The @BBC will not broadcast an episode of David Attenborough’s flagship new series on British wildlife #WildIsles because of fears its themes of the destruction of nature would risk a backlash from Tory politicians & the billionaire-owned press.
This is symptomatic of something terrible happening to Britain - a rapid slide away from a relatively open, unified, welcoming, forward-looking mature democracy, toward an insular, unwelcoming, backward-looking, polarised, infantilising authoritarian oligarchy.
The decision has angered the programme-makers & some insiders at the @BBC, who fear the corporation has bowed to pressure from lobbying groups with “dinosaurian ways”.
The latest row focuses on #WildIsles, narrated by David Attenborough, which is likely to be extremely popular.
A sixth episode has been filmed, which is understood to be a stark & honest look at the losses of nature in the UK, & what has caused the declines.
It is also understood to include some examples of rewilding, a concept which has been controversial in some right-wing circles.
The sixth episode, a documentary, will not be broadcast along with the others & will instead only be available on the @BBC’s iPlayer
This is what the slide into authoritarianism means in practice: citizens are denied access to essential information inconvenient to the powerful.
Senior sources at the @BBC told the Guardian that the decision was made to fend off potential critique from the political right.
This week the Telegraph "newspaper" attacked the BBC for creating the series & for taking funding from "political lobbyists" the WWF & the RSPB.
For the billionaire-owned Telegraph to frame this as a 'political lobbying scandal' is imho deeply disturbing. Given the toxic influence of #TuftonStreet lobby groups - whose representatives are always on @BBC shows & in the press: this is a sinister & REAL attack on free speech.
One source at the @BBC, who did not want to be named, said “lobbying groups that are desperately hanging on to their dinosaurian ways” such as the farming and game industry would “kick off” if the show had too political a message.
“Frankly, this idea that you sort of put it in a separate programme to almost parcel it to one side is disingenuous. Why don’t they integrate those stories into all of them at the time?”
Laura Howard, who produced the programme and used to work at the @BBC’s Natural History Unit, said she does not believe its messages to be political.
“I think the facts speak for themselves. You know, we’ve worked really closely with the RSPB - @Natures_Voice - in particular who are able to fact-check all of our scripts and provide us with detailed scientific data and information about the loss of wildlife in this country.”
“And it (the loss of wildlife) is undeniable, we are incredibly nature depleted. And I don’t think that that is political, I think it’s just facts.”
She hoped a young audience would be able to find it, as they are used to streaming on iPlayer rather than watching a broadcast.
"In a statement provided after the story was first published, the @BBC said: “This is totally inaccurate, there is no ‘sixth episode’. Wild Isles is – and always was – a five part series and does not shy away from environmental content."
"We have acquired a separate film for iPlayer from the RSPB and WWF and Silverback Films about people working to preserve and restore the biodiversity of the British Isles.”
Alastair Fothergill, the director of Silverback Films and the executive producer of Wild Isles, added: “The @BBC commissioned a five-part Wild Isles series from us at Silverback Films back in 2017. The RSPB and WWF joined us as co-production partners in 2018."
"It was not until the end of 2021 that the two charities commissioned Silverback Films to make a film for them that celebrates the extraordinary work of people fighting to restore nature in Britain and Ireland. The BBC acquired this film for iPlayer at the start of this year.”
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
The @BBC in 2020, & again in 2021, confirmed the personal @Twitter accounts of freelancers (eg Lineker, Packham, & Andrew Neil) are "unrelated to" the BBC, & "the BBC is not responsible for its content".
Davie's new (October 2020) social media guidelines stated @BBC staff should, on their own personal social media accounts, 'avoid expressing personal views on current issues of political controversy', which as a right-winger he described using the pejorative 'virtue signalling'.
However, the response to a complaint about Chris Packham, which came in September 2021 - almost a year after Tim Davie had set out his new social media guidelines for '@BBC staff' in October 2020 - stated Chris's "personal social media account has no connection to the @BBC." 🤔
I've written before about the uncanny parallels between the rise of the Boris Johnson regime & the rise of the Nazi regime, both ushered in by a third of the electorate.
Imho, if anything, Gary Lineker was too restrained in his tweet about Govt rhetoric.
When Adolf Hitler took power in 1933, the Nazis controlled less than 3% of Germany’s newspapers.
In contemporary Britain, the overwhelming majority of national newspapers exist to neutralize any threat from the Left to corporate interests, which includes defending a failed Govt.
In early 1933, the Nazi regime deployed radio, press, & newsreels to stoke fears of a pending “Communist uprising” - a sort of ideological “invasion” from within - then channeled popular anxieties into political measures that eradicated civil liberties.
Anyone who supports free speech - & everyone should support it - should be apoplectic.
If ALL @BBC presenters are to be BANNED from saying ANYTHING political - and almost everything IS political on @Twitter - then almost every presenter will be silenced.
The highly selective outrage from the @BBC, from the "pro-free speech" @Conservatives, & from their "pro-free speech" billionaire-owned right-wing press & media, reveals them as the pathetic, intolerant, anti-free-speech hypocrites they really are.
That time Rishi Sunak distanced himself from Suella Braverman’s inflammatory claim the UK was facing an “invasion”, after far-right terrorist Andrew Leak firebombed an immigration processing centre & Robert Jenrick warned Ministers to choose their words more carefully.
Braverman said: “the British people deserve to know which party is serious about stopping the INVASION on our southern coast”. Shortly after, Sunak claimed the UK would always be a “compassionate, welcoming country”, & No. 10 emphasised her words had not been cleared with No. 10.
Lord Dubs, who came to the UK as a child refugee in 1939, said about Braverman’s comments “It [language] is very important because it influences public opinion. It influences the way people see refugees. It shows hostility to people who are fleeing for safety.”
But curiously not by Jacob Rees-Mogg accusing Tory Jews of being "illuminati", nor by Boris Johnson's book saying 'Jews control media', nor by Bridgen comparing vaccines to the actual #Holocaust, nor by his wife's use of the antisemitic conspiracy theory of 'Cultural Marxism'.
On @bbcquestiontime tonight, the Govt's Immigration Minister, Robert Jenrick, who - like his boss & UK PM, Rishi Sunak - in November distanced himself from Suella Braverman's disgusting "invasion" rhetoric.
Here's a #THREAD of important contextual factors about Jenrick.
The far-right attacked Robert Jenrick after he rejected Braverman's rhetoric, accusing him on the right-wing Traditional Britain Group Telegram channel of “treason”, & referring to his Jewish faith alongside the alt-right image of Pepe the Frog.
On #bbcqt in April 2022, Jenrick INSISTED that #Rwanda was "a safe country".
Bullshit.
The truth is, Rwanda is one of the most autocratic, authoritarian, & repressive regimes ON EARTH, ranked 150th out of 179 countries on the Index of Liberal Democracy.