Skip to content

Two BBC Complaints Resubmitted

December 31, 2023
tags: ,

By Paul Homewood

The BBC obviously think the general public are something beneath contempt, and any complaints should be fobbed off and ignored!

I filed two complaints last week, which have now had the usual disdainful first stage replies.

The first was on this article, which claimed that Storm Arwen was unprecedented, even though there have been other, much stronger storms in Scotland in the past:

 

 

image

 image

http://web.archive.org/web/20231219012205/https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-67752167

.

This is their response:

image

.

I have therefore resubmitted this complaint:

Storm Arwen
Your response states "we have amended the wording to make it clearer. The article now states:
“Scientists have warned that climate change is making extreme storms more common.”
Scientists say no such thing.
The Met Office’s State of the UK Climate 2022 report [page 42] states "As a measure of storminess Figure 51 counts the number of days each year on which at least 20 stations recorded gusts exceeding 40/50/60 Kt (46/58/69 mph). Most winter storms have widespread effects, so this metric will reasonably capture fairly widespread strong wind events. The metric will consider large-scale storm systems rather than localized convective gusts.- The most recent two decades have seen fewer occurrences of max gust speeds above these thresholds than during the previous decades, particularly comparing the period before and after 2000.
This earlier period [before 2000] also included among the most severe storms experienced in the UK in the observational records including the ‘Burns’ Day Storm’ of 25 January 1990, the ‘Boxing Day Storm’ of 26 December 1998 and the ‘Great Storm’ of 16 October 1987. Any comparison of storms is complex as it depends on severity, spatial extent and duration. Storm Eunice was the most severe storm to affect England and Wales since February 2014, but even so, these storms of the 1980s and 1990s were very much more severe."
The same page includes Figure 51, which clearly shows extreme storms being much less frequent and intense in recent years
The link to the report is here:
https://rmets.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1002/joc.8167
Your article needs to be corrected to show that Storm Arwen was not in any way "unprecedented" or "unusual"

.image

The second complaint was about this article:

image

image

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-67494082

It is simple arithmetic to work out that £590m divided by 27m households is a lot less than £40! And when you factor in that domestic users only consume a third of UK electricity, the actual cost is £7 a year.

Evidently the BBC are not capable of simple maths, and believe that Carbon Tracker must be right!!

image

Again, I have resubmitted my complaint:

Your response fails to address my complaint, which is that claims that wasted wind power is adding £40 a year to household bills, are factually incorrect.
The fact that they were made by a lobby group for renewable energy, Carbon Tracker, is irrelevant. It is the BBC’s duty to report factually correct information.
It is difficult to see how this transparently false claim ever passed the BBC’s editorial checks, as it iis so blatantly and obviously fake.
Nevertheless the BBC must now publish a correction.

.

Both of these BBC falsehoods fit into the same narrative. The first is part of their ongoing agenda to indoctrinate the public into thinking that weather is becoming more extreme.

In the second example, they are peddling propaganda for the renewable lobby. If the public think wasted wind is costing them so much, they might put pressure on the government to spend billions on more transmission lines.

24 Comments
  1. lordelate permalink
    December 31, 2023 3:40 pm

    Just the same as trying to complain to any government organization. Do as say dont do as I do.
    Best wishes for 2024 everyone.
    LL

    • lordelate permalink
      December 31, 2023 3:41 pm

      Do as I do!
      damn old age!

  2. lordelate permalink
    December 31, 2023 3:43 pm

    Still got it wrong. Do as I say!
    maybe I should not have started on the Prosecco

    • bobn permalink
      December 31, 2023 4:49 pm

      Yes, Nasty machine made Prosecco will not do you good; stick with quality and natural English sparkling wine.

  3. deejaym permalink
    December 31, 2023 3:45 pm

    I salute your indefatigabality (sic) Mr Homewood !

    All the best to you for 2024 & beyond

    • Harry Passfield permalink
      December 31, 2023 6:06 pm

      Well said Mr Galloway! (/Grin)

  4. Mark Hodgson permalink
    December 31, 2023 3:58 pm

    Paul,

    Thank you for all that you do. I hope you manage to keep at it with as much vigour in 2024.

  5. Artifex permalink
    December 31, 2023 4:08 pm

    Keep on going Paul

    btw this Sub needs some promotion, joined alot of dots:

    https://escapekey.substack.com/p/the-new-new-economic-policy

    On how ‘you will own nothing’

    • Mike Jackson permalink
      December 31, 2023 4:51 pm

      Sorry, Artifex, but that site lost me at “Covid was a scam”.
      You can argue as much as you like about the causes or the reactions to it but a scam it was most definitely not, believe me!

      • gezza1298 permalink
        December 31, 2023 8:29 pm

        Well said Mr Jackson.

      • Artifex permalink
        January 1, 2024 9:23 am

        Lol climate-change is a scam but covid wasn’t, this is exactly how nothing changes; once you scratch beneath the surface of ANY official narrative, it turns out to be a bottomless snake pit of deception, manipulations and outright lies. ‘True’ information would not contain anomalies. Its all a false-flag-limited hangout, well poisoning operation, with the ‘media’ hyenas hysterically churning out obvious falsehoods and misdirections mixed in with partial truths, so humanity would be divided by those who believe one cover-story over another, ensuring nothing is ever resolved. Good luck with pandemic 2.0 which will occur before 2030.

  6. December 31, 2023 4:19 pm

    You have fortitude Paul. Keep going.

  7. 2hmp permalink
    December 31, 2023 4:24 pm

    Well done – again. I do hope your website is followed by more than just a few MPs. the BBC has be stopped in its tracks sooner or later but which MP or Minister will have the guts to do it. Spineless creatures almost all.

    • bobn permalink
      December 31, 2023 4:50 pm

      Andrew Bridgen stood up and spoke out. Look what the crass cowards did to him!

  8. notforuses permalink
    December 31, 2023 4:26 pm

    Keep chipping away at it, Paul. Keep up the good work. Here’s to a bias-free 2024. Happy New Year.

  9. Joe Public permalink
    December 31, 2023 5:22 pm

    Good luck with both of your responses, Paul.

  10. December 31, 2023 5:28 pm

    We need you on Substack Paul!

  11. tomcart16 permalink
    December 31, 2023 5:29 pm

    I suppose the BBC realise that when it becomes apparent to most that the BBC are dishonest about climate matters and their progress to covering other unreliable nonsense their standing in the public arena is progressively eroded. Paul’s followers will exclaim about my stating the blindingly obvious and they would be right.
    The BBC seem to think that their position is inviolate. The trouble is that we care less and less about the BBC’s self esteem although the appointment of a 23/24/25/? year old to field complaints soon after the return of the BBC team of 40 from COP 28 might give us cause for hope, I suppose.
    A friend in the editor’s office of one of the heavy dailies might be worth having if Paul’s challenges can thereby become regular news.

    • gezza1298 permalink
      December 31, 2023 8:35 pm

      Sadly, too many people still hold the BBC in esteem based on what it was decades ago. They fail to see how biased and woke it is. How it has become a sprawling leftwing global propaganda operation. It will only learn when more people stop paying for it though my fear is that whichever Labour is in power – Red or Blue – will find a way of funding it through our taxes.

      • tomcart16 permalink
        January 1, 2024 10:47 am

        We may go over the top when it comes to our disappointment with today’s BBC and we may. What I find puzzling is the lack of self-awareness of the BBC. Neither Wilson nor Heath trusted the BBC so perhaps they were more objective in those days.
        As I have said before the willingness of the BBC to do the work of a press agency is very odd i.e. to tell us what we can expect will be news later that day.
        You will recall the day of 9/11 when we were told at 9.00 am what to expect of the Prime Minister’s speech to the TUC that afternoon. No such speech we made as I recall as the twin towers’ inferno dominated the rest of the day’s reporting.

  12. Harry Passfield permalink
    December 31, 2023 6:02 pm

    When the BBC say ‘Scientists say….’ they are probably using the Betts’ ploy: take ten years of real (probably adjusted) data and then model the next (future) ten years on it – and call it data. They are desperate….but they figure that many won’t realise what they are doing.

    • gezza1298 permalink
      December 31, 2023 8:41 pm

      No, they are just using that as a shield to spout lies. Their defence is we were just reporting what they said. Yes, of course they never come across any scientists that say anything contrary to their beliefs. The Guardian does it as well in their recent climate change lies including the massive porkie over the Libyan dam failure which has been thoroughly debunked.

  13. catweazle666 permalink
    December 31, 2023 7:46 pm

    Happy New Year Paul and keep up the good work!

  14. gezza1298 permalink
    December 31, 2023 8:28 pm

    But don’t worry, as GB News has noted. every week there will be a new article on the BBC on slavery – or more accurately our involvement in the slave which will ignore how the proceeds were reinvested here and how the Royal Navy worked to stop that trade. And of course no mention of who leads the way in modern slavery.

Comments are closed.