David Leigh is the Guardian’s investigations executive editor. He is now the subject of an investigation after the Guido Fawkes blog double sourced accusations that Leigh had admitted some years ago to engaging in ‘phone hacking’.
When Harry Cole asked Leigh about his ‘phone hacking’ activities, Leigh denied it. This is because Leigh is a liar.
If David Leigh can lie about this after making a written, public admission of criminal behaviour, what else has Leigh lied about? The veil is being drawn back and now Leigh and his Guardian cronies are going to come under intense scrutiny – and this blog will be reminding people in the coming days of other David Leigh activities that he has denied despite evidence.
The Guardian, with its uniquely smug air of self satisfied arrogance, has eagerly pursued its agenda to undermine News International as part of the effort to stop Rupert Murdoch regaining full control of British Sky Broadcasting. That effort has been driven by a desire to protect the BBC’s utter dominance over the dissemination of news in the UK and significant presence overseas, and it has seen key members of the Guardian – including editor Alan Rusbridger – strutting around TV and radio studios to pontificate about ‘phone hacking’ outrageous.
Needless to say, other news media outlets around the world are thoroughly enjoying the delicious irony of The Guardian being put under the microscope for the very crime it has spent years pushing to the front of the news agenda, as some of the headlines reveal from a Google search. But there is one glaring omission from the international cast of media outlets covering the story…
The BBC. (Important edit: Although the BBC did refer to Leigh’s hacking activity in piece back in April, since Leigh’s denial being reported globally it has gone very quiet)
As you can see, the BBC does not mention David Leigh in any news story anywhere on its site today, and has not done so in the past week. And a search of the BBC site using its own internal search engine reveals the same resolute refusal to cover a story that is being reported from Australia to the United States:
This reinforces our condemnation of the BBC for outrageous bias, only selecting news stories that support the BBC’s worldview or agendas. And one of the BBC’s agendas is presenting its close friends at The Guardian as trustworthy, authoritative and reliable.
This omission of the story, which is damaging to David Leigh and The Guardian, is not the BBC turning its attention away from ‘phone hacking’. We have ample evidence this bias by omission in a deliberate effort by the BBC to keep its audience in ignorance of inconvenient news and information. This is an utter corruption of the BBC’s public service remit.
At the time of writing, in the last 24 hours Google shows BBC News has published no less than 8 stories related to its obsessive coverage of the ‘phone hacking’ scandal. This screen capture shows them:
The BBC’s relationship with The Guardian is an incestuous union devoted to the pursuit of an illiberal-left agenda, funded by taxpayers’ money. BBC News is nothing more than a propaganda outlet that puts its own interests before its obligation to report news honestly and impartially. This is their idea of honest and transparent media.
Thus the BBC treats the British public with contempt, taking our money and using it to distort the news while behaving as an activist, advancing views and theories without any semblance of impartiality. As such it is our duty to resist this corruption and work towards the destruction of BBC News.
Autonomous Mind 
I only wish there were some sort of organised mass campaign to stop paying the BBC Licence fee. It would have my committed support.
Here’s an idea for you to consider: no more compulsory fee to fund the BBC – abolish the TV licence fee e-petitions http://t.co/De8UGoL
Their bias is getting more noticable but their search engine is crap anyway.
I have posted a link over at Biased BBC on their ope thread, aslo to the petiton linked above.
By the way, you posts on newspaper circulation highlight even more the BBC’s bias, Craig has regular data re their use of journalists and on the Dateline London proramme the follwoing is the breakdown of the newspapers where the guests are from:
Guardian/Observer – 35
Independent – 18
Sunday Telegraph – 11
Daily Mail – 7
Times – 6
Was it newsworthy?
Everyone’s aware of Murdoch, his papers and Sky.
Nobody much reads the Grauniad. Nobody’s heard of David Leigh.
You don’t have to pay a licence fee, stop watching TV – I have.
“That is my defence, when I try to explain newspaper methods to my current university journalism students, and some of whom are rather shocked.”
Did/does DL tell his students how to hack into a voicemail? It’s not the same as telling them that it is a ‘newspaper method’ of obtaining information, that you yourself have done so, and attempting to justify it.
Rather than DL, are GF’s witnesses liars? Who knows?
This is adding nothing to the debate AM, but I have to say well done! The more people who hold the BBC to account the better – particularly when it is done to such a high standard.
Fred, if you read the whole of Leigh’s piece you see him describing the thrill of listening to someone else’s messages, ergo the only lie is his denial. He flatly contradicts himself.
We will have more on Leigh’s world of contradiction in a few days.
Well ladies and gents, I think we’ve had enough evidence that the BBC is inherently biased, certainly from this blog and the esteemed Biased BBC with their relentless proof on a daily basis.
I’ve stopped paying the telly tax due to the ABC of following the money:
A. The head of Pension Investments for the £8billion BBC Pension Trust since 2000 -> Peter Dunscombe
B. The Chairman of the Institutional Investors Group on Climate Change (IIGCC) with €3.7trillion assets -> Peter Dunscombe
C. IIGCC membership includes -> BBC Pension Trust Ltd
The bias is obvious, and all those that are still paying the licence fee and expecting the government de jour to investigate and stop it are simply, well, what can I say, wasting the opportunity of taking their family out on holiday, because, to be honest, no politician of any flavour will forfeit their luscious salary to pursue that one.
So let’s get to the meat of the chase, to mix my metaphors:
1. Cancel your direct debit to TV Licensing
2. Put a notice outside your front door denying the implied right of access to your property – that will stop any Capita (TV Licensing) salesmen from bothering you – THE most important deterrent
3. Ignore the automated letters they send – they have no legal precedent
4. Carry on as before
Do what New Zealand did their state broadcaster – stop paying en masse.
I’m going to put the simple instructions out on my blog and yes, I am going to use the little experience I’ve had in internet marketing to make a difference.
You can too.
Bemused
Still not one single hit for David Leigh in BBC search engine.
“Fred, if you read the whole of Leigh’s piece you see him describing the thrill of listening to someone else’s messages, ergo the only lie is his denial. He flatly contradicts himself.”
Of course I read the bloody article (and the quote is on GF’s blog every day – though never in context).
Again …
Informing your students of questionable “newspaper methods” (like voicemail ‘hacking’), and admitting to having used them, is not the same as teaching them how to use them. So, no evidence of contradiction – until GF’s two sources are named.
However …
Even media and communication studies students must have heard of Google and, by 2006, the web was awash with ‘how to hack voicemail’ sites.
I am looking forward to your nailing DL with something more substantial.
The issue wasn’t about teaching them the methods, it was the admission he had engaged in them himself. The contradiction was Leigh denying he had ever hacked a voicemail, but stating in that 2006 article that he had done so. It can’t be put any more clearly than that, Fred.