BBC Forced To Retract Its Smears Of Philip Davies MP But Leaves Misleading Headline In Place

By hequal: On Wednesday we highlighted a number of significant biases in the BBC’s treatment of Philip Davies, seemingly in retaliation for his election to the House of Commons Women and Equalities Committee. The BBC’s misconduct included an article containing various lies and misinformation including:

• A misleading click-bait headline which transformed the Women and Equality Committee into a committee only concerned with women.
• A doctored quote stating he had claimed “that some women wanted to “have their cake and eat it”.
• Stating that a speech given by Davies this year occurred in 2015
• Giving a false and less prestigious name to the conference Davies spoke at.
• A refusal to accept the gender justice gap as fact, despite Davies giving some 20 separate points from official government sources proving the phenomenon beyond any doubt.

The above was compounded by a previous attack on Davies by feminist BBC Radio presenter in which she again misquoted him, doing so completely unprompted and in a discussion about the Red Pill Movie rather than about Davies.
We forwarded our article to the BBC as well as to Davies himself and although they’ve failed to discuss any of the points, they have at least made some changes to the article.
First the good news. The BBC have completely retracted their fabricated quote, replacing it with the real thing. As we stated previously, Davies made the transcript of his speech available online and a video of it on YouTube has over 10,000 views so it’s hard to image how the BBC thought they could get away with misrepresenting his comments. The BBC have also corrected the date of Davies’ speech and also amended the name of the event he spoke at (albeit still getting it wrong by omitting the term “issues”). The changes were all automatically captured by the brilliant Newssniffer site for everyone to see:

The bad news is that the BBC article is still pretty atrocious, both in terms of accuracy and impartiality. Furthermore, they’ve been presented with proof of all the relevant facts and thus any mistakes and biases now in place are undeniably 100% deliberate on their part.
Firstly, the organisation has insisted on keeping its misleading headline, despite almost every other news outlet in existence going for either a completely or at least  more accurate version. This makes the BBC’s bias headline even worse than that of the Guardian, a world-leader in misandrist journalism. The juxtaposition of a “men’s rights campaigner” and a women’s committee is a clear attempt by the feminist BBC to generate outrage and to make the appointment seem nonsensical. On the other hand, the more appropriate description of such a campaigner being elected to an equality committee makes perfect sense and is in fact a historic event that has been long overdue. Thus we can see the BBC is insistent on carrying out misleading feminist activism in what it writes instead of actually doing its job and reflecting reality in an impartial manner.

A further bias still in place is the BBC’s treatment of the men’s equality issues such as the gender justice gap as against feminist causes such as the so-called gender pay gap (which should really be called the “gender earnings gap”). The BBC has a long track record of bias in this area, always describing feminist claims of discrimination as factual, whilst using dismissive/questioning language. In this case they fail to accept the very existence of the gender justice gap, instead describing it as “what he says is the varying treatment of male and female prisoners”. Only a few paragraphs later this very same article uses the debunked feminist  term “gender pay gap” as if it isn’t in at all controversial or in dispute. A notable and very obvious previous example of this phenomena was BBC Three’s Tyger takes on programme from last year, and we highlighted the bias then too.
It’s important to view these events in a wider context, and that context is a clear pattern of bias against men and boys in the BBC’s output. In our work alone we’ve highlighted how the BBC:

• Refused to ever report on a single suicide caused by false rape allegations.
• Falsely described a false rape accuser as a “rape victim” even though she was on trial, and allowed feminists to smear the real victim.
• Deliberately sabotaged the election campaign of a men’s political party by banning men from their hustings event (and making all the questions about women).

What should be noted theses that these biases and “mistakes” only every work one way. The BBC never misquotes Davies or any men’s campaigner to paint them in a more positive light, the exaggeration only ever goes in the other direction, inventing sexism by Davies where there was none in order to smear him. They never mis-title men’s events to make them appear more significant, only less so. And of course, while all feminist activism/achievements are celebrated or described as “historic” and “ground-breaking”, they fail to use the same descriptors for Davies’ quite incredible smashing of not so much a glass ceiling for men’s campaigners, but more like  a three meter thick concrete fortress. A great many powerful organisations and politicians have defended the above fortress for many years and its clear that the feminist BBC is chief amongst them.
For those who’ve missed it, here’s Davies’ superb speech at ICMI16, please share it as widely as possible:

Source