|
Telegraph Fisks Beeb via leaked emails
Hat Tip: LucianneBBC reports âlittered with errorsâ By Chris Hastings, Media Correspondent (Filed: 04/07/2004) A significant number of BBC news reports are untrustworthy and littered with errors because the corporationâs journalists fail to check their facts, according to e-mails sent by one of the BBCâs most senior news managers. His messages reveal that the credibility of the news service is "on the line" because of a climate of sloppiness. So many rumors to The internal memos, which have been obtained by The Telegraph, highlight concerns about the standard of journalism on local BBC television and radio, as well as on the BBCâs flagship News Online service. They suggest that the corporation is struggling to keep its promise to improve the standards of its news services following damning criticisms levelled against it by the Hutton inquiry into the death of Dr David Kelly. Struggling? Improve? How about just slowing the rate of decline? The BBC was criticised by Lord Hutton after it emerged that Andrew Gilligan, the Radio 4 Today programme journalist - whose flawed story about the background to the Governmentâs claims on Iraqâs weapons of mass destruction was at the centre of the inquiry - had filed his report without it being checked by station managers. In their frenzied bid to topple Blair, perhaps? The Press Creed: To move UP the Food Chain, you must bring Somebody DOWN. The leaked e-mails sent by Hugh Berlyn, an assistant editor of BBC News Online, show that despite the furore surrounding the Gilligan report, dozens of "unvetted" stories appear on the internet every day. The result is a string of stories that are, at best, littered with errors and, at worst, inaccurate and potentially libellous. I would suggest to Berlyn that "littered with errors" and "inaccurate" can be reasonably described as synonymous. Thus there is no difference between the "best" and "worst" of Beeb reportage. It all sucks to some degree. In an e-mail last October, Mr Berlyn said journalists were not showing their reports to managers, who are supposed to check them in accordance with BBC rules. He wrote: "Yesterday we carried out a study of how many of your stories were being properly checked by a second pair of eyes before publication. To my surprise and concern, more than 60 stories around the country were apparently published without being second-checked." And Beeb Mgrs get paid for this non-performance? Another e-mail, sent in February, said that the number of "justified complaints" about the lack of accuracy in spelling, names, grammar or simple detail was growing. Mr Berlyn told staff that he received dozens of complaints a day. "I really think the level of complaints is such that our credibility is on the line and that cannot be allowed to continue." Lol! The Understatement of the New Millenium regards Journalistic Standards. Meanwhile, over at the NYT... same, same. Although his memos were addressed to staff at BBC Online, they highlight concern about local studios, which provide the internet service with much of its material. He said that it was no longer acceptable for News Online staff to justify mistakes by saying: "Thatâs what was in the radio and TV copy." He wrote: "We have to accept that the standard of journalism in local radio and regional TV is not the same as that required by News Online." Hysterical! Errors are okay in broadcast but less so for online? How about an internal single-source for copy / film which has been thoroughly vetted? F**kin Duh. BBC Online is the most popular website in Europe, receiving 1.9 billion hits a month. It has two million internet pages. One misled customer is too many when the errors are preventable with minimum effort. A BBC spokesman insisted last night that it had confidence in its journalists. "Since these e-mails were written, tighter procedures for checking copy have been put in place." The BBC has committed itself to implementing measures recommended by Ron Neil, the former head of news. Mr Neil, who was asked to investigate news services following the Hutton Inquiry, has recommended the establishment of a journalism college and expansion of local news services. Funny, I hadnât noticed a difference. If they ever get their act together enough to root out the agenda specialists, perhaps they can stage a comeback. With the Telegraph "outting" the Beeb, how does one classify this? Red on Red -- or Blue on Red? Posted by: .com 2004-07-04 |
| http://www.rantburg.com/poparticle.php?ID=37133 |