Skip to comments.
BBC BOSS QUITS AS BRIT PROBE BARES PHONY WAR STORY
New York Post ^
| 1/29/04
| Post Wire Services
Posted on 01/29/2004 2:35:46 AM PST by kattracks
Edited on 05/26/2004 5:19:20 PM PDT by Jim Robinson.
[history]
January 29, 2004 -- LONDON - The chairman of the British Broadcasting Corporation resigned yesterday and the broadcaster apologized for some of its reporting on the buildup to the war in Iraq after it was lambasted in an inquiry by a senior judge. The inquiry by Lord Hutton criticized journalist Andrew Gilligan, the BBC's management and its supervisory board of governors, for a radio report saying the government "sexed up" intelligence in a dossier on Iraqi weapons. Hutton said the BBC report was unfounded.
(Excerpt) Read more at nypost.com ...
TOPICS: Extended News; News/Current Events; United Kingdom; War on Terror
KEYWORDS: andrewgilligan; bbc; davidkelly; gavyndavies; huttonreport
1
posted on
01/29/2004 2:35:47 AM PST
by
kattracks
To: pau1f0rd
ping
2
posted on
01/29/2004 2:36:32 AM PST
by
risk
To: kattracks
I'm glad that the BBC was lambasted, but it puts me off a little that the problem is stated as not enough levels of managerial oversight and prescreening of what the ground-level reporter, Andrew Gilligan, was going to say. I'd prefer a system where reporters and commentators say what they think, but where everyone knows that they have to take things with a grain of salt. Apparently, the British ideal would be to fact-check everything six times before saying anything. Gilligan apparently exaggerated or even lied about what David Kelly had said to him, and that was wrong, especially since it led to an overly sensitive man's death; but the BBC's fault, in my opinion, was not in being too loosely managed but rather in circling the wagons and claiming that they could never have been wrong. What the Brit's seem to want is an authoritative journalism that they can trust and believe in without people having to be skeptical and think for themselves. A dangerous thing to want, I think.
3
posted on
01/29/2004 3:21:16 AM PST
by
Stirner
To: kattracks
Seems Kelly was right.
4
posted on
01/29/2004 3:27:30 AM PST
by
Zipporah
(Write inTancredo in 2004)
To: kattracks
All good, except, of course, he should have fired Andrew Gilligan first.
Looks like Gilligan was the only one sexing anything up...
I see the leftiods on other websites are claiming Hutton is in on some grand conspiracy with Blair though. I guess they can't get it through their heads that the "anti-war" cause always was built on a house of cards and neo-fascist sympathizing.
To: swilhelm73
I see the leftiods on other websites are claiming Hutton is in on some grand conspiracy with Blair though
yes, it's that grand conspiracy called 'keeping your country safe'.
6
posted on
01/29/2004 4:01:52 AM PST
by
pau1f0rd
To: Stirner
I agree with your post........but OH! think about the New York Times!
Regards,
7
posted on
01/29/2004 4:08:56 AM PST
by
Jimmy Valentine
(DemocRATS - when they speak, they lie; when they are silent, they are stealing the American Dream)
To: kattracks
Anyone know if Gilligan is still there?
8
posted on
01/29/2004 4:13:49 AM PST
by
mewzilla
To: kattracks
"The inquiry by Lord Hutton criticized journalist Andrew Gilligan, the BBC's management and its supervisory board of governors..."
You mean to say they were exposed to be a SHAMELES propaganda outfit for the left?
Go ahead, you can say it!
9
posted on
01/29/2004 4:46:36 AM PST
by
observer5
To: swilhelm73
BBC wouldn't know waht journalism is if it hit them with a 16 wheeler truck.
Disclaimer:
Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual
posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its
management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the
exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson