Cracks appear in BBC ranks as executives face staff revolt

Guardian ^ | 07/21/03 | Matt Wells

[Billthedrill]

Mr. Gilligan might have a future in journalism in the United States once he gets his sense of shame surgically removed.

[zarf]

The important question - which remains unanswered - is whether Dr Kelly was rowing back from the Gilligan report earlier in the day, or whether Gilligan himself "sexed up" the quotes.

The BBC is the quintessential example of left wing bias in the major media.

I hope they fu**ing implode.

[squidly]

Far as I know, the NYT hasn't filled the opening left by Jayson Blair. Come on over, Gilligan!

[AdamSelene235]

I hope they fu**ing implode.

In 92 languages !!

[D-fendr]

"Who will any right-minded person believe?

_______ or a journalist?"

[The Radical Capitalist]

Just once in my life, I'd like to be "sexed up."

[Cicero]

Beautiful. The tide is turning. The Guardian is a left-wing newspaper, yet it is turning the focus of blame from Tony Blair to the BBC.

As I said earlier, Kelly's suicide will be very disturbing to the left wingers. Essentially he appears to have been a naive, idealistic left-winger who thought he could help the cause but was misquoted and betrayed by the BBC reporter whom he thought was his friend. Ergo, the BBC is responsible for putting him into an insupportable position where he felt that he had to commit suicide.

The stringers at BBC would certainly support their bosses if they were standing up to a conservative attack. But they are not. Now the leftist ranks have been split because one leftist betrayed another, and the food fight will get nastier and nastier, just as it did at the New York Times.

[piasa]

My tinfoil theory of the day: Could there be another leaker higher up who is now pleased no one will come looking for him?

[Torie]

It appears that either 1) Dr. Kelly lied to the MP's, downplaying his concerns, or 2) Dr. Kelly sexed it up to Gilligan, or 3) Gilligan sexed it up what Dr. Kelly told him. 1) and 2) seem most consistent with Kelly's suicide, which would get Gilligan off the hook, unless Kelly should not have been leaking to Gilligan, and he will kill himself over being a leaker, rather than a liar. Do I have this right?

[Torie]

I should add that Gilligan's problem if he was not distorting, is that he used only one source, with violates journalistic standards.

[livius]

Beautiful. The tide is turning.

Yes!!! I think Kelly was exactly as you have described him, but I suspect he didn't even distort that much. During the hearings, however, he suddenly saw that his rather guarded words had been taken and twisted out of all recognizeable shape by the BBC, and that he was going to be the fall guy.

The BBC and the press in general have much more responsibility for Kelly's death than even the peculiar combination of conservative and extreme left-wing opposition involved in the hearings. The BBC set him up.

[Torie]

BBC is responsible for putting him into an insupportable position where he felt that he had to commit suicide.

For what? For being a leaker? If so, the Kelly was an eggshell skull type, as it were.

[Prodigal Son]

Another said: "The BBC statement is a disaster. On the face of it, based on the evidence to hand, Gilligan sexed up his story. The only other explanation is that David Kelly wasn't being truthful to the committee, but I tend to think now that Gilligan did what he accused Campbell of. And our boss backed him. If that's true, they have tarnished each and every one of us. Until they prove otherwise they have lost my confidence. They should go."

Trouble in the hen house. That's a pretty strong statement there.

[Mo1]

Another said: "The BBC statement is a disaster. On the face of it, based on the evidence to hand, Gilligan sexed up his story. The only other explanation is that David Kelly wasn't being truthful to the committee, but I tend to think now that Gilligan did what he accused Campbell of. And our boss backed him. If that's true, they have tarnished each and every one of us. Until they prove otherwise they have lost my confidence. They should go."

I don't trust Gilligan as far as I can throw him

But hey, if he loses his job at the BBC .. I hear there's still an opening at the NYT's

[McGavin999]

The BBC set him up.

The BBC has blood on their hands. The journalists have been hounding Tony Blair about his having blood on his hands, they should go after the BBC as well.

[ShandaLear]

It's all going to fall apart for the Dems too. Gilligan's story was the foundation for the current brouhaha re: the SOTU speech. Watch as is all crumbles down. Man, I love politics!

[Mo1]

The BBC has blood on their hands. The journalists have been hounding Tony Blair about his having blood on his hands, they should go after the BBC as well.

You bet the BBC needs to be held accountable on this

[brydic1]

How great it is that the NYT and the BBC, both premier voices for the left in their respective countries have been exposed as being prevaricating frauds who hire slimes to make up or "sex up" stories to slander those who dare support the defense of the western culture. In time maybe the world will really learn the extent of the treason committed by the leftist media.

[FreeReign]

...the BBC had occupied a large expanse of sure ground. Its determination not to reveal its source was seen as a principled stand...

IMO, using unnamed sources is not very principled.

If an accusation doesn't have a named source , then there is a greater chance than not, that the information obtained from the unnamed source is -- 180 degrees wrong.