BBC complaint get’s non-answer after one month
My complaint on 2nd March: Misreporting organised crime
The presenter said: ‘New figures reveal there are one hundred and twelve organised crime groups operating in Scotland but fewer than at any time in the past five years. A report by the Scottish Government’s Serious Organised Crime Task force says that although the number of gang members is down around 30%, the criminal groups are widening their scope. They’re not just dealing drugs they’re also targeting vulnerable bank customers.’
1. Nowhere does the report use these words nor does it suggest any ‘widening of scope’ in organised crime. There is nothing in the report to suggest that targeting vulnerable bank customers is a new and worrying trend.
2. The government press release headline ‘Around £13 million saved from fraudsters’ is used by STV and others. Why did you choose not to inform your audience?
BBC response on 3rd April:
Your comments were passed to the Editor, Reporting Scotland, who has asked that I forward her response as follows:
“Thank you for being in touch about the lunchtime edition on 2nd March.
You correctly quote the story as read and then say “Nowhere does the report use these words”. The report shows that the number of known serious organised groups has been going down over five years and now stands at 112. We said that.
The report also demonstrates that over the same five years the number of known persons involved in serious organised crime has gone down by about 30 per cent: the report may not use the percentage figure we used but we worked out from the data provided by Police Scotland. It is customary for journalists to present information in an easily digestible way which does not detract from the substance of the information provided.
You say “there is nothing in the report to suggest that targeting vulnerable bank customers is a new and worrying trend”. The word “worrying” is yours, not ours; and the fact that a multi-agency initiative was set up only two years ago to identify vulnerable victims being defrauded of funds from their bank accounts – apparently with considerable success – and was also singled out in the clip we used from the Justice Secretary, when he went out of his way to refer to the “more joined-up approach” exemplified by these moves, suggests either that the Scottish Government has belatedly woken up to a long-term trend or that they have been timeously proactive in dealing with the problem. The story appears to have tended to the latter interpretation.
Finally, we are not spoon-fed by press/news releases from any organisation. Other media may do what they want, but we are guided by such matters as the relevance, accuracy or meaningfulness of the information provided. These decisions are made day in, day out by journalists and I see nothing exceptionable in this story.
This kind of evasive answer reminds me why I tend not to bother.
Talking-up Scotland 'Albatraz' 
How dare you imply our use of information from our underthecovers reporter, Dame Ruthie Von Peerage is somehow tainted with bias. Dame Ruthie was one of our mostly qualified tea ladies.
And….”free stuff” we find in our in-tray is at the summit of investiga**** journalease—just because it says “property of the Scorrish Con-serve-yer sel Party” must not be allowed to remove it from the airwaves–because as is well known, we RULE the waves—–didnt you know? Well…now you do !
And in-house links with our partners in the Blair-is God, Blue Labour party, and the We-arra-people Flute Band sports news feed are entirely legitimate and normal (for us).
We refute all you say, all you do and all you stand for.
When we stand at our doors at night, and clap for Boris, its a disgrace that our contentment is marred by the likes of you, your lack of respect for decent folk working to defeat the Forces of Darkness stalking our fair land…………………………………………….foam, blah, blah, cringe.
All together “Orange is the col………………………….
LikeLiked by 2 people
Sorry John this little gem from BBC Scotland earlier today (now deleted) I feel surpasses your recent ‘side splitting Herald headline’. The second lead story was about a women in a small part of Edinburgh who felt forgotten after decades (the Editorial team must have forgotten to remove the ‘s’) of decline and that her bus service has been reduced due to Covid-19.
Honest to god if Scotland was under nuclear attack the BBC would find some SNP member with a Russian sounding name or a health worker in Applecross that didn’t have any radiation protection. Absolutely pathetic they just cannot handle the prospect the Scot Gov is handling this crisis better than rUK.
LikeLiked by 3 people
Not only did they come from Edinburgh for goodness sake, they were a stonesthrow from the parliament, why was Nicola Sturgeon not running across the street get their shopping list! .
LikeLike
Now, now John. We can be sure Ian Murray, wur Wee Cockney barra-boy, is running the messages for Morningside Matrons as we speak. In his finest bespoke Union Jock* suit of course.
Apparently wur Ian is to be our next Shadow, Shadow Secretary of State for Scotland—in waiting.
Leonard, Ballie and Murray—the three stooges of old Corbynite, new Blairite Scottish/Brittish/Brexit labour, who will only ever agree to disagree on whatever subject is placed on their laps by their London Leader.
With the proviso they do as they are told–as always !
LikeLiked by 1 person
This is a perfect illustration of what Chomsky was talking about in that famous Marr clip.
Watching it the last time i was listening more to Marr’s comments and to the unconscious nature of journalistic bias. It was actually very funny listening to it again because Marr is dodging around that question like a bee to honey and Chomsky is subtly saying, don’t go there old chap. He even tells Marr that it ISN’T self-censorship but Marr isn’t listening, he is so excited to get to what he thinks is his coup de grâce, that he ignores Chomsky completely and asks again how he himself
is self-censoring. The rest is history.
It is more brilliant every time i listen to it.
But my point is that Chomsky’s whole theory is that journalists aren’t self-censoring, they think they are the most honourable fair-mined people in the world doing a wonderful service (my paraphrase).
It is obvious that the person who replied to John just can’t see his own bias. How could he, even when it is served on a silver platter.
It is even more mind blowing that Chomsky was saying that a couple of decades ago (at least) and even though journalistic standards have plummeted to hell in that time, they still don’t see it.
There are a few people who have stepped out and are shouting about it. Hopefully they can organise and create a new media. I love John’s blog and have several others i follow but they are usually focused on one or closely related topics.
I have to follow about 10 blogs or twitter outlets to get my news. Canary is great but it doesn’t cover many of those focused topics that i am most interested in.
There is a danger of losing out on new important new developments. I am sure the big powers would love that.
Who ever thinks about Tibet nowadays!
LikeLiked by 1 person
To paraphrase that reply.
‘We as journalists never try to frame the news to tell a story.
The fact that every single drama* on TV including the BBC and every single novel ever written which has a journalist paints that same is pure bias and accusation.’
Soldiers never kill
Policeman never arrest
Farmers never grow
Journalists (especially the Scottish BBC) never show bias
*To be fair Endeavour may have been a first.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Every time you sanitise your hands repeat to yourself “The BBC can do no wrong, the BBC can do no wrong…..” for the full 20 seconds.
Wash your brain while cleaning corona. It won’t do any harm, will it?
LikeLiked by 2 people