Secrets And Lies Of The BBC: Information Hiding And The Propaganda Model

The BBC doesn't lie...except it does.

Let me explain...the BBC output doesn't consist so much of boldly stated falsehoods: what is going on is far, far more devious and cunning than that.

The BBC propaganda model is based on the remarkable and nauseating fact that one can lie without actually saying something that is untrue.

How? Well what happens is that the BBC draws attention to some things, whilst drawing attention away from and remaining silent over other things..."covering up in plain sight", "information hiding".

Let me give an example:

Since the year 2000 the president of Zimbabwe Robert Mugabe has been receiving what has at times amounted to saturation coverage on the BBC news. Apart from the fact that all of these reports are negatively biased against Mugabe and therefore make a walking mockery of the BBC's assertions of impartiality and fairness, the infinitely more serious situation a short distance away in the Democratic Republic of Congo (DRC) during the same time period has barely received a whisper.

What situation? The Democratic Republic of Where? Precisely.

BBC Propaganda Model: Case Study -- Zimbabwe and Congo

• Robert Mugabe = saturation coverage.
  
  
• 5 1/2 MILLION people killed in the Democratic Republic of Congo (DRC) since 1998 = barely a whisper.
  

That's right, 5.5 million people have been estimated to have been killed in DRC since 1998. This has received little if any coverage by the BBC. In contrast, the Zimbabwean land reforms -- which kicked off the BBC's saturation attacks on Robert Mugabe during the same time period -- had resulted in the deaths by 2010 of "less than two dozen" white farmers, according The Times newspaper.

(This, incidentally, compares to the 3000 white farmers who have been killed in South Africa since 1994...but again, you will find no BBC reporters raving about Nelson Mandela, Thabo Mbeki, Jacob Zuma or the ANC as they do Mugabe.)

As well as not reporting the full story of the horrors of DRC, you will never see a BBC news report telling you that "The Congo is probably the richest country in the world in terms of natural resources." Or that British companies are "losing out" as they see it in Zimbabwe...but still making lots of money in DRC.

So here we see the BBC concentrating its viewers' attention on one thing, whilst ignoring another.

But does this amount to lies?

The statements that the BBC reporters, newsreaders, and so on make on the screen before you are, after all, often quite truthful and accurate in the context of what they are talking about. Surely no-one could therefore stretch this to say they are telling lies..?

Well the fact is it is lies...and it is possibly the most insidious and nefarious form of lies of all.

The viewer who sits to watch the BBC news on television believes he is being given an accurate and fair picture of events in Britain and the world.

But, as we have seen, the viewer is being given a DISTORTED picture of the world...he is NOT being given the FULL STORY.

The lies consist therefore not so much in what the viewer is being told, but in what he is NOT being told. The BBC propaganda machine therefore never gives the FULL story; you are not getting the FULL PICTURE.

This, then, is the propaganda model. You can apply it to pretty much any story that this deceitful organisation broadcasts...in any BBC news story there is likely to be information hiding going on -- anything from facts that are simply left out (but which are essential to understand a given story); all the way up to why any particular news story is being presented in the first place and thrust in the viewer's face, and not some other story.


Links:
www.theirc.org...
www.timesonline.co.uk...
www.africafiles.org...

A star and flag for you, sir.

Americans critical of the BBC in the past have never given me a satisfactory explanation(I doubt that any of them have ever watched it). The reports on the BBC are more informative and impartial than any American news media. I thank you for finally explaining that it is what the BBC doesn't report that betrays its hidden biases.

Lying by omission an old propaganda technique.Look at how they ignored the Climate gate emails that were sent to them weeks before they hit the headlines ,and even when other papers published them it took them along time to give minimal coverage.I read a book on the Intelligence services by an ex agent (can't remember who)He said that the BBC had a number of agents inside who would plant false stories and bias stories.He said they were even more active at times of war.I really couldn't work out why the BBC had a problem with Mugabe.I know he is an ahole but as you say there are plenty of worse people and crimes going on in Africa.Should have know there would be a buisness angle.Having said all that the BBC at least do some good journalism .

reply to post by OurManInGlasgow


Have to agree with you here.

A lie by omission is still very much a lie.

But then it's hardly surprising is it really? The BBC has always been the media arm of the establishment, and takes it's orders from on high.

Look what happened to Gregg Dyke, when he didn't toe the 'official' line over the farce of the Hutton inquiry, he was allowed to resign though, unlike poor old Dr. David Kelly.

On the particular issue of Zimbabwe coverage v Congo coverage, there's an important angle which posters haven't considered yet.
Zimbabwe used to be part of the British empire.
Furthermore, Mugabe's policies are in direct conflict with white farmers of British descent.
This gives Zimbabwe an interest to British audiences.
A very anglo-centric BBC will judge that its main audience is less interested in events in former Belgian and French colonies.
I bet you that BBC news teams will race to events in Kenya or Tanzania with more alacrity than to a revolution in Chad.