Tuesday, 13 December 2011

Revisit the credibility of State Media

As the credibility of the BBC is once more being called into question surrounding the alleged duping of the public in the "Frozen Planet" episode recently screened concerning the baby Polar Bears. We thought this would be an ideal opportunity to revisit a Blog posting we published back in October last year (2010)

Of course there are any number of occasions that could be mentioned when it comes to the BBC allegedly duping the public, whether it be Panorama and the supposed sweat shops, the Blue Peter child being asked to pose as a competition winner, the Queen being edited to look like she was walking out of a photo shoot, when in fact she was walking IN. Again there are probably many more that could be mentioned, not least The Wiltshire Report, or as it is commonly known, the (discredited) prosecution case against Former Jersey Chief Police Officer Graham Power QPM.

The BBC, along with the rest of Jersey's State Media, published/broadcast/reported on this Wiltshire Report (prosecution case) quite extensively. The BBC has now been in possession of Mr. Power's 62,000 word submission to Wiltshire (the defence case) for TWO MONTHS and have not reported a single word of it. What are the chances that the BBC will be leaked anything again in Jersey? Haven't they got an obligation to tell both sides of a story? How can they expect trust and credibility? Why won't they report it?

"Leaks, Trust and Credibility Revisited" (October 2010)

After today’s announcement that Mike Bowron is the preferred choice of our Home Affairs Minister, Senator Ian (P9-26) Le Marquand, to be our next Chief Police Officer very serious and very probing questions need to be asked of our “accredited” media.

These questions should go right to the very top echelons of the BBC, ITV and the “Independent” Press Complaints Commission, or whoever it is that are tasked with the job of watching over the JEP .

The Home Affairs Minister’s announcement raises many, many questions to the credibility and trustworthiness of our “accredited” media. Regular Readers/viewers of this site will be aware that we were provided with information, not only to the identity of the new (subject to States approval) Chief Police Officer, but the alleged “cover story” that enabled David Warcup to secure his pension, that the selection process was just a PR exercise, Mr. Bowron was “the chosen one” before the selection process had even commenced and  It enabled him (David Warcup) to resign before the Napier report became public and thereby claim that he was leaving because of political and Blog criticism. 

After doing everything we could to substantiate the information we were given, we decided to publish it HERE

NINE DAYS LATER the “accredited” media announce that Mike Bowron is “the chosen one”. It is a known fact that the “accredited” media read this Blog, and have in the past, used it as a source for their own news, but why not this story? So a few of the questions that need to be asked are “how long have they been in possession of this information?” How is it that they report it as “news” NINE DAYS after it appeared on here? Why wasn’t this information provided directly to them? And many more questions besides.

For now we’ll just concentrate on the “trustworthiness” of the “accredited” media, their credibility and that of Team Voice. If this information wasn’t given to the accredited media, then why not? Could it be that they could not be trusted with it? And Team Voice could? Let us just suppose they were provided with this information then we must ask, why didn’t they report it? Are they as “independent” as they claim to be? Were they “encouraged” by our powers that be to keep it under wraps? If so then how can they claim to be an independent media? Either scenario suggests that they cannot be trusted.

As for the credibility, we at Team Voice, believe ours has never been in question. That is because, to the best of our (somewhat limited in comparison to the “accredited” media) ability, we research the facts and rely on documentation to substantiate these facts. We do as best we can to only publish evidenced facts. By doing this and reporting “in-depth” on the more embarrassing (to our government) stories we have gained the trust of some very courageous, knowledgeable, trustworthy, and conscientious people from inside the very heart of our government/Civil Service. These contacts can not be thanked enough, they are taking a huge risk to their livelihoods, their pensions, mortgages and so forth in order to have the truth told. They are, along with the Abuse Survivors, the unsung heroes in this very dark period in Jersey’s History……But why are they not giving, or leaking, this information to the “accredited” and “independent” media?

Our source was right about the name of the successful candidate and it is reasonable to assume that they were also right about the other things in the same story. Or are we to assume that getting the name right was a lucky guess and the rest should be ignored? This is further evidence of how Ministers could be systematically lying to the public about these issues and how the "accredited” media are falling for it hook line and sinker, or are complicit in their party line and deliberately keeping the public ignorant. If Ministers are willing to lie and cover up about these things what else are they willing to lie/cover up about??   Can anything they say be trusted and can we believe anything the Jersey media repeats on their behalf?

It must be said that we (Team Voice) know little about Mr Bowron himself apart from what is available on the internet. From what we do know he appears to be a respected and capable officer and wish him well in his new position. However, his apparent (alleged) association with David Warcup and the "cover story" for Warcup’s departure is not a good start and we hope that Mr Bowron will take an early opportunity to assert his independence from the “untrustworthy?” political leadership of this island. We hope that he will strive to create a politically independent Police Force. We hope that he will also strive to rigorously pursue the perpetrators of Child Abuse and bring them to justice without fear or favour.

What (or who) must also be in serious question is the Home Affairs Minister Ian Le Marquand. Regular readers/viewers will be aware that he gave the Wiltshire Report to the “accredited” media before he gave it to his fellow States Members as we reported, with great thanks to Deputy Trevor Pitman, HERE, with a follow up 

Despite all the promises made about keeping Members informed, he (ILM) has again failed to show respect to his colleagues. We have just checked the States website and there is no proposition lodged to appoint the next Chief Police Officer. Given the concerns about the Police Chiefs one would have hoped that ILM would have ensured that proper etiquette was followed and his fellow States Members wouldn’t have to learn about it through the “accredited” media…………..or on here!

The credibility, trust and independence of our “accredited” media are seriously in question. If any of it was in any doubt concerning Team Voice then this should now have been dispelled……………You heard it HERE  first.


  1. So I take it you think Stuart Syvret's blog is more truthful than the media then?

  2. Did you actually take the time and read the posting? If not please do. If so you're not an editor at one of the State Media outlets are you?

  3. Bowron is a 'Yes' man. How is he getting on with planning corruption and the like?

  4. Game show Mike.

    That is another question the State Media should be asking. No doubt they'll do what they're paid to do that's wait for the Press Release and churn that out.

  5. vfc when bowron got the job i left a comment on hear to say he was just more of the same a yes man and i have seen nothing to change my mind.

  6. Another handshake man? Bowron that is,many police are they seem to have a particular lodge they use.

  7. Wildlife programme uses captive animals to show how wild animals act - not a shock as how do you they think they get cameras into the den do the world's biggest and most dangerous land predator?

    As someone said previously blog land contains more lies than any other media and I am grown up yo know which one I believe and is not you.

    What you are doing is merely using matters to prove things as facts and you need to know both sides of a story before reaching a conclusion

  8. “and you need to know both sides of a story before reaching a conclusion”

    You got it in one. Jersey State Media have run numerous “tales” about Lenny Harper’s expenses, yet NEVER asked him his side of the story.

    Jersey State Media run numerous “tales” concerning the Wiltshire Report (prosecution case against Graham Power) Jon Gripton of BBC Jersey was given a copy of the defense case TWO MONTHS AGO and has published/broadcast not a word of it.

    We do want to know both sides of a story before coming to a conclusion, but in order to get both sides, we have to ask one of them because the State Media don’t.

  9. "blog land contains more lies than any other media"

    - and yet here you are, reading them and commenting! LOL!

    I think it's fairly obvious to anyone sane that the mainstream media has an agenda and spins things to their own ends; the blogs may or may not be believable; but the honest blogs like this one can be spotted a mile off from the worst excesses of the world's blogs (some are completely deranged, misguided or outright fiction, as you'd expect from any endeavour in any walk of life).

    Yes, we'll make our own minds up too, and in contrast to Mr 16:12 by the looks of it!

  10. After 3 weeks of waiting Commissioner Pitchers has rejected Stuart Syvret's appeal(s). In approximately 3-4 lines on an A4 piece of paper we are told, the commissioner, still hasn't given the reasons for his decision but will soon.

  11. Neil - I'd be cautious about cosying up to that biased BBC blog. They are orders of magnitude more biased themselves, and not in a good way.

    They've eagerly leapt on the Frozen Planet non-story, but have shot themselves badly in the foot by showing their twisted motivations. The story screamed out in headlines by the tabloids was not some simple shock horror discovery about David Attenborough's honesty but was actually framed as part of the climate change denialism propaganda that is so widespread these days.

    The last Frozen Planet episode was specifically about rapid and far reaching changes in polar conditions (caused by accelerating climate change) and there was a lot of controversy (before the shock horror reports) that the US networks weren't going to show the final episode because their viewers are too extremely biased to want to see reality shoved in their faces.

    This non-story will have been promoted to front page status by those who choose to mislead the public by feeding them lies, deception and cherry picked evidence etc to sway their minds.

    So, why did David Attenborough "cheat". Simples, in any real sense, he didn't. The propagandists tried to make people think that some great dishonest conspiracy had been outed. What utter cobblers! They ruthlessly exploited the public's general lack of knowledge of how wild life programmes are usually put together to smear Attenborough for reporting a truth that they don't want the public to accept.

    Here is Peter Rhodes, JEP columnist (JEP 14/12/11)

    "The vole looks startled. The owl looks alert. The vole suddenly runs. The owl suddenly takes off. The owl dives, seizing the vole in its talons. If, after 60 odd years of nature documentaries, you seriously believe you're watching the same owl and the same vole throughout, you are probably the sort of person who thinks Frozen Planet was cheating by filming 'Arctic' polar-bear cubs in a Dutch zoo"

  12. Remembering P.33/2010

    "It should be recalled that the Royal Court in a judgement given on 8th September 2009 expressed its “serious concern at the fairness of the procedure apparently adopted by the Previous Minister. He was dealing with the person holding the most senior position in the police force who had enjoyed a long and distinguished career. Bearing in mind the implications of suspension, we would have thought that fairness would dictate firstly Mr Power being given a copy of the media briefing and Mr Warcup’s letter and secondly an opportunity to be heard on whether there should be an investigation and, if so, whether he should be suspended during that investigation.” (Judgement paragraph 19.)

    Since the suspension, which was conducted in 35 minutes, countless hours have been spent in getting to the truth surrounding the suspension. Sadly, although the suspension was deemed to be a “neutral act”, countless time and expense has been incurred in successfully placing obstacles in front of those seeking the truth. However, the States has now adopted a 2-stepped approach to establish the truth which is covered further into this Report.

    It should be recalled that both the former and present Chief Ministers refused to provide the suspended Chief Officer with details of when documents were drafted. They were only released following a Complaints Board Review, and dates on the documents showed that the sequence of events were not as claimed by the former Minister.

    It is no longer denied that the original notes drafted by the Chief Executive Officer were destroyed by that same Officer. This is the same Officer who, along with the Acting Chief Officer of Police was directly involved with the suspension of the Chief Officer. As a result of the suppressed documents being released, it is now known that the letters to be served on the Chief Police Officer on 12th November were prepared on Saturday morning 8th November and the report from the Acting Chief Police Officer to the Chief Executive Officer was written on Monday 10th November 2008. It was this letter which formed the base for the suspension. The sequence implies that that the decision to suspend was taken first and the evidence was provided afterwards. The Minister in a sworn statement claimed that until he had received the Acting Police Chief’s letter he had no reason to believe that the management of the investigation was not being well handled. That claim now appears to be inaccurate. The author made reference to a Metropolitan Police Interim Report which he claimed fully supported his previous comments and the opinions which had been expressed in his letter. However, it was never seen by his Minister and was subsequently withdrawn by the Met Police apparently because it was not drafted for suspension purposes.

  13. "The story screamed out in headlines by the tabloids was not some simple shock horror discovery about David Attenborough's honesty but was actually framed as part of the climate change denialism propaganda that is so widespread these days."

    Actually, I think the BBC has been less than honest about many things, and the polar bear fiasco is just one in a long list of con tricks.

    If I am watching a television program about wild polar bears I think it's only reasonable for the footage used to actually be of wild polar bears and if captive polar bears are used that the program makers actually say so. I don't like being lied to or deliberatly misled by the television people or anyone else at all.

    I have a few other grudges against the BBC, one of them is the fact that they made a television program about Staffordshire Pindown without contacting the people who they know darned well were abused in "care" in Staffordshire as children, even though they knew very well where at least one of those people lived - me. I was furious about that. They had Neil Morrissey on, why didnt they just call it the Neil Morrissey Show or something, it was a farce of a documentary when they deliberatly blocked out people who wanted to be on it.

    They're always gagging people and misleading people. Look how they have treated Stuart Syvret! They know he's in prison, they know why he's in prison, they ought to be blasting it out on the news, but they won't.

    If the BBC didn't threaten people with massive fines and jail I certainly wouldn't pay the licence fee as I don't think I get my moneys worth. There's hardly ever any program I want to watch, so many of the programs are mind numbing drivel, it didn't used to be like that but it is now, they don't even show the Open University programs any more, childrens BBC is a disgrace, and to top it all they can't even be bothered to tell the plain unadulterated news. This rolling news, it makes me feel they are trying to brainwash me, repeating the same stuff over and over and over all day, and so many times they have broadcast one thing but then you discover what they have broadcast is propaganda or even a downright lie, that makes me furious.

  14. http://www.statesassembly.gov.je/AssemblyPropositions/2010/15409-15965-2332010.pdf

  15. State Media will have their headline "news" sorted for tomorrow. "Shock, Horror it's windy and wet in the middle of December!" A whole day of "news" will be dedicated to the weather tomorrow.......Journalism in Jersey......priceless!

  16. I see in the filthy Rag this evening that there will be no Inquiry into the way the media have behaved in Jersey.

    Quelle surprise!

    Bailhache said ' What has the media done? The Leveson Inquiry is a totally different thing. It is about appalling behaviour on the part of the media' Simon (Judas) Crowcroft agreed saying he was not sure whether it was an issue, but certainly not an issue for them.

    Well Mr Bailhache, it is not so much what the media have done but what they have NOT done. They have not been balanced, fair or impartial. They have misled the general public, they have withheld information of public interest. They have certainly not behaved in any way, shape or form as the MSM should.

    As for Mr Crowcroft, he disappointed when he voted for Bailhache for CM, and has now totally shown his true colours.

    Long live citizens media!

  17. Jill.

    Have just been e-mailed a scanned copy and it is so funny. Philip Bailhache says "what has the media done"? After Vice Chairman Deputy Montfort Tadier had said " there had been complaints in some circles about media reporting during the recent election campaign period."

    In answer to Philip Bailhache "the JEP run your election campaign for you Philip."

  18. For Gods sake forget the JEP and stop letting it run you.

  19. For god sake forget this Blog and stop letting it run you.

  20. vfc so much for new states taking us forward we are going backwards and what is going on with crowcroft and i allso see mr tadier not puting up much of a fight again as i said before there will be no real inquiry,s for the next 3 years under bailhache and gorst

  21. Martin is was Deputy Tadier that brought it to the attention of PPC that there had been complaints about the media's reporting over the election campaign. He was, it appears, out voted. Simon Crowcroft is probably right this is not an issue for PPC more an issue for Scrutiny. The new Scrutiny Chairman is Deputy Tracy Vallois, and for those who feel strongly about this subject she can be contacted here t.vallois@gov.je

  22. By Andy Sibcy JEP 17th December 2011
    Haut de la Garenne reporter arrested in UK police bribery investigation
    THE former News of the World crime editor who wrote some of the most lurid stories during the Haut de la Garenne child abuse inquiry has been arrested by anti-corruption police.
    Several national newspapers have reported that Lucy Panton was taken in for questioning on suspicion of paying officers for stories. The 37-year-old was detained during a dawn raid on her Surrey home at 6.15 am on Thursday.
    She is the seventh person to have been arrested since the launch of Operation Elveden, a probe into allegations of bungs being given to police officers by journalists.
    The investigation is running parallel to the police inquiry into phone hacking
    In February 2008, it was one of Mrs Panton’s photographers who was found hiding in bushes at Haut de la Garenne in the days before former deputy police chief Lenny Harper went public about excavations at the former children’s children’s home in St Martin.
    In July this year, Home Affairs Minister Ian Le Marqauand said that police, either in Jersey or from the UK, must have leaked information about the inquiry to the Sunday tabloid.
    In July 2008, Mrs Panton wrote a story for the paper claiming that she had exclusive access to a ‘shock secret police report’ which revealed ‘youngsters there were murdered then burned in a furnace to cover up the atrocities’. The story ran with the headline ‘All Kiddie killers left were burned bones and 65 teeth’.
    Just months before that story, Mr Harper who was leading the Jersey historical child abuse investigation, invited Mrs Panton, who is married to a Metropolitan police detective, to dine with him and other police officers at an exclusive London restaurant.
    The meal at Sir Michael Cain’s Shepherds restaurant cost the Jersey taxpayer £699.
    Early this year, Mr Harper said that there was nothing inappropriate about his relationship with the media. He said that he had taken Mrs Panton out to dinner to try and stop the News of the World printing wildly inaccurate stories.
    He told the JEP in July ‘I seem to be the only cop in trouble for not receiving hospitality from the News of the World, but for actually using my hospitality budget to pay for dinner’.
    He added ‘I have been on record many times, as was (former police chief) Graham Power, that we were very concerned about leaks to the media and made strenuous efforts to track the leaks down’.
    No evidence has come to light of Mrs Panton paying any Jersey officers for information.
    Mrs Panton was promoted from crime correspondent to crime editor of the News of the World in October 2005. She had joined the paper in September 2002.
    A statement released by the Metropolitan police about the arrest on Thursday morning said’ At 6.15 hrs on Thursday 15 December officers arrested a woman on suspicion of committing offences involving making payments to police officers for information’.

    Is this fair/accurate reporting?

  23. Letter to the editor 13 December 2011

    Haut de la Garenne: Perhaps we should hold our own inquiry from Cameron McPhail

    “I NOTICED from the front page report (JEP, 1 December) that the Leveson Inquiry is finally exposing the ill-founded and sensational stories printed in the press about Haut de la Garenne.
    In its piece the JEP seems to suggest that it’s reporting, in contrast, was balanced, accurate and saw through the allegations of mass murder in the children’s home. Sadly, that’s not how I remember matters. On many occasions the Post seemed to revel in revealing any form of accusations, no matter how far-fetched. Consequently the paper’s tacit or implied defence that ‘a big boy did it and ran away’ does not ring quite true.
    Perhaps we should have our own inquiry about how the local media got caught up in the fabrication of the events surrounding the debacle. “

  24. "Is this fair/accurate reporting?"

    What do you think?

  25. "What do you think?"

    "In July this year, Home Affairs Minister Ian Le Marqauand said that police, either in Jersey or from the UK, must have leaked information about the inquiry to the Sunday tabloid."

    In September/October this year, Iam Le Marquand said that he now knows that the person who carried out the leaks was Mick Gradwell. This is what they should have reported!! Stinks to high heaven!

  26. Andy Sibcy, is he the one who goes off to America quite a lot? Just wondering.

  27. "Is this fair/accurate reporting?"

    We must look at the bigger picture here and ask what has the role of the JEP been concerning the Child Abuse and related matters? What have/haven't they been reporting? Have they ever attempted to discover how it was possible for children to be abused FOR DECADES in State run institutions? Perhaps The former Chief Police Officers words sum up the JEP's role in all this.

    "The attempts to divert this debate into discussions concerning the trivia of expense claims, is a scandal of which all involved should be thoroughly ashamed." Graham Power QPM.

  28. Lenny's contact at the NOTW arrested.

    You've got a big job on your hands trying to spin that one in your favour haven't you ?

  29. We deal, as best we can, with facts and evidence on here not innuendo, conspiracy theories and spin that’s the State media’s role. If anybody has been up to no good with “Journalists” then the “evidence” points to MICK GRADWELL

  30. So let me understand you correctly.

    Lenny Harper, the deputy head of our police force, has extensive contact with a journalist.

    That same journalist is later arrested for paying police officers for details on stories, and you seriously see no potential problem, or need to comment, on this ?

    Do you thinnk the people who read your blog are idiots ?

    This is the most selective ignorance of a story potentially related to the HDLG investigation I have yet seen, and I'm afraid exposes Citizen's Media for what it is.

    Just another propaganda tool for those with a grievance.

    You are destroying any credibility you might have had in some people's eyes.

  31. You appear to be obsessed with Lenny Harper. After giving you strong “evidence” that Mick Gradwell was leaking confidential information to at least one “journalist” during a live Child Abuse Enquiry. A “journalist” that has a history of supporting convicted paedophiles and you come back with “innuendo” about Lenny Harper?

    Would you care to comment on the “evidence” concerning Mick Gradwell’s alleged leaks?

    As for “Do you thinnk the people who read your blog are idiots ?”

    I've got a suspicion that one of them is!

  32. You might deal with facts but you very selective in what you don't want discussed on here.

  33. What would you like us to discuss? Lenny Harper had a meal with a Chief Crime Reporter; he has not been accused of any wrongdoing. Indeed we have confronted him with the “insinuations” that he “might” have been involved in wrongdoing as the link above proves. There is no “evidence” to show that anything untoward has gone on.

    In stark contrast we have Mick Gradwell who has been publicly accused by the Home Affairs Minister and by a number of witnesses (under oath) of leaking information to at least one “journalist” (during a live Child Abuse Enquiry) with a history of supporting convicted paedophiles.

    Go with the “evidence”

  34. In case you missed it first time round would you like to comment on THIS?