrorism and we should opt out of the ECHR.

If he can put down The Blair Years, maybe John Humphrys can find out for us in the next day or two...

Misplaced Priorities

Why on earth did the Today programme give Alistair Campbell a full half-hour to promote his book and spin for Tony Blair this morning, when we have the head of Interpol criticising our immigration procedures and claiming "The UK's anti-terrorist effort is in the wrong century"? The day's top story was tomorrow's security, not yesterday's spin!

Noting that The UK currently makes only 50 checks a month on the Interpol database, compared with 700,000 by France and 300,000 by Switzerland, the head of the 186-nation international police agency accused the UK of failing to share information on terrorism investigations and not carrying out adequate checks on people crossing its borders. He also told the BBC that "We have received not one name, not one fingerprint, not one telephone number, not one address, nothing from the UK about the recent thwarted terrorist attacks."

With the new security minister, former navy chief Admiral Sir Alan West, suggesting the battle to deal with radicalisation in the fight against terrorism could take at least 15 years, the Government has some serious explaining to do. Two years after the so-called 7/7 attacks and nearly six years after the Al-Qaeda threat first struck so successfully against the West, why are we so far behind where we should be with securing our borders and international cooperation? I fully expect John Humphrys to take Home Secretary Jacqui Smith to task tomorrow — it is inexcusable that he did not do so today.

BBC Impartiality Failure

Anti-American; biased coverage of single-issue political causes such as climate change and poverty; and Muslims given preferential treatment over Christians.

That is the judgement of the BBC Trust about the broadcasting corporation, which it says "has failed to promote proper debate on major political issues because of the inherent liberal culture of its staff." If that's what the BBC's own trustees believe, no wonder the BBC has been accused by others of being in danger of peddling government propaganda! Criticising programmes such as The Vicar Of Dibley, the Trust quotes BBC executives admitting they would broadcast images of the Bible being thrown away but not the Koran in case Muslims were offended. So, our media tsars believe that it's OK to offend Christians (presumably because they're supposed to be forgiving and are not expected to turn violent) whereas the sensitivities of the Muslim minority are to be uncritically pandered to.If the BBC is now "going to face the challenges of impartiality in the modern world," perhaps its soap operas and sitcoms could also offer a few more positive role models rather than glossing over the complexities of life in favour of an orgy of bitterness and gossip, conflict and infidelity. Some claim that the portrayal of real life would not be as entertaining, but the truth is reality needs no exaggerating to be challenging, uplifting, even eye-opening and mind-stretching. Others contend that people are not influenced by what they know to be fictional stories. However, that is not how the human mind works — hence the vast sums that are spent on advertising. Just consider the increase in people enrolling onto forensic science courses at university in recent years, attributed to the influence of TV crime dramas such as Waking the Dead and Crime Scene Investigation.

We all assimilate subliminal messages whether we wish to or not and affecting how and what people think is the business of mass media. Unlike all other media providers, the BBC is uniquely privileged in being funded by tax-payers through the television licence fee. Its responsibility to offer objective, impartial, and balanced output is therefore all the greater.

Israeli Time Bomb

A reader has written to ask why I have not mentioned the kidnap of BBC journalist Alan Johnston, who disappeared in the Gaza Strip on 12 March. In part I have not done so because others, such as Charles Moore in today's Telegraph, have done so far more effectively than I could do — In the spirit of which, I point you in the direction of an item that I suspect most readers in Britain will otherwise miss out on, "Israel’s “sadistic torture” of Palestinians" at AlJazeera. It begins:

In Israel, there is “no effective barrier – not legal and certainly not ethical – that stands in the way of using torture,” concluded a recent report by the Public Committee Against Torture in Israel (PCATI).

The report slammed the Israeli High Court’s approval of the use of tough tactics to interrogate Palestinians classified as “ticking bombs”, saying that the ruling was interpreted by Israel’s internal intelligence service, the Shin Bet, as a green light to torture almost every Palestinian detainee. Moreover, PCATI said that prison wardens, policemen and even doctors took part in torturing Palestinian detainees, as well as lawyers, military judges and senior officials in the Justice Ministry.

In the report, titled “A Time Bomb”, PCATI detailed accounts of nine Palestinian detainees who have been subjected to physical, sexual and psychological abuse at the hands of their Israeli interrogators over the past year.

More Global Warming Evidence

Anyone who has watched or listened to the BBC's news lately will know they have become rather absorbed by an event that happened two years ago, when a sizeable chunk of the Arctic ice sheet came loose, setting it on the same course as all other icebergs.

You can be reasonably sure that they will not be giving the same airspace to the latest scientific evidence on global warming. For, a new study into Atlantic hurricanes published in Nature has found little correlation with ocean temperatures. Just as with recent research on hurricane activity in the Atlantic, Kilimanjaro's melting glaciers, rising sea levels, and changes in polar bear populations, the hard facts conflict with the fashionable message being promoted by the climate change industry.

The research, which analysed sediment records going back 5000 years, instead discovered an inverse correlation with El Niño-related warming in the eastern Pacific. So, whenever El Niño picked up in the Pacific, then hurricanes were almost non-existent in the Atlantic. Conversely, whenever El Niño fell away, the storms kicked up again. In the words of one of the researchers, we need to "Consider the whole picture: On the centennial and millennial scale, El Niño seems to trump the warming processes in the Atlantic."

Wot No Exit Poll?

I don't know if anyone else has commented on this but it's been bugging me since 10pm last night and I can't find anything on any of the other likely political blogs (please correct if I'm missing it somewhere): What happened to the customary BBC exit poll? Normally, whenever polls close, the BBC is the first to predict the eventual result based on its exit poll. Did they really not conduct one (if so, why not)? Or was the result so bad for Labour that they decided not to reveal the results and hope that over a 24 hours period of results trickling in, we would all get bored and not notice that the night had been a veritable disaster for Labour and an incredible success for the Conservatives?

Not that the BBC is biased in any way, of course...