Tuesday, August 02, 2011
Reprise of BBC Manipulation of the Hacking Story
These days, people don't seem to be very good at noticing that news story X, which everybody currently agrees is the biggest and most unique and most newsworthy story of all time, is an awful lot like news story Y from a few years ago*, which everybody has completely forgotten about already and didn't even pay much attention to while it was in the papers.
For example, as I pointed out in my last Taki's Magazine column, the wrongdoing in the ongoing brouhaha over Murdoch newspapers in London hiring a private investigator to tap into voice mail is an awful lot like the wrongdoing in the last decade's now forgotten Hollywood scandal in which moguls and stars hired private investigator Anthony Pellicano to wiretap people they wanted to abuse.
* in Britain there is the added fact that, since the BBC censor the news story Y may not have appeared at all or been very much hidden.
For example the Libyan war is being sold on the grounds of various alleged atrocities by Gaddafi, all without alleged evidence being seen by anybody independent while the fact that NATO's policeman running Kosovo is unquestionably guilty of far worse crimes, including genocide and the dissection of living people all carried out under the NATO authority of politicians now justifying this new aggression on these grounds..
Or over the hacking story - that other papers have been doing this for decades without any reporting.
Or the way the BBC, when there is a flood, say global warming will cause more floods in future, while the previous year, following a drought, they said it would mean a future of more droughts.
----------------
----------------
Steve also reports on my opinion that the ""News International hacking scandal" so heavily reported by the BBC is being reported because the BBC were scared of facing real competition in British broadcasting not because of any alleged inherent importance of the story.
-------------------
Finally a slightly weird example of what may not ever be reported on the BBC, even when the knives were out. I remember at the height of the "scandal" a Beeboid talking head being asked why Murdoch was still refusing to do the obvious and throw the woman editor involved overboard. His reply was some obvious euphemism about Murdoch being very family orientated, which was clearly nonsense but I took to mean he or his son were shagging her. Then when I saw her name written out it was obvious that it is because Rebekah Wade is Jewish, like Murdoch on his mother's side. Something you will not learn if you see wikipedia or other "respectable" news about her.
Labels: BBC, British politics, Media
