Forum Topic

Trump Derangement Syndrome

A Panorama programme broadcast last year ‘doctored’ a speech by Trump, making it appear that he had encouraged a riot at he Capitol after his loss to Biden, according to a whistleblowing BBC memo. The programme misled viewers by showing Trump telling his supporters that he was going to the Capitol to ‘fight like hell’ when in fact he said he would walk with them to ‘peacefully and patriotically make your voices heard’. When this issue was raised with BBC Management, they apparently refused to accept that there had been a breach of professional standards.The false report was not just a deviation from the normal standards of journalism but a contravention of the BBC Charter which imposes a duty of impartiality on its journalists.  What is so surprising that the programme makers felt the need to fabricate evidence against when, for anyone opposed to Trump, there is a lot of true material available.The interesting question is why the Panorama team chose to jeopardise the BBC’s reputation in this way and why the Management refused to remedy the situation. I would attribute the collective failure of the BBC in this case to TDS. The BBC is largely staffed by a left leaning university educated elite. Like most of the progressive left nowadays they don’t believe in socialism but they haven’t replaced it with anything else.  They don’t know what they are in favour of so they define their virtue in terms of who they hate - Boris Johnson, Nigel Farage and above all Donald Trump. So in their eyes any attack on Trump, whether factually based or  not, is justified. And even if he didn’t utter the words attributed to him in the programme, or if he used them in another context, it doesn’t matter,  because in the view of the progressives of the BBC it’s the kind of thing Trump would have said.

Steven Rose ● 8d54 Comments

Hello Steven,I stand corrected.  I thought I had copy-pasted both paragraphs in their entirety but I did not do so for the first.  I apologize for this.The complete first paragraph quoted is as follows:"I know that everyone here will soon be marching over to the Capitol building to peacefully and patriotically make your voices heard. Today, we will see whether Republicans stand strong for the integrity of our elections. But whether or not they stand strong for our country —our country, our country has been under siege for a long time. Far longer than this four-year period."The last paragraph of the speech, which was delivered nearly an hour later to the one above, I copy-pasted completely.  I repeat below for clarity purposes:"Our brightest days are before us. Our greatest achievements still wait. I think one of our great achievements will be election security, because nobody, until I came along, had any idea how corrupt our elections were. And again, most people would stand there at 9 o’clock in the evening and say, “I want to thank you very much,” and they go off to some other life. But I said something is wrong here, something is really wrong, can’t have happened, and we fight. We fight like hell, and if you don’t fight like hell you’re not going to have a country anymore."I am not incorrect in saying that he was reinforcing his statement that their forthcoming achievements would include election security because, until he came along, nobody had realized how corrupt they were.  He realized something was really wrong, it can't have happened and we fight.  We fight like hell and if you do not, you're not going to have a country anymore.The initial words of "marching over to the Capitol building to peacefully and patritically make your voices heard" were forgotten and the people responded to his rallying call to fight for hell.Of course Trump is furious.  I am sure he will sue the BBC (remember when he advised Teresa May to sue the EU?). But these are not fake news - as he loves to call them.  According to The Telegraph (which I also read, among others) claims that the White House attacks "Leftist propaganda machine" over biased doctoring of president's speech".  Everybody knows that the ending of a speech is vital because:1. It highlights the important material2. It gives the next course of action3. It clearly indicates the speech is over.Under the first point, he highlighted that the importance of election security (not to repeat his usual words that the election was stolen).Under the next course of action, he never uttered the words "to peacefully and patriotically make your voices heard". On the contrary, he stressed "we fight, we fight like hell". This is the course of action he was after.Then the speech came to an end.Regardless of what the EGSC says, what Michael Prescott said, I do not think that Panorama was purposefully deceitful or dishonest.  You can say they made a mistake in their editing (some would say a terrible mistake in their editing) but they were not dishonest.  They did not invent anything nor add anything that was not already there.

Ivonne Holliday ● 4d

Hello Sue,Apologies for the delay in replying.No, the BBC took excerpts of the speech.  It could not run the whole 1 hour speech in a one hour programme.What Trump said initially was:"Now it is up to Congress to confront this egregious assault on our democracy. And after this, we’re going to walk down and I’ll be there with you. We’re going to walk down — we’re going to walk down. Anyone you want, but I think right here, we’re going to walk down to the Capitol and we’re going to cheer on our brave senators and congressmen and women, and we’re probably not going to be cheering so much for some of them. Because you’ll never take back our country with weakness. You have to show strength and you have to be strong.We have come to demand that Congress do the right thing and only count the electors who have been lawfully slated. Lawfully slated. I know that everyone here will soon be marching over to the Capitol building to peacefully and patriotically make your voices heard. Today, we will see whether Republicans stand strong for the integrity of our elections. But whether or not they stand strong for our country —our country, our countryhas been under siege for a long time. Far longer than this four-year period."But the end of the speech was: "Our brightest days are before us. Our greatest achievements still wait. I think one of our great achievements will be election security, because nobody, until I came along, had any idea how corrupt our elections were. And again, most people would stand there at 9 o’clock in the evening and say, “I want to thank you very much,” and they go off to some other life. But I said something is wrong here, something is really wrong, can’t have happened, and we fight. We fight like hell, and if you don’t fight like hell you’re not going to have a country anymore."As I said before, I did not watch the programme.  But, the excerpts did not change the meaning of the words he spoke, they did not invent anything.  They shortened a lot of his ramblings.  The end of the speech was a rallying call.  I have no doubt that Trump will protest against the programme.  The main mistake the BBc made was not inflate your beloved Trump's ego.

Ivonne Holliday ● 4d

Hello Sue,My TDS affliction is in your mind alone.  If that makes you happy, so be it!!The first citation is very early in the speech and it read:"Now it is up to Congress to confront this egregious assault on our democracy. And after this, we’re going to walk down and I’ll be there with you. We’re going to walk down —(APPLAUSE) —we’re going to walk down. Anyone you want, but I think right here, we’re going to walk down to the Capitol —(APPLAUSE) —and we’re going to cheer on our brave senators and congressmen and women, and we’re probably not going to be cheering so much for some of them."The second one was at the end of the speech:"I think one of our great achievements will be election security, because nobody, until I came along, had any idea how corrupt our elections were. And again, most people would stand there at 9 o’clock in the evening and say, “I want to thank you very much,” and they go off to some other life.But I said something is wrong here, something is really wrong, can’t have happened, and we fight. We fight like hell, and if you don’t fight like hell you’re not going to have a country anymore."The last one is certainly a rallying cry.I do like the BBC but I also read articles from other sources to get a more balanced view, including The Telegraph !!!! You dedicate yourself to GB News only.  This is your Messiah; I have none.It is also untrue that the BBC has never said that Hamas is a  terrorist group - please!!!!  Every report they mention that Hamas is a proscribed terrorist organisation.  What do you think that means?Please, do be brave and tell me which big organization is not flawed.  From the government, the NHS, the DWP to name a few.I wholeheartedly hope that Reform, if elected eventually, does not interfere with the BBC or the NHS.

Ivonne Holliday ● 7d

Ivonne, I think you are missing the point of my post. I am not a Trump fan and I specifically said that if anyone wishes to criticise Trump there is plenty of genuine material out there. What is not acceptable is for the BBC to mislead viewers by doctoring Trump's speech to make it appear that he had explicitly incited a riot at the Capitol.What Trump actually said was  'We're going to walk down to the Capitol and we're going to cheer on our brave senators and congressmen and congresswomen.'But in Panorama's edit he was shown as saying,    'We're going to walk down to the Capitol ... and I'll be there with you. And we fight. We fight like hell.'The two sections of the speech that were edited together were more than 50 minutes apart and were spoken in different contexts - one about the march, and the other about alleged electoral fraud in general.After showing the president speaking, the programme played footage of flag-waving men marching on the Capitol. But in fact the footage was shot before the president had started speaking.What is particularly disturbing is that BBC Management subsequently refused to accept that the programme makers had done anything wrong despite the obvious dishonesty of the reporting.In any case it is not just me or the 'Telegraph' complaining. A cross-party group of MPs has said that the BBC has 'serious questions to answer'. The House of Commons culture, media and sport committee has written to the BBC Chairman, Samir Shah, to ask what action is being taken over the concerns raised in the memo from the BBC's former independent advisor on editorial standards.

Steven Rose ● 7d