Bbc Set Record Straight Re James Dyson Accusation:

[lankeela]

“The BBC’s characterisation of me as a prominent Conservative donor, or supporter, leveraging a position of power to extract favours from the Prime Minister, is completely untrue,” he wrote in The Daily Telegraph.

“I have met Boris Johnson only three times – always with officials – the last time in 2016. I have not attended any Conservative social events.”

On a BBC corrections and clarifications web page, the publicly-funded broadcaster responded to Sir James’ objections to the way he had been described.

“In our coverage of texts he had sent to the Prime Minister we referred in various outlets to Sir James Dyson as a prominent Conservative supporter or said he backed the Conservatives,” the website entry on Monday said.

“Sir James says this is factually incorrect. We are happy to set the record straight.

[Khandro]

That dreadful Laura Kuensberg should be sacked (or worse)

[bednobs]

i miss nick whathisface

[Ellipsis]

He's not a prominent Conservative supporter who knows Boris Johnson well. He's just somebody famous who has made donations to the Tory party and who has Boris's mobile phone number.

[lankeela]

I bet you wouldn't refuse a ventilator made by him if you needed one.

[Ellipsis]

I wouldn't, if I needed one, and he made any.

[naomi24]

The squeaky clean journalism of the BBC, Ellipsis. Always to be relied upon. ;o)

[gingejbee]

...you can't even buy much of Dyson's stuff on their own web-site...lots of "out-of-stock". (Blamed on Covid, Brexit and Suez).
That's what you get for moving manufacturing bases to the Far East.

[emmie]

they are moving back apparently, or so i read the other day

[jno]

good. If anyone accused me of a being a Tory supporter, I'd be on the phone to the editor too.

[ToraToraTora]

...or worse jno, a British Supporter?

[ToraToraTora]

Lankeela: "I bet you wouldn't refuse a ventilator made by him if you needed one." - as long as it's bagless!

[gulliver1]

12.07 LOL.

[youngmafbog]

The impartial BBC of course.

[Ellipsis]

> I bet you wouldn't refuse a ventilator made by him if you needed one.
>> I wouldn't, if I needed one, and he made any.

I am of course referring to the news from just over a year ago, 24 April 2020: "Dyson will not supply ventilators to NHS to treat Covid-19"
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2020/apr/24/dyson-will-not-supply-ventilators-to-nhs-to-treat-covid-19

[Peter Pedant]

// The squeaky clean journalism of the BBC, Ellipsis. Always to be relied upon. ;o)//

what is this? I remember the lady protesting that if it was nt on the Beeb and in English it hadnt happened
( knife man knifing monk in er Clermont Ferrand - you know the place in France)

how things change according to circumstances

[Peter Pedant]

// Dyson will not supply medical ventilators to help the NHS treat Covid-19 patients after the government told the engineering firm that its services were no longer required.//

from the ellipsis URL - and that is what he Jay Dee said: we were ready to go and they said dont.

[Canary42]

The squeaky clean journalism of the Daily Telegraph, Naomi. Always to be relied upon. ;o)

[naomi24]

PP, there’s little point in telling you to stop lying or to stop being stupid. Both are clearly beyond your capabilities.

[naomi24]

Canary, ellipsis and I discussed this very subject recently - hence my post. Best not jump on bandwagons you know nothing about. You end up looking silly - again.

[Ellipsis]

Naomi, "Correct Mistakes" is in the same guidelines I referred to in the other thread. I'll suggest again, very few publishers have, let alone publish, similar standards and guidelines and ask to be held accountable to them. I'll ask again, where do you prefer to get your news of UK politics from?

https://www.bbc.co.uk/editorialguidelines/guidelines/accuracy/guidelines
Correcting Mistakes

3.3.28 We should normally acknowledge serious factual errors and correct such mistakes quickly, clearly and appropriately. Inaccuracy may lead to a complaint of unfairness. An effective way of correcting a serious factual error is saying what was wrong as well as putting it right.

Mandatory Referral
Where we believe we have broadcast a defamatory inaccuracy, Programme Legal Advice must be consulted.

Mistakes in on-demand and online content
Where mistakes in our on-demand content, which is available online after broadcast, are unlikely to be a serious breach of editorial standards, a correction should be published on that platform, so that it is visible before the output is played. Such on-demand content does not then normally need to be changed or revoked.

Where mistakes to our on-demand content are likely to be considered a serious breach of editorial standards, the content must be corrected and the mistake acknowledged, or in exceptional cases removed. We need to be transparent about any changes made, unless there are editorial or legal reasons not to do so.

In online text content, any mistake that alters the editorial meaning should normally be corrected and we should be transparent about what was wrong.