BBC/Media watch

[QE Harold Flair]

I'm just going drop this in this thread right here.

http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=24e_1443134509


An analysis of photographs the BBC uses to illustrate
Europe’s migrant crisis has revealed the publicly funded organisation is
using mostly pictures of children, despite the actual number of
children making the trip being suspiciously low.
The United Nations Refugee Agency reported last week there were 72
per cent men, 13 per cent women, and just 15 per cent children making
the trip to Europe by sea. This was out of a total of 381,412 people,
meaning that 274,616 of those making the trip were men, with just 49,583
women, and 57,211 children.
The numbers, updated for this week, claim there are now nearly 80,000
children arriving, and over 305,000 men, and just over 57,000 women.
But a Breitbart London
analysis of over 200 images used by the BBC on its website shows a
staggering 53 per cent of children as the focal points of images, with
36 per cent focused on the men, and just 10 per cent focused on women.
By this measure, readers may assume that of the total number of sea
arrivals, over 230,000 of them are children – an overestimation pushed
by the BBC’s narrative of around 150,000.
The BBC also presents an underestimated image of how many men are
making the trip, with its images implying just 160,000 of the migrants
are men, an underestimation of around 145,000 people.
The skewed results will raise questions over the BBC’s coverage of
the migrant crisis, alongside its obligation for neutrality, accuracy,
and balance as set out in the BBC Trust’s Charter.
The news comes as it was revealed
that four in five of migrants logged by the European Union are not
Syrian refugees, but rather, migrants from places as far apart as
Afghanistan, Bangladesh and South Sudan.
The news confirms fears that many migrants are lying about their backgrounds in order to gain refugee status in Europe.


German authorities last week admitted at least 25 per cent of the migrants it has processed have lied about being Syrian citizens fleeing war.


Interior Minister for Mecklenburg-Western Pomerania, Lorenz Caffier,
said: “At least a quarter of those refugees allegedly coming from Syria
are not from Syria, but from other Arab or African countries.”
Rainer Wendt, head of the German Police Union: “Almost without
exception, every refugee pretends to be a Syrian when in fact, many come
from other countries, even from sub-Saharan Africa”.
The BBC coverage tallies with the coverage by the Canadian state broadcaster, the CBC, which has seen a petition lodged against its coverage of the migrant crisis.

[Giggles]

57,000 kids is quite a lot.

[SvN]

I thought you weren't coming back?

[Josh]

Or they could just be showing the pictures of kids because it causes more of an effect and makes more people click on their site? I doubt they're intentionally trying to trick people into thinking there are more children than there are? You're a moron if you see 20 pictures and then divide the number of refugees over the number of children/men/woman in the 20 photos.

[Giggles]

I thought you weren't coming back?

He probably just wanted to warn us about the 274,616 terrorists the BBC are letting into the UK. A public service goes beyond any forum preferences.

[Pepe]

By this measure, readers may assume that of the total number of sea
arrivals, over 230,000 of them are children

Only if they are idiots. Can see how Harold could be tricked by it.

[7om]

Messageboards might be going down all over the place but that doesn't mean the good fight stops being fought.

[QE Harold Flair]

The chickens will come home to roost, you will see. The BBC is not supposed to cover such events to 'get clicks' or whatever it is you said, they are duty-bound to give a balanced coverage and not lie about things. BBC Question Time last night - the first answer to the first question by the quite excellent UKIP lady got met with silence, despite polls always showing this is the majority view in this country.

[Boydy]

If you keep chickens, surely you want them to come home to roost?

[Toby]

Nicely selective statistic. It looks only at those travelling by sea, are the images solely related to the same sort of journey?

Why no focus on those coming overland into Hungary?

[phonics]

Harold Bishop, there, posting about using poor sourcing's ability to produce distorted world views.

[QE Harold Flair]

So you're just going to ignore the fact they lied about it being 53%?

Those in Syrian camps have had virtually no press. The story here is indeed about those coming to Europe by themselves.

[Disco]

If you're interested in balance Haz do you know if other media outlets have reported this in a similar fashion?

[Boydy]

Are you just going to ignore my question about chickens?

[Disco]

It's an odd aphorism because you don't let chickens out anyway so technically they're always at home.

[Pleb]

Does this set of information affect the new season of "Don't Tell The Bride"?

[QE Harold Flair]

............
What is now being called Europe’s “migrant crisis” is far more than that. It is in fact a crisis of European thought and of political leadership. At the heart of this crisis are the irreconcilable feelings of the European publics, the problems of a European political class trying to found policies based on those contradictions and a continent-wide unwillingness to think this crisis through beyond short-term emotionalism to any of its logical endpoints.

The first of those problems — the contradictions of the public — has been most evident in recent weeks. In late August, in the eastern German town of Heidenau, there were protests outside a refugee centre and an arson attack on a facility to be used by migrants. The German Chancellor, Angela Merkel, announced that Germany would accept around 800,000 refugees (about 1 per cent of the current German population) this year. When she subsequently appeared in Heidenau, Merkel was roundly booed and heckled by the crowds. This was, understandably, not the image that many other Germans wished to give to the world. Only days later, as refugees flowed across the borders of Germany, there were almost euphoric scenes as people lined the way, clapping, doling out toys and in some places throwing what appeared to be a carnival for their new arrivals. Yet these two groups of people are not wholly separate entities but rather represent a confusion which goes through the heart of many Europeans.

Because of course when we in Europe see people fleeing across borders we think of those who fled from country to country as refugees from Nazi Germany and scoured the globe for anyone to take them in. Our immediate instinct is compassion and, in some cases, guilt. Yet emotion is not enough and little enough, and while journalists compete to find the worst horror stories from those escaping from Syria few people if any are asking the questions behind the emotions.

Here are just a few of the questions we still cannot answer. Is Syria really like Nazi Germany? To date Lebanon, Turkey and Jordan — among other countries — have grudgingly taken in many refugees, but is the choice for Syria’s exiled populations really Europe or death? Even if it was, would Europe be able to take in millions of Syrian refugees? What will we do once they are here? Do we have any jobs for them or places for them to live? If they come here will they ever return to their country, once the war is over? Could “temporary asylum” even exist, given that most people will enter the welfare system and their children access schooling and other undoable provisions? In truth, these questions are the simplest of all. Because that is not the problem in full, but only a portion of it. We are failing to deal with even a portion of the problem.

Of the migrants who now form the largest inflow of migrants into Europe in recent history, only around 40 per cent are Syrians. We have lasered-in on the Syria portion of this problem. But it is only part of the problem. Most of those currently coming into Europe — as I saw on a recent trip to the Italian Mediterranean island of Lampedusa — are from elsewhere in the world, including sub-Saharan Africa and in particular Eritrea. Even if it were in Britain or Europe’s gift to bring peace to Syria, what is the plan to bring stability and prosperity to Eritrea? Has anybody, anywhere got any idea? The British Home Secretary, Theresa May, recently said that Britain and other countries must try to improve living standards in such countries to prevent people coming here. But the truth is — as many studies have shown — it is only when living standards rise (though hardly to luxurious levels) that the migration truly begins. Truly poor people do not have the money to bribe the smugglers.

Even here we are far beyond the current acceptable political discussion, yet barely scratching the surface of the problem. But the questions have to be asked. What system does Europe have in place to discern who is a legitimate refugee and who is an economic migrant? Is it fit for purpose? In Italy I asked every aid worker I could find if they knew of anybody being sent back home after arriving in European waters. Nobody could think of such a case. The truth is that once someone is here they stay because Europe cannot work out who is who (most people having deliberately come without papers) and even if they are clearly economic migrants they are never sent home. Europe had no workable system to do this when the movement was at a low-point. Now that it is at a historic high Europe has less than no system.

And then there is the question of the composition of the migrants. If this movement is indeed a movement of the genuinely dispossessed then why are almost all of them young men? In recent weeks the media has zoomed its cameras in on the occasional woman or child. But they are the rarities. On Lampedusa I saw only young men from sub-Saharan Africa. I saw no women. One of the first things that many of the arrivals did on getting to the island was to buy a SIM card and call home to tell their families that they had made it: families they will end up sending money to if they make any (largely in the underground economy) and whom they will often aim to bring over to join them.

And of course there is the question of integration. Does anybody, anywhere in Europe still think integration has happened to date? Almost every government, currently opening its borders to further migrants, has in fact accepted that it has not. Chancellor Merkel said as much in a speech five years ago, as David Cameron did four years ago. So why would integration happen when immigration is at the current historic highs, if it didn’t happen when immigration was at — remarkably — a comparative low? Some politicians want to blame the public for a lack of enthusiasm about importing millions more people into Europe. If they are looking for someone to blame for that attitude they could do worse than looking to the citizens of Dewsbury, Gennevilliers, Malmö and many other places in Europe anyone can name.

All of this, again, barely touches the beginning of the debate which our continent is so far away from having. But perhaps it brings me to the most crucial question of all. Assuming that the majority of the arrivals are economic migrants and that we are going to do little or nothing to prevent them coming, ought not Europeans to try to start thinking their way through the first-principles questions? Such as: “Is it the job of Europeans to give a better standard of living in our continent to anybody in the world who wants it?’

If public opinion polls are anything to go by it would seem that the publics of Europe already have an answer to a question their political representatives still dare not ask. In Hungary, Poland, Slovakia and other countries, politicians are trying to respond to public sentiment. But everywhere else the strain of sustaining the current disconnect is beginning to show. The Swedish government recently announced that it is going to take a further 80,000 refugees this year (around 1 per cent of its current population). It is a continuation of a more-than generous asylum policy which has seen Sweden boast of becoming a “humanitarian superpower”. But these things have consequences. One recent poll showed the only anti-immigration party in the country — the Sweden Democrats — for the first time leading the opinion polls. This party, often described as far-right, was until recently never polling above low single digits.

In late August the official immigration statistics for the UK were released and showed that Cameron’s 2011 boast that his government would bring net immigration into the UK down from the “hundreds of thousands” a year to the “tens of thousands” has been missed by more than ever. The figures showed that net migration into the UK had actually reached an historic peak — rising to 330,000 up to the start of this year. We know how few people welcomed this because poll after poll tells us so. One poll carried out last year found that a mere 11 per cent of the UK population want the population to increase. Another recent poll showed that just 7 per cent of the British public want more immigration to our country. Now that 13 per cent of the UK population were not born in the UK, one interesting thing this shows is that even most immigrants to Britain do not want more immigrants. In the initial part of the current crisis Cameron tried to reflect British public opinion. He stood against the demands of Merkel and the European Commission that European countries take quotas even as they conceded that the quotas were insufficient to address the problem.

But then the internal contradictions of Europe were demonstrated again by what most seem to agree was a turning-point: the photograph of a dead Syrian boy, Aylan Kurdi, washed up on the shores of Turkey. A social media campaign grew — like the “Bring back our girls” hashtag of a couple of years ago about Nigerian girls kidnapped by Boko Haram. This time the hashtag was “Refugees welcome” and celebrities, politicians and others photographed themselves with the sign and sent the photograph around on social media. Public and media opinion grew militant, simultaneously demanding slashes in net migration and vast increases in the number of refugees. The political class understandably struggled to keep pace with these contradictory demands. Soon the Hungarian government was being sat upon from above and every voice of caution seemed to be on the defensive.

[QE Harold Flair]

There's more, but this shit site has a maximum post limit of 10,000 characters.

http://www.standpointmag.co.uk/node/6239/full

[Boydy]

If you don't like, don't live here.

[Giggles]

In fairness, it wouldn't be TTH without Harold's ramblings. This is the final bed cushion into making it home.

[Boydy]

Still dodging my chickens question too, I see. I don't think you've ever even kept chickens.

[Toby]

So you're just going to ignore the fact they lied about it being 53%?

Where have they done that?

I'll ask again, were the chosen photos only of migrants arriving by sea?

[Toby]

If you don't like, don't live here.

As a refugee from TD he should have stayed on Teh Refuge as the first forum to take him on after the crash. He's nothing but an economic migrant here to steal our vCash.

[phonics]

Only​ 10,000 characters.

[Disco]

It's a tragedy is what it is, there's nothing I hate more than coming into a thread and seeing a post from Harold only for it to be less than 10,000 characters.

It's censorship I tell you!

[QE Harold Flair]

I'll ask again, were the chosen photos only of migrants arriving by sea?

That's the whole point - those arriving are what we are talking about, not those in camps elsewhere. Of course most of us with a brain can already work out the bias without such investigation.

[Toby]

Not all of them are arriving by sea though, they're increasingly using the land borders into Greece and Bulgaria, which would obviously be a much safer journey to undertake with children.

[QE Harold Flair]

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/media/lord-grade-former-bbc-chairman-accuses-corporation-of-bias-in-coverage-of-stabbing-attacks-on-a6701471.html


Lord Grade, the former BBC Chairman, has accused the corporation of “inexcusable” bias in its coverage of the recent wave of stabbing attacks on Israelis.
In a letter to James Harding, the BBC Director of News, Lord Grade criticised a report by the BBC correspondent Orla Guerin, which he claimed “directly misled” viewers by failing to acknowledge the involvement of militant Palestinian groups.


The BBC are still at it, I see.



http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=e29_1445515562

[Clunge]

Yeah, no one cares. Like even a jot.

Go put your willy in a frog.

[Yevrah]

Or a horse...

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-norfolk-34615001

[Magic]

He must have some cock to do that to a horse.

[Yevrah]

Was also my first thought. :D

[Reg]

Boydy, try one more time with the chickens. He's got to crack.

[QE Harold Flair]

Yeah, no one cares. Like even a jot.

Go put your willy in a frog.

I will bring these things up whether you care or not.

[Clunge]

Great. I look forward to hearing tales of your putting your willy in a frog.

[QE Harold Flair]

Pm me for details.

[QE Harold Flair]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GKaGqSDnaqQ

"Let the lady speak"

That's all she fucking did Snow, you lanky streak of piss. And continued doing over Farage, which you allowed, naturally. Watch out for more of this.

[Kikó]

He must have some cock to do that to a horse.

He's got the surname for it.