Reply To: Elections aftermath


Home Forums Discussion Forum Elections aftermath Reply To: Elections aftermath

#49843
Kim Sanders-Fisher
Guest

SA – It is absolutely incredulous that anyone might claim that the BBC has an anti-Tory bias after all they have done to decimate the Labour Party. But then it is equally monstrous for a rabid bigot who makes seriously offensive incitements to racial hatred to vilify a respected iconic leader of the struggle for peace and justice. Current Head of the BBC, Lord Hall, has vehemently denied that the painfully obvious anti-Labour bias exists as he defends the BBC’s warped political agenda. The breaches of Electoral Law committed by the reporter Laura Kuennsberg and Dominic Raab MP, both caught on camera by the BBC, have resisted challenge so far: they broke the law and should be charged,

Lord Hall is stepping down from his position at the BBC this summer; the issue of anti-Left BBC bias needs to be fully acknowledged and addressed before he goes. Public outrage must dominate who is chosen to succeed him as the rogue team of Boris Johnson and Dominic Cummings will seek ways to maintain control, possibly by targeting BBC funding to ensure absolute compliance with Tory propaganda. The rules of Purdah should have levelled the playing field, but the BBC went to unprecedented extremes, drowning out every positive message from Labour on policies with an aggressive fake anti-Semitism smear campaign. This was one of many tricks to deliberately deceive or dissuade voters from exercising their democratic right.

This Canary Article highlighted how, on the night of the final deadline to register to vote, our “impartial” BBC News Election 2019 exerted their influence over the British public. Instead of reminding the population of the urgency and importance of getting on the Electoral Roll they displayed this discouraging message: “Non-voters wouldn’t change the result everywhere. In 2017’s election even if every non-voter registered went to the polls, in 99/650 seats the same MP would have been elected.” That clearly revealed the BBC agenda: don’t bother participating, the Tories already have their votes stacked up among elderly regulars and they wouldn’t want to risk a strong youth vote.

The negative BBC messaging backfired spectacularly as over a million predominantly younger voters managed to get registered in the final 48hours before the midnight deadline. Regrettably, many of the university students chose to use a postal vote due to the deliberate poor timing of the election scheduled for the week of moving back home for the Christmas break. There are multiple reports of problems they encountered, but where did all their votes go?

The nightly Paper Review segment offers the BBC an ideal opportunity to maximize their amplification of the vile right-wing smears when they selectively home in on tabloid articles that emphasize, exaggerate, fabricate and lie about Corbyn to unjustly demonize him with one-sided vilification. There is no balance and no means of defence as all Labour MPs are systematically grilled over fake anti-Semitism. When disgruntled Labour defector Ian Austin spewed his vile rant in the media and the Chief Rabbi offered his personal interference to deter Labour voters there was no alternative perspective sought from Jewish Voice for Labour. The JVL 6th of December Article: “Jews, antisemitism and Labour – a letter to the BBC” is worth reading.

FIGHT BACK: Harking back to notably the most egregious vilification committed by the BBC in a Panorama programme just prior to the election, Birkbeck College, University of London Journalism and Media lecturer Justin Schlosberg is fighting back. This Jewish co-author of the book “Bad News for Labour. Antisemitism, the Party and Public Belief.” is Crowdfunding to launch a legal challenge against the BBC and he deserves our support in this noble effort. Schlosberg’s Crowdfunding has already raised over half the target amount for: “A formal legal challenge to Ofcom’s decision not to investigate complaints about the BBC’s Panorama programme ‘Is Labour antisemitic?’” This abhorrent hatchet job was so appallingly biased it received over 1500 complaints to the BBC that were ignored as per usual, but appeals to Ofcom were equally dismissed as they too decided not to investigate.

The public is denied accountability again by a fake “watchdog:” A Watchdog that refuses to watch is despicable dog!

AND MORE FIGHT BACK: Change.org Petition Cooperation – John Han 16 Jan 2020 — “We have decided to run a joint petition campaign of our ‘Stop the anti-Corbyn bias on the BBC’ with Richard House’s ‘Demand a full independent inquiry into the BBC’s coverage of the 2019 General Election’. We are going to look for a shared action, as well as possibly joining up with other groups against BBC bias. There are a lot of exciting things happening at the moment. There is more news to come soon. Please sign the other petition.”

YET MORE FIGHT BACK: ‘Demand a full independent inquiry into the BBC’s coverage of the 2019 General Election’ Richard House’s Petition on Change.org appears to have stalled below its modest target of 7000 votes. We need to give this petition the boost it deserves by sending the link to family and friends; I know from experience just how hard it is to make sure an important petition gets noticed. “We have just witnessed the dirtiest general election campaign in British political history.” was no understatement by House who includes a long list of links to supporting evidence that I will include here.

Novara Media Novara Media – “The BBC is… CANCELLED?”
Media Lens – “The Arrogance of BBC News”
Jewish Voice for Labour – “Jewish Voice for Labour lobbies BBC over election coverage bias”
A Very Public Sociologist – “All that is Solid – The BBC’s Anti-Labour Bias” https://averypublicsociologist.blogspot.com/2019/11/the-bbcs-anti-labour-bias.html
Guardian – “How truth gets lost in the BBC’s search for balance”
Independent – ‘Consciously’ biased BBC contributed to Tory election win, Labour MP says”
Andy McDonald MP, Daily Mirror – ‘Labour’s unfair treatment shows broadcasters need urgent democratic reforms’
LSE – “The Exit Poll, BBC Election Night and systemic media bias”

Richard House states that: “When voters’ access to unbiased information is compromised in this way, democracy itself is gravely threatened. When a government is elected to absolute power, carried over the line by bias and propaganda, its very legitimacy is in severe doubt – with grave implications for the sheer governability of a deeply disgruntled, disenfranchised citizenry.” He concludes his petition: “We the undersigned demand an immediate independent inquiry into the BBC’s 2019 general election coverage (NOT held by OfCom), to ascertain the truth about these grave accusations, and so lessen the possibility of such an outrage to democracy being repeated at future general elections.”

In the Canary Article supporting Schlosberg’s Crowdfunding Appeal they note he highlights the fact that: “This was the third Panorama edition since 2015 that was focused on, and wholly critical of Jeremy Corbyn’s leadership of the party. It contained gross breaches of the BBC’s legal commitment to due impartiality and due accuracy rules.” There are several embedded links that focus on supporters of a very different reasoning that drives the not so hidden agenda of the BBC and in the same piece, the Canary also reported that: “Among unfavourable analysis of the BBC‘s election coverage was a YouGov poll showing that only 44% of Britons now trust BBC News reporters to tell the truth. This fell by 7% between October and December 2019.” (Original links embedded in this Canary quote for reference.)

I deviate from the opinion that, as vile and disgusting as the BBC smear campaign got during the election, it was not the magic bullet that secured a genuine landslide victory for the Tories. I believe it was part of a well coordinated cover story, that remains a work in progress, in a desperate effort to lend legitimacy to the rigged vote. I do not know if exposure of the smear campaign and all of the serious violations of the Purdah laws alone will be enough to overturn this rigged election, but it presents a far more tangible initial target and a good place to start.

A mandatory rebalance forced on the BBC by the courts would show the massive crowds who came out singing and cheering for Jeremy Corbyn. This huge volume of support does not equate to the unfathomable loss of votes in Labour heartlands. Once the “everybody hates Corbyn” myth has been debunked as fake-news, the dubious vote results will stand out as an obvious fabrication of a stolen election. Voters could have opted for a safer Brexit option under Labour and there is very little else to support any legitimate reason for a “landslide” Tory majority. It is highly suspicious that rather than focusing on any remote reason for a Tory victory the media are still obsessing over dissecting the Labour loss.

We could appeal to the EU while we still remain EU citizens, which is why Boris is rushing through the vote. Although there is very little time before the Brexit deadline the transition period offers our last hope. If the Election is proven to be illegally rigged, with strong suspicions over the EU Referendum vote already exposed and further discredited by the vote rigging scandal, we have every right to appeal to the EU for a new free and fair Referendum.

Would the EU ignore a proven case of illegal vote rigging in a member state to strip away the rights of millions of European citizens? It is not in their best interests for us to crash out against our will so that Boris can create an ultra-deregulated rogue state on the edge of the EU to destabilize Europe for Trump! I think the European Court would support a case to defend EU citizen’s rights against corruption and injustice.