Hutton Inquiry

Piliger

Originally posted by DMC
So, would any other broadcaster, newspaper or media outlet in the world broadcast the Panorama programme the BBC broadcast last week about the Hutton Report, and do it is such a way that instead of naval-gazing you would attack the channel you are actually broadcasting on?? I can't see NBC having an exposé on GE etc.

Any other public broadcaster would in my opinion. They didn't have much choice anyway. To ignore the issue would have been rediculous and to argue against the obvious facts of the situation, the facts that Hutton echoed this week, would have been equally rediculous.

Remember, its not the newspapers or journalists thats the issue with regard to what you have just said. Newspapers in the UK are allowed to have political views, and their own views on the BBC, and quite often air them. TV and Radio do not. The BBC had to report impartially on their own crisis. So if you wanted a fair and unbiased report, ITN or Channel 4 News or even Sky News, dont look at the press.

I was referring to the media across the board. And the issue was not one of fairness or impartiality. It was of truth and lies.

You are wrong in implying that the newspapers are allowed to lie - though they do on a regular basis.

The issue I raised in the later part of my post was that the unification of the media in a joint move against Hutton was more than an anti Hutton move. It was a flexing of joint muscle against any effort to judge or criticise the media. There is a belief throughout much of the modern media that they are above judgement, above criticism.
They are the only industry that accepts no such judgement.
And the explosion of anti Hutton material on all of the media may be receiving a welcome from many who find it convenient right now - but I suggest to all that the implications of the response for the future are serious for democracy.

This report is cleaner than clean for the UK Government, it has harmed them even more than if there was a few resignations from the Government side, because it is that white for them its blinding.

Sometimes right is right and wrong is wrong.

Next time a murderer is found guilty will you argue that it couldn't have be all his fault ? that the victim should share the blame ? that the verdict was too one sided. ?


The BBC lied and that was the subject of Hutton's enquiry and he heard all of the evidence that no one here heard. That is what will outlast the media spin machine of the last couple of days.

chill

I've never witnessed the scale of Spinning going on over the last couple of days by the BBC staff and resignators as well as SKY, C4 and ITV as well as most of the newspapers. It has been awesome and I tend to agree with your comments that it may be a minor matter now but it's a bit frightening.

DMC

Originally posted by Piliger
Any other public broadcaster would in my opinion. They didn't have much choice anyway. To ignore the issue would have been rediculous and to argue against the obvious facts of the situation, the facts that Hutton echoed this week, would have been equally rediculous.

They didn't have to. It was with a sense of surprise that they did it.

I was referring to the media across the board. And the issue was not one of fairness or impartiality. It was of truth and lies.

You are wrong in implying that the newspapers are allowed to lie - though they do on a regular basis.

I didn't imply anything. Have a good read back. What I said was that papers can be allowed to have their take on any issue, becauses of a political stance they can have, whearas broadcast media cannot.

The issue I raised in the later part of my post was that the unification of the media in a joint move against Hutton was more than an anti Hutton move. It was a flexing of joint muscle against any effort to judge or criticise the media. There is a belief throughout much of the modern media that they are above judgement, above criticism.
They are the only industry that accepts no such judgement.
And the explosion of anti Hutton material on all of the media may be receiving a welcome from many who find it convenient right now - but I suggest to all that the implications of the response for the future are serious for democracy.

And should we, as open minded people allow to accept the judgement? Judges are human too, they can and often make mistakes!
This from the Sunday Times! A Murdoch, anti-BBC paper!

The prospect of Hutton's findings being challenged in the High Court was raised this weekend by some of Britain's most senior lawyers. Lord Lester of Herne Hill QC, the expert on freedom of speech, said there was no doubt the BBC had strong public interest grounds to report concerns about the government's Iraq dossier even though there may have been errors in the report.

As Greg Dyke said this morning, for someone to just concentrate on the 6.07 report and not report on the dithering Geoff Hoon in the witness box at the public hearings is mind boggling. I'd advise you to do a search on contemporary reports into Geoff Hoons statesments. Or even do it on the Hutton Inquiry website. for an un-spun log of the event.
Andrew Gilligan's report didn't kill David Kelly. It was Ailister Campbell and others method of looking for the source of the story and the way David Kelly's managers dealt with this leek lead the man to believe his life was not worth living anymore.

Sometimes right is right and wrong is wrong.

Next time a murderer is found guilty will you argue that it couldn't have be all his fault ? that the victim should share the blame ? that the verdict was too one sided. ?

The reaction of Dr. Kellys family to it all means that crap doesn't need any responce.

The BBC lied and that was the subject of Hutton's enquiry and he heard all of the evidence that no one here heard. That is what will outlast the media spin machine of the last couple of days.

And the naming of Dr. Kelly and his treatment gets virtually ignored by Brian Hutton.
I hear there is still a position in No. 10's press office open, wanna apply? :rolleyes:

Piliger

As Greg Dyke said this morning, for someone to just concentrate on the 6.07 report and not report on the dithering Geoff Hoon in the witness box at the public hearings is mind boggling. I'd advise you to do a search on contemporary reports into Geoff Hoons statesments. Or even do it on the Hutton Inquiry website. for an un-spun log of the event.

More red herrings. Greg Dyke is transparently desparate to drag every other issue in to the discussion to spin his way out of responsibility for the fiasco his leadership created.

Andrew Gilligan's report didn't kill David Kelly. It was Ailister Campbell and others method of looking for the source of the story and the way David Kelly's managers dealt with this leek lead the man to believe his life was not worth living anymore.

Rubbish. Kelly committed suicide. He was clearly a man with serious personal problems, a flawed and disturbed personality who could not deal with his own betrayal of the trust placed in him by his employers and the gathering exposure of the betrayal. How he was still in such a serious position seem to me more of a scandal than anything.
Hutton correctly rejected the quite rediculous accusations that the Gov of MOD has any contribution to his cowardly act.

Akrasia

I would very much prefer if you didn't refer to Suicide rhetorically as a "cowardly act"
Thank you

monument

Originally posted by DMC
This from the Sunday Times! A Murdoch, anti-BBC paper!

While I agree with you that the BBC is not whom the main blame should fall to for Kelly’s death, Murdoch would easily choose backing the BBC to take a poke at Labour, as they are not currently his party of choice.

Sparks

Originally posted by monument
While I agree with you that the BBC is not whom the main blame should fall to for Kelly’s death, Murdoch would easily choose backing the BBC to take a poke at Labour, as they are not currently his party of choice.

You wouldn't think so from watching Sky News over the last few days. Every opportunity to take a dig at either side has been taken. So they're basicly saying "yes, it's a whitewash, and we should oust New Labour over it, but at the same time, it's totally accurate about the BBC and they're no longer a trustworthy news service. Now watch Sky News. We're fair and balanced, honest we are...."

sovtek

Originally posted by DMC
I can't see NBC having an exposé on GE etc.

LOL...Hell you can't even get an anti-Bush policy add during the Superbowl...even for a million dollars...or 1.3 million.
I wonder if my hash smoking buddies know they are supporting terrorism?

This report is cleaner than clean for the UK Government, it has harmed them even more than if there was a few resignations from the Government side, because it is that white for them its blinding.

That seems to be the case. Was watching some debate show on ITV this Sunday. Just about every Labour MP that spoke got booed.

sovtek

Originally posted by Piliger
It was of truth and lies.

You are wrong in implying that the newspapers are allowed to lie - though they do on a regular basis.

Uh oh theres that "l" word.

The BBC lied and that was the subject of Hutton's enquiry and he heard all of the evidence that no one here heard. That is what will outlast the media spin machine of the last couple of days.

Really? When did that happen?

sovtek

Originally posted by monument
While I agree with you that the BBC is not whom the main blame should fall to for Kelly’s death, Murdoch would easily choose backing the BBC to take a poke at Labour, as they are not currently his party of choice.

Maybe not but he sure likes his war.

monument

Originally posted by Sparks
You wouldn't think so from watching Sky News over the last few days. Every opportunity to take a dig at either side has been taken. So they're basicly saying "yes, it's a whitewash, and we should oust New Labour over it, but at the same time, it's totally accurate about the BBC and they're no longer a trustworthy news service. Now watch Sky News. We're fair and balanced, honest we are...."

Taking pokes at both at them – most likely even better in his view.