Industrial interests at BBC Farming Today

Wed Apr 25 16:07:16 BST 2012

Cheers James. Lol, me? a culture-jammer, in advertising! The very thought! You know what Bill Hicks said about that: 
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gDW_Hj2K0wo
Twas a simple internet search. I'd have to be a member to post to tlio which I should be anyway but in the meantime you could forward it? 

________________________________
 From: james armstrong <james36armstrong at hotmail.com>
To: project2012 at googlegroups.com 
Sent: Wednesday, 25 April 2012, 15:22
Subject: RE: [project2012] Re: [Dem-Village] propagandaa by BBC

Alison,
Wow!   
Can you post this to tlio at yahoogroups.com ?
Are you in advertising? Who else reads the Grocer? 
Well done!
James 

________________________________
Date: Wed, 25 Apr 2012 12:06:56 +0100
From: alisonbanville at yahoo.co.uk
Subject: [project2012] Re: [Dem-Village] propagandaa by BBC
To: democracyvillage at googlegroups.com; diggers350 at yahoogroups.com; politicsandspiritnetwork at yahoogroups.com; project2012 at googlegroups.com

Nice one James! 

Just seen this which reports that the editor of Farming Today, Fran Barnes, was poached by the NFU on March 15th of this year. She replaced 'another BBC veteran' at the NFU. Not sure who the new editor is but it raises some interesting questions about the impartiality of the programme makers and their closeness to the farming industry. 
http://www.thegrocer.co.uk/people/people-news/nfu-nabs-radio-4s-barnes-for-top-comms-role/227265.article

The programme's producer was Sarah Falkingham in 2010, not sure if she still is. A call to the Beeb would get an update.  

________________________________
 From: james armstrong <james36armstrong at hotmail.com>
To: democracyvillage at googlegroups.com 
Sent: Tuesday, 24 April 2012, 19:29
Subject: RE: [Dem-Village] propagandaa by BBC

Hello Alison,
Good idea.`I will send to anna hill and to the radio 4 controller gwyneth williams now,
thnaks for advice.   Media lens is good.
James 

________________________________
Date: Tue, 24 Apr 2012 13:54:25 +0100
From: alisonbanville at yahoo.co.uk
Subject: Re: [Dem-Village] propagandaa by BBC
To: democracyvillage at googlegroups.com; politicsandspiritnetwork at yahoogroups.com; diggers350 at yahoogroups.com; project2012 at googlegroups.com

oops here's the ML link: http://www.medialens.org/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=675:when-populism-is-dangerous-for-democracy-to-the-media-gallows-with-controversial-george-galloway&catid=25:alerts-2012&Itemid=69

________________________________
 From: Alison Banville <alisonbanville at yahoo.co.uk>
To: "democracyvillage at googlegroups.com" <democracyvillage at googlegroups.com>; Politicsand Spirit Network <politicsandspiritnetwork at yahoogroups.com>; diggers <diggers350 at yahoogroups.com>; "project2012 at googlegroups.com" <project2012 at googlegroups.com> 
Sent: Tuesday, 24 April 2012, 13:51
Subject: Re: [Dem-Village] propagandaa by BBC

Hi James,

It's excellent that you've taken it to the Beeb like this, but can I suggest something? And that is to ignore the complaints department and take it to the actual people who make the programme.

Media Lens editors Davids Cromwell and Edwards always urge people to contact individuals in any news organization because they know that the complaints departments are just an official way of fobbing the public off. See their alerts, at the bottom you will see 'suggested action' and the email addresses of journalists and editors to send communications to. 
Scroll to the bottom of this one and see the email address for the editor of News at Ten amongst others. 
This is far, far, more effective because the people responsible for the programmes are not used to being held to account. 

Send your email to the presenter of Farming Today (firstname.lastname at bbc.co.uk) and it can't be difficult to find out who the editor is, send it to him too. Go on the Media Lens forum if you want help.

The point is, it is a very uncomfortable experience for these people to have your assessment come into their own inbox. They then personally know and feel that they are being scrutinized. This feeling of being held to account stands whether they reply to you or not. Jim Gray, editor of Channel 4 News has never replied to Media Lens (which says a lot about his defensiveness) but look at the fascinating exchanges they've had with top journos who have replied. I've had great exchanges with Kirsty Wark, Alex Thomson, Ed Fraser (dep. ed. Ch4N) Jonathan Miller (Ch4N), Emily Maitliss and others. And I've had some interesting exchanges with the PR people that some journos have passed me on to - yes Krishnan Guru-Murthy!! Tells us a lot about the man who boasts about how accountable he is to viewers! Here's my exchange with the Beeb re The Andrew Marr show and very embarrassing email: http://bsnews.info/_BBCCorrespondence2.html

Alison

________________________________
 From: james armstrong <james36armstrong at hotmail.com>
To: diggers <diggers350 at yahoogroups.com>; TLIO list <thelandisours at yahoogroups.com>; democracyvillage at googlegroups.com 
Sent: Tuesday, 24 April 2012, 9:06
Subject: [Dem-Village] propagandaa by BBC

Letter.
 to BBC Complaints

Farming Today  on  24 April 2012  broadcast  

“ £400billion is the cost  to wildlife  caused by agriculture
in Europe” 

On a number of levels this statement is extraordinary.  

1  launching a
bombshell figure, £400 billion   without
explaining any arithmetic, as part of one subjectfeastured  among others  in a  radio programme  is bad communications and bad form – the form
surely demands some background knowledge by listeners ,some context of
comparative amounts.  The units  of  ‘billions’  used on air needs
something to distinguish it from ‘millions’         

Since wildlife don’t have pockets to carry money , how can
it cost them  cash? 

2        If it is wildlife in Europe ( we
are told that this figure is from the European parliament) listeners might wrongly
assume  Europe
should or is paying this sum .  
Especially when the cost of CAP is
not  itemised in the UK  Budget  
3        The follow up discussion  focussed on UK
wildlife- with no  UK
cost  announced. 

4        The interviewees  were both  from groups, NFU and RSPB,  receiving
major CAP grants . So there was no balance.  Noir was this stated, nor were the amounts
revealed -so these were both interested parties and both with an interest
in  increasing the amount of CAP their
organizations receive. The NFU organization receive £30,000, their  members receive an estimated £1billion in UK(my estimate, what is BBC's? ) 
.  RSPB received.£4.8 millionCAP  in 2010. Is
that not relevant in a programme about the cost to wildlife(sic) of agriculture
and about agricultural  environment
schemes?  

5      There was no balance , achieved by
interviewing  someone with an interest in
reducing  the amount of CAP payments.. 

6Attributing a financial cost
to  ‘wildlife’ and omitting the  financial cost to UK  listener/ taxpayers/people , is
novel and some might think 'misinformation' in a broadcast to ‘people’ not for  the ears of wildlife. .  

7        One estimate of the CAP budget for Europe
is euros 450 billion. 
Is there not some danger of conflation by any listeners who
know this of  the amount  in the BBC statement in 1 above?   
 The cost of CAP and
environmental schemes to UK
taxpayers is some part of £3.9billion per annum. Only some (small?) part of 15% of
people in UK know this  (The 15% is the
findings of  a Eurobarometer  poll)  and the 15% is those who have heard of CAP and think they know what it
is.  
This broadcast illustrates  the harmful misinformation spread by Farming Today, and the 
Abuse of  public
broadcasting under the secret influence of  corporate groups.
James Armstrong. 

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Democracy Village " group.
To post to this group, send email to democracyvillage at googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to democracyvillage+unsubscribe at googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/democracyvillage?hl=en.

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Democracy Village " group.
To post to this group, send email to democracyvillage at googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to democracyvillage+unsubscribe at googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/democracyvillage?hl=en.

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Democracy Village " group.
To post to this group, send email to democracyvillage at googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to democracyvillage+unsubscribe at googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/democracyvillage?hl=en.

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Democracy Village " group.
To post to this group, send email to democracyvillage at googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to democracyvillage+unsubscribe at googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/democracyvillage?hl=en.

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Project2012" group.
To post to this group, send an email to project2012 at googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to project2012+unsubscribe at googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/project2012?hl=en-GB.

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Project2012" group.
To post to this group, send an email to project2012 at googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to project2012+unsubscribe at googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/project2012?hl=en-GB.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://mailman.gn.apc.org/mailman/private/diggers350/attachments/20120425/c6f04d1d/attachment.html>