Blasted Broadcasting corporation


"Lord Hutton has criticised the BBC as he cleared the government of embellishing its Iraq weapons dossier in his long-awaited report on the death of Dr David Kelly.

"The claim in BBC reports that the government 'sexed up' its dossier on Iraq's weapons was "unfounded", he said.

"The retired law lord highlighted 'defective' BBC editorial processes over defence correspondent Andrew Gilligan's broadcasts of the claims on the Today programme.


"Prime Minister Tony Blair said the report showed 'the allegation that I or anybody else lied to the House or deliberately misled the country by falsifying intelligence of weapons of mass destruction it itself the real lie.' "

The editorial process failed at the BBC, because journalist and editors were more interested in reinforcing their bias than finding the truth. There was also the bizarre notion that it was somehow wrong to name the "source" of the faulty report. It was a classic case of ambush journalism where the "attacker" was to be kept in the shadows and not made responsible for his extroidinary charges. As it turned out, the "source" was misquoted in a way to give the impression the journalist wanted. How could this have been discovered without identifying the source? While whistleblowers may sometimes render important public service, they should have the courage to make their case in public.


Popular posts from this blog

The plot against the President

While blocking pipeline for US , Biden backs one for Taliban

Sharpie ballots in Arizona discarded?