BBC bias again?

Printable View

Show 100 post(s) from this thread on one page

10-01-2018, 09:28 AM
SouthsideHarp_Bhoy

Quote:

Originally Posted by Kavinho

So you contingently agree with the couple of minor contributions I've made, but then go on to ask a rhetorical, and Id wager unanswerable question.
No wonder this is a circular argument.

But if you want to add some weght to your argument feel to come back with anything remotely assembling stats to back up your couple of claims that its worse in respect to Govt stories

Or you can help me try and square this circle from Twitter today (Ponsonby)

Sarah Smith: "Last week over one hundred thousand patients waited more than four hours to be seen."
--
There were 25,865 attendances at Emergency Departments across Scotland last week. Source. https://t.co/dcIm4ZsFXn

https://t.co/MMi27oN72T

--
Yet:
According to her figures, 78% were seen in the target 4 hours. Therefore her "100,000" represents only 22% of total A&E attendances. So total attendance works out at over 454,000, i.e about 8.5% of Scottish population.

--
Genuine question.. I'm open to any explanation

Sorry, to answer your question i dont know - maybe she confused last week with last month? Maybe she is just talking ******* - as we all know, stats can generally be massaged whatever way you want them, hence my distrust of them in argument.

But i dount she got an editorial line from her bosses / old school networks or anyone else, telling her to deliberately make stuff up to stick it to the nats.
10-01-2018, 09:31 AM
Moulin Yarns

Quote:

Originally Posted by Kavinho

So you contingently agree with the couple of minor contributions I've made, but then go on to ask a rhetorical, and Id wager unanswerable question.
No wonder this is a circular argument.

But if you want to add some weght to your argument feel to come back with anything remotely assembling stats to back up your couple of claims that its worse in respect to Govt stories

Or you can help me try and square this circle from Twitter today (Ponsonby)

Sarah Smith: "Last week over one hundred thousand patients waited more than four hours to be seen."
--
There were 25,865 attendances at Emergency Departments across Scotland last week. Source. https://t.co/dcIm4ZsFXn

https://t.co/MMi27oN72T

--
Yet:
According to her figures, 78% were seen in the target 4 hours. Therefore her "100,000" represents only 22% of total A&E attendances. So total attendance works out at over 454,000, i.e about 8.5% of Scottish population.

--
Genuine question.. I'm open to any explanation

I haven't seen the Sarah Smith piece on BBC England but this is possibly where the 100,000 comes from

Quote:

Last month, BBC analysis of NHS data showed that fewer patients in Scotland were waiting longer than four hours in A&E than they did in 2012/3 in contrast to England where the number had more than doubled.

It found England had a 155% rise in long waits between 2012/3 and this year, up to 2.5 million a year.

Hospitals in Wales and Northern Ireland also saw an increase over the period.

In Scotland, the number of patients waiting more than four hours fell by 9% to just over 100,000.

The 100,000 appears to be for the whole of December, not last week of December.
10-01-2018, 11:28 AM
Kavinho

Quote:

Originally Posted by SouthsideHarp_Bhoy

Sorry, to answer your question i dont know - maybe she confused last week with last month? Maybe she is just talking ******* - as we all know, stats can generally be massaged whatever way you want them, hence my distrust of them in argument.

But i dount she got an editorial line from her bosses / old school networks or anyone else, telling her to deliberately make stuff up to stick it to the nats.

So it'll just be another honest mistake then.
Fair enough cheers.

Just wish they weren't as regular as they are, and anecdotally it seems the vast majority are against the govt to me.
10-01-2018, 11:31 AM
Kavinho

Quote:

Originally Posted by Golden Fleece

I haven't seen the Sarah Smith piece on BBC England but this is possibly where the 100,000 comes from

The 100,000 appears to be for the whole of December, not last week of December.

Cheers
Appreciated
10-01-2018, 11:43 AM
GlesgaeHibby

Quote:

Originally Posted by Golden Fleece

I haven't seen the Sarah Smith piece on BBC England but this is possibly where the 100,000 comes from

The 100,000 appears to be for the whole of December, not last week of December.

The 100,000 is for more than December.

Smith's piece on BBC News at Six last night was a disgrace, with the headline being that 100,000 people attending A&E last week failed to be seen within 4 hours. Reailty is that the number was 22% of 25,865 total attendees, ie 5,690. The constant attacks by Reporting Scotland on the NHS have been bad enough, but to announce gross misinformation to the whole of the UK on the News at Six shows that Sarah Smith is either incompetent or a liar.

If you look at the published stats, it's actually inconceivable how that mistake could be made as the first bullet point highlights total A&E attendances at 25,865.
10-01-2018, 11:44 AM
Kavinho

Quote:

Originally Posted by SouthsideHarp_Bhoy

Sorry, to answer your question i dont know - maybe she confused last week with last month? Maybe she is just talking ******* - as we all know, stats can generally be massaged whatever way you want them, hence my distrust of them in argument.

But i dount she got an editorial line from her bosses / old school networks or anyone else, telling her to deliberately make stuff up to stick it to the nats.

Having just revered the clip again. The same quoted figure is given by the news presenter in her intro and by Sarah Smyth in her piece.. so Not just the one genuine mistake it would appear.

No wonder cynicism levels are through the roof.
People have as much faith in Craig Thompson..!!
10-01-2018, 03:56 PM
ronaldo7

Quote:

Originally Posted by Kavinho

Having just revered the clip again. The same quoted figure is given by the news presenter in her intro and by Sarah Smyth in her piece.. so Not just the one genuine mistake it would appear.

No wonder cynicism levels are through the roof.
People have as much faith in Craig Thompson..!!

Craig Thompson gets more things right. 😁
10-01-2018, 04:06 PM
ACLeith

Quote:

Originally Posted by GlesgaeHibby

The 100,000 is for more than December.

Smith's piece on BBC News at Six last night was a disgrace, with the headline being that 100,000 people attending A&E last week failed to be seen within 4 hours. Reailty is that the number was 22% of 25,865 total attendees, ie 5,690. The constant attacks by Reporting Scotland on the NHS have been bad enough, but to announce gross misinformation to the whole of the UK on the News at Six shows that Sarah Smith is either incompetent or a liar.

If you look at the published stats, it's actually inconceivable how that mistake could be made as the first bullet point highlights total A&E attendances at 25,865.

Her father must be birlin' in his grave on Iona
10-01-2018, 05:11 PM
Kavinho

Quote:

Originally Posted by ronaldo7

Craig Thompson gets more things right. 😁

I would agree.. others might not - as countless threads have shown!
10-01-2018, 06:32 PM
ronaldo7

Quote:

Originally Posted by SouthsideHarp_Bhoy

Do you know that is the case, or is it another od your innuendos?

What old school network are they both part of?

If an organisation had come out fundamentally challening my organisation and i felt it was unfounded, i would also seek to raise it at the highest possible levels.

That doesnt prove anything, other than the author fept he had rattled the BBC

Rather than take the opinion ofnour friendly, local Hibs net SNP political education officer, lets see what Blair Jenkins thinks about this issue, habing worked at senior levels on both sides -

"Mr Jenkins said the broadcast media had an important role to play. He added that as a former BBC Scotland news boss, he very rarely saw "deliberate bias" and he did not believe there was "systematic bias" at the BBC.

He told the committee: "You see mistakes being made and mistakes are being made because resources are being cut, particularly at BBC Scotland.

"As someone who held a senior role in BBC Scotland I am very aware of the strength of feeling in the journalistic community that they are over stretched.

"I am more aware of opportunities being missed, programmes not being done and issues not being treated with enough depth."

I thought you might have taken the opportunity to move into 2018, having left all that pish behind. Perhaps you should have posted it in the baby box thread. :dummytit:
10-01-2018, 09:16 PM
ronaldo7

They just can't help themselves.

https://randompublicjournal.com/2018...mirrors-media/
10-01-2018, 09:38 PM
johnbc70

Quote:

Originally Posted by ronaldo7

They just can't help themselves.

https://randompublicjournal.com/2018...mirrors-media/

Again, it's one man's opinion and interpretation of what he felt he saw.

What facts can you present, not someone else's opinions, that the BBC is anti SNP?
11-01-2018, 12:00 AM
snooky

Quote:

Originally Posted by GlesgaeHibby

The 100,000 is for more than December.

Smith's piece on BBC News at Six last night was a disgrace, with the headline being that 100,000 people attending A&E last week failed to be seen within 4 hours. Reailty is that the number was 22% of 25,865 total attendees, ie 5,690. The constant attacks by Reporting Scotland on the NHS have been bad enough, but to announce gross misinformation to the whole of the UK on the News at Six shows that Sarah Smith is either incompetent or a liar.

If you look at the published stats, it's actually inconceivable how that mistake could be made as the first bullet point highlights total A&E attendances at 25,865.

She can also be both surely?
11-01-2018, 07:40 AM
GlesgaeHibby

Quote:

Originally Posted by snooky

She can also be both surely?

True, but I don't believe she is incompetent. She's a pretty shrewd character.
11-01-2018, 08:34 AM
SouthsideHarp_Bhoy

Quote:

Originally Posted by GlesgaeHibby

True, but I don't believe she is incompetent. She's a pretty shrewd character.

Well she cant be that shrewd if she blows her cover as a secret anti-nat agent in so obvious a way, and on an issue of such minor importance!

I would guess that she has just repeated something she was given without properly checking it - sloppy journalism would be my guess.
11-01-2018, 10:17 AM
snooky

Quote:

Originally Posted by SouthsideHarp_Bhoy

Well she cant be that shrewd if she blows her cover as a secret anti-nat agent in so obvious a way, and on an issue of such minor importance!

I would guess that she has just repeated something she was given without properly checking it - sloppy journalism would be my guess.

Her cover was blown long time ago.
11-01-2018, 12:21 PM
Moulin Yarns

a little bit of redressing the balance.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-42648951

They must read Hibs.net :wink:
11-01-2018, 03:01 PM
snooky

Quote:

Originally Posted by Golden Fleece

a little bit of redressing the balance.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-42648951

They must read Hibs.net :wink:

Ffs, I need smelling salts. :dizzy:
11-01-2018, 03:20 PM
xyz23jc

Quote:

Originally Posted by snooky

Ffs, I need smelling salts. :dizzy:

Fake news! :greengrin
11-01-2018, 03:48 PM
johnbc70

Quote:

Originally Posted by Golden Fleece

a little bit of redressing the balance.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-42648951

They must read Hibs.net :wink:

Clearly the BBC have been hacked.
11-01-2018, 04:19 PM
ronaldo7

Quote:

Originally Posted by johnbc70

Again, it's one man's opinion and interpretation of what he felt he saw.

What facts can you present, not someone else's opinions, that the BBC is anti SNP?

You're obsessed with the SNP.😄

It's about balance and impartiality.

You've got to wonder how the beeb got hold of the one legged wonder. Maybe he was just hanging around eh.

Nice to see Donalda has received my letter. 😎
11-01-2018, 04:38 PM
johnbc70

Quote:

Originally Posted by ronaldo7

You're obsessed with the SNP.😄

It's about balance and impartiality.

You've got to wonder how the beeb got hold of the one legged wonder. Maybe he was just hanging around eh.

Nice to see Donalda has received my letter. 😎

So no facts, no problem.

I have no idea what the rest of your post means. Is one legged wonder some reference to someone's disability?
11-01-2018, 04:53 PM
ronaldo7

Quote:

Originally Posted by johnbc70

So no facts, no problem.

I have no idea what the rest of your post means. Is one legged wonder some reference to someone's disability?

Did you read the link?
11-01-2018, 04:59 PM
grunt

Quote:

Originally Posted by ronaldo7

Did you read the link?

Do you think that he'd have posted what he said in #132 if he'd read the link?
11-01-2018, 05:03 PM
ronaldo7

Quote:

Originally Posted by johnbc70

So no facts, no problem.

I have no idea what the rest of your post means. Is one legged wonder some reference to someone's disability?

Balance and impartiality in full from the BBC. The one legged wonder is in this link too.

http://indyref2.scot/a-bbc-scotland-...oken-ankle-man

Quote:

Originally Posted by grunt

Do you think that he'd have posted what he said in #132 if he'd read the link?

:aok:
11-01-2018, 05:13 PM
ronaldo7

Quote:

Originally Posted by Golden Fleece

a little bit of redressing the balance.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-42648951

They must read Hibs.net :wink:

The difference with this story is, it's actually true. What's come over them.
11-01-2018, 05:15 PM
johnbc70

I never related the man with a broken ankle to a man with one leg.
11-01-2018, 05:17 PM
johnbc70

Quote:

Originally Posted by grunt

Do you think that he'd have posted what he said in #132 if he'd read the link?

Yes he would have.
11-01-2018, 05:22 PM
ronaldo7

Quote:

Originally Posted by johnbc70

I never related the man with a broken ankle to a man with one leg.

Now that you have, what do you think of the BBC "story", which made the main news ALL DAY?

I wonder if they'll run a story on someone going into A&E and getting seen, triaged, and fixed, all in the space of 4 hours. I won't hold my breath though.
11-01-2018, 05:25 PM
grunt

Quote:

Originally Posted by johnbc70

Yes he would have.

Well you may have read it, but you appear to have missed the point.
Which is that the BBC's use of that interview is a clear example of bias, or failing that, lack of professionalism.
If they had done any background checking they should have identified the man as someone with an axe to grind against the Scottish Government and the SNP in particular.

But I'm not going to engage further, because I suspect you're just trolling for an argument.

Show 100 post(s) from this thread on one page