To want the BBC to explain wreathgate properly

[Hingeandbracket]

The BBC has apologised for cutting a section of 2016 coverage of Boris laying a wreath into the coverage of Sunday.

But they haven’t provided a proper account of how or why they did it.

I would like to know.

This was not a simple or easy mistake.

My advice is stop paying the TV licence

And surely no one has forgotten the flak Michael Foot got for wearing a “donkey jacket” which was in fact a perfectly respectable coat.

OP So, you don't care deeply enough to actually do a quick internet search to find out the answer (which of course you are free to accept or disbelieve) but care deeply enough to start a thread about it?

PS I don't necessarily trust the BBC either.

Mum the issue is that people are NOT talking about the veterans now, because the footage of Boris was three years old. The BBC detracted from the remembrance by trying to make out Boris is a tidy, well kept leader who placed the wreath the correct way.

I think it doesn’t make any difference whether it was a mistake or not, it still needs correcting much more obviously than it has been.

The apology and the explanation of how it happened should be broadcast on the BBC news, along with the correct footage. Not put on twitter / hidden on the website where a lot of people won’t see it.

People need the opportunity to judge for themselves if they think the BBC is biased. They also have a right to see our PM disrespecting our fallen servicemen and women, rather than having it covered up.

While we shouldn't care about the minor details of how a politician lays a wreath, we should care about whether the BBC is purposefully doctoring their news footage to create a more flattering image of a specific political figure or party. That is worrying. That suggests they are in the pocket of the Tories. A serious issue.

I agree. His appearance this year was disrespectful and shambolic. Corbin was smarter.

Oh please. Corbin didn't even bow his head properly. Insulting behaviour. It would be better if he didn't go at all.

Oh yeah how could I forget. Corbyn didn’t bow deeply enough. The fucking lengths the right-wing will stoop too are embarrassing.

*to

Oh please. Corbin didn't even bow his head properly. Insulting behaviour. It would be better if he didn't go at all

If you’re going to object to the head bowing skills, why is only Corbyn on the receiving end of your criticism?

Not sure why the BBC did it, but the people saying it was an honest mistake are either lying or stupid. It cannot have happened by mistake, it did not happen by mistake, the logistical reasons for this ar eboth obvious and complex. For some reason, as yet unexplained the BBC wanted to show us one clip rather than the other. Why? no idea, but it was a deliberate act.

Call me cynical but I suspect that if Jeremy Corbyn had turned up to a solemn ceremony looking less than pristine, and had then proceeded to mess up his part in the proceedings, not only would his presence have been broadcast exactly as was, but there'd be all manner of additional criticism thrown his way, accusations of disrespect and so forth.

If you accept that somehow, someone made an innocent 'mistake' by both selecting and showing out of date and irrelevant footage, it still doesn't detract from the fact that Boris' (latest) bumblings and dishevelled appearance weren't even remarked upon. There is a precedent for this.... I can still remember the furore over Michael Foot's duffle coat at a previous Remembrance day ceremony. Whether you agree with it or not, people.... politicians..... in the public eye are often judged by their appearance and demeanour so abberations from the 'norm' are usually commented upon by the press and news media.

Strange how this hasn't been the case for Boris however. Particularly as many viewers would have seen exactly what happened in real time when watching the ceremony live in the morning. I refuse to believe that no-one at the BBC noticed the gaffe. And it's human detail like that which is usually prime news fodder.

Unless of course you have a vested interest in presenting the PM as a professional statesman.....

The explanation from the BBC that I read said they'd loaded the archive footage to preview the service which made sense but I still don't understand why they didn't preview the most recent footage which at 4am on Sunday would have been 2018's service not 2016's.

Because the exact incline of jc's head is way more important than the fact that the bbc is choosing not to report certain things, and actually playing wrong footage not just once but twice in 24 hours, all of which appear to be in the tories favour.

If the focus is to be on minuscule things though, I think the PM could have worn a black suit not blue, done his coat up, and made more of an effort to pay attention so thay he stood forward at the right time, and learned to read do that he should know his wreath was upside down. But yes, 5 more degrees on the head bend would have prevented such a horror.

While we shouldn't care about the minor details of how a politician lays a wreath, we should care about whether the BBC is purposefully doctoring their news footage to create a more flattering image of a specific political figure or party. That is worrying. That suggests they are in the pocket of the Tories. A serious issue.

Yes. And I really don't understand how other people can't see this. If our national broadcaster is deliberately covering up anything that shows or prime minister in a bad light, then our country is in trouble.

Spot on @housemdwaswrong!

In Asian countries the degree of the bow is dictated by very complex cultural norms. In Europe... meh.

He bowed his head. It's enough - i don't know why everyone is always digging on Corbyn. The Sun doctored photos of him walking with someone to make it look as though he was dancing down the street. Is that normal for the press to behave like this?

The fact is that the Prime Minister looked as though he'd slept in his clothes, didn't appear to be wearing a jacket, hadn't apparently brushed his hair and shambled around at the Cenotaph. But apparently none of that is worth remarking on? But Corbyn wearing a raincoat or not bowing deeply enough, or Michael Foot wearing a "donkey jacket" (which was nothing of the sort) is enough to send the press into some kind of frenzy.

So it may have been a "mistake" or it may have been deliberate. but there is no getting away from the fact that if you compare the two clips, one shows Johnson in a much more favourable light.

You know what, I don't actually care if Johnson got in a bit of a muddle at the ceremony, nor if Corbyn was deemed to have bowed enough (whatever the hell that means). It doesn't actually matter, they went, they pairs their respects.

What I do mind is if the BBC at some level tried to cover it up. That matters.

paid not pairs.

If it was a simple mistake, then the problem is that the compliance and editorial systems in place are completely inadequate. When using archive material for current news stories the BBC are supposed to indicate on screen that it's archive, editorial staff are supposed to review election coverage that goes out to ensure it's accurate/fair/unbiased etc.

Mistakes happen, that's why there are systems to catch them, an organisation going "it was just the bod in the edit suite made a mistake" is always a wrong response as they are not supposed to be responsible, the entire team is, and they failed, but no admission or explanation of how they failed, it's very poor.

He looks like the last days of Boris Yeltsin. Drunk and dishevelled. His handlers clearly couldn’t get the alka-seltzer and comb to him in time.

The right wingers went on and one about Corbyn’s incorrect this and that during Remembrance Day in 2015 and how it displayed how disrespectful he was. Now suddenly when Johnson is the one “doing it all wrong” it’s suddenly “not a big deal” and we should be getting on with other stuff. The hypocrisy of the right never fails to astound me.

The thing is... if this was a deliberate decision to show Boris in a better light, rather than a genuine error, you then have to wonder how the wool is being pulled over our eyes in other respects? It was relatively easy to call the BBC out over this because no deep understanding or analysis was required to do so..... this was something many people had seen for themselves as it happened and could therefore see that the footage used in later reports didn't match.

It's not so simple to feel confident that you're being presented with accurate and unbiased information when it comes to more complex issues because many people simply don't have the in depth knowledge or expertise to make that call. Instead, they turn to a' trusted' and familiar source of news, like the BBC, to help them understand things which are hugely important.

So yes, the 'fuss' about what seems to be, at first glance, a relatively minor story, is actually very concerning because it calls the integrity of the BBC into question.

Unfortunately the BBC has got a lot of form recently in its political programming of bias against Labour since Corbyn was elected leader of the Party. Remember Fiona Bruce saying a while back that Labour was "behind in all the polls" when in fact it was at the time behind in a couple, level in a couple and ahead in a couple. When 'little mistakes' keep happening that always seem to the benefit of one side, it starts looking like institutional bias. In fact if you look at the backgrounds of the main staff in the BBC politics team, you will see that the majority have or had ties to the Conservatives or Conservative organisations/media. If I lived in the UK I would be very unhappy paying for it.

Corbyn wears an appropriate but apparently not smart enough coat. The media (and MN) makes a big fuss and it makes headlines.

Corbyn doesn't bow his head quite as low as others. The media makes a big fuss (haven't checked yesterday's Telegraph so unsure if it made headlines).

Johnson turns up looking half cut, can't even stand still and places the wreath the wrong way round. The BBC edit their footage.

That is why people need to make a fuss.