BBC Discredited; Retractions on 9/11 Hit Piece Forthcoming?

http://prisonplanet.com/articles/february2007/190207tissueoflies.htm

From http://www.prisonplanet.com/articles/february2007/210207bbcdiscredited.htm


BBC Discredited; Retractions on 9/11 Hit Piece Forthcoming?

Complaint responses suggest consternation within corporation on revelations of bias in Conspiracy Files documentary, indicates large number of complaints received

Paul Joseph Watson & Alex JonesPrison PlanetWednesday, February 21, 2007
digg_url = 'http://www.prisonplanet.com/articles/february2007/210207bbcdiscredited.htm';
digg_title = 'BBC Discredited; Retractions on 9/11 Hit Piece Forthcoming?';
digg_bodytext = 'The BBCs response to complaints made against the bias and inaccuracy of the 9/11 Conspiracy Files documentary suggests that an overwhelming backlash has caused considerable consternation at the network and possible retractions or apologies may be forthcoming, with BBC bosses potentially fearing the companys credibility has been tarnished.';
digg_topic = 'politics';
The BBC's response to complaints made against the bias and inaccuracy of the 9/11 Conspiracy Files documentary suggests that an overwhelming backlash has caused considerable consternation at the network and possible retractions or apologies may be forthcoming, with BBC bosses potentially fearing the company's credibility has been tarnished.
Following the airing of the show on Sunday evening, numerous websites representative of the 9/11 truth movement issued precise and detailed rebuttals to what many saw as nothing more than an outright hit piece that used crass emotional manipulation, concocted evidence and cynical bias in an attempt to dismiss questions about the official story behind 9/11.
Appearing on the Alex Jones show on Monday, the show's producer Guy Smith offered little to defend against allegations that the program represented nothing more than yellow journalism and an attempt to create a strawman argument in the interests of debunking 9/11 skeptics.
From what can be gleaned from how the BBC is treating complaints made against the show, it seems that the backlash has forced the complaints to be passed up the chain of command and that the overwhelming response is forcing bosses to consider whether it might be necessary to issue retractions or clarifications in an attempt to calm the furore.
Here's the BBC's standard response to complaints being made about the Conspiracy Files program.

Thank you for contacting the BBC.
This is to let you know that we are dealing with your recent complaint but are waiting to clarify some points with other colleagues in the BBC before we reply more fully to you.
We will of course respond as soon as possible but trust you will understand that the time taken can also depend on the nature and number of the other complaints we are currently investigating. The BBC also issues public responses to issues which prompt large numbers of significant complaints and these can be read on our website at http://www.bbc.co.uk/complaints/
We would be grateful if you would not reply to this email and, in the meantime, would like to thank you for contacting us with details of your concerns.
Regards BBC Information


-----------------------------------------The Internet leader in activist media - Prison Planet.tv. Thousands of special reports, videos, MP3's, interviews, conferences, speeches, events, documentary films, books and more - all for just 15 cents a day!Click here to subscribe!---------------



Because the BBC is funded solely through taxpaying British citizens via their TV license fee, the corporation is obliged to issue retractions and apologies if complaints about a particular broadcast are high. On most occasions, they are at least forced to clarify their position on their editor's blog website. 9/11 truth websites across the spectrum are encouraging readers to make complaints and so it's safe to speculate that the BBC has been inundated with them.
There have been numerous instances where BBC investigative programs have had to issue retractions and apologies due to faulty research or deliberate bias, a notable example being a 1999 Horizons documentary which sought to debunk the research of controversial archeologist Graham Hancock. An investigation upheld Hancock's complaint that his response to debunkers was not included in the show, and the BBC had to air the re-edited documentary.
The BBC divides complaints into four different categories - accuracy, bias, taste/standards and other. Since the Conspiracy Files farce displayed overwhelming inaccuracy in several claims it made, most notably the "pancake collapse" animation which even official NIST authorities have backed away from, and also betrayed patent bias in pitting thirteen debunkers against just three 9/11 skeptics, while ridiculing the character of the skeptics by means of false accusations and stereotyping, it fits into at least two of these categories.
We must push now for a retraction, an apology, or at the very least a clarification from the BBC in regards to this blatant hit piece. The basis for our accusations that the program was a hit piece are documented here and here.

Go to http://www.bbc.co.uk/complaints/make_complaint_step1.shtml and select "make an official complaint." Please be as polite as possible and remember that the person reading your complaint will most likely have no connection to the production of the hit piece. Be clear and concise in your complaint, and stick to the facts about the bias and inaccuracy of the program.
If the BBC are forced to respond to the backlash, it will deter other networks and producers from creating malicious hit pieces designed to discredit the 9/11 truth movement in future.

postCount('210207bbc');
Comment (1)
postCountTB('210207bbc');
Trackback