Over the summer BBC News had a series of reports on escalating tensions between the US and China. The reports focused on Chinese government operations in the US where Chinese spies disguised as academics engage in intellectual property theft.
The reports are divided into two. The first half reports the latest espionage scandal, and the second half has a context section below. The problem is these context sections generate a narrative with bias. They are used as a filler to make a news story look double the size but are repeated day after day.
At first glance nothing seems wrong but don’t be fooled. Encyclopedia entries by definition don’t change, just like these context fillers.
On the other hand, news by definition does change. That’s why we use the word ‘new’ to describe it. These unchanging entries however are something else. They are entrenched editorial text, and therefore highly suspicious.
It turns out the BBC has used the rolling Chinese espionage story to discredit Trump with a cleverly worded biased context filler below. To understand how the bias works we need to unpack the section.
The Suspect Paragraph Unpacked
So, let’s take a closer look at the small paragraph under the espionage report.
The section heading is titled with a question, ‘What is stoking tensions between the US and China?’.
The format is immediately condescending. Arrogant BBC editors are telling you that they already ‘know’ which question you have in your mind.
This stylistic annoyance aside, the section then mentions three ‘main’ areas of US-China tensions: Coronavirus, trade and Hong Kong.
The list is woefully scant. Excluded topics include, the destruction of Uighur society, forced labour camps, internet censorship, non-existent freedom of speech, live prisoner organ harvesting, political executions, and mass surveillance.
Tensions over Coronavirus are then explained. This is where the BBC reveals its true colours for conceptual manipulation.
Instead of explaining that the US is angry about the first months when China covered up the virus and allowed international flights out of Wuhan while banning internal flights, the explanation attacks Trump instead. Here’s a screenshot of the text:
BBC News APP – China-US row: Fugitive researcher ‘hiding in San Francisco consulate’. https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-53510260
Quotation Marks Make a Big Impact
The BBC writes: ‘President Trump refers to Covid-19 as the “Chinese Virus”. By using quotation marks the BBC immediately implies that this term is false. This in itself reveals bias. The entire world watched where the virus originated from. So calling the virus the ‘Chinese Virus’ is completely normal.
Historically, scores of viruses have been named after the region they originated from. By using quotation marks the BBC is firstly saying that Trump is lying, and is secondly saying that Covid19 is not a Chinese virus, which is patent nonsense.
Four pieces of bias
This is astonishing. With one turn of phrase, we have a plethora of BBC anti Trump bigotry all packed into one small sentence listed below:
‘President Trump has repeatedly referred to Covid19 as the “Chinese Virus”, means:
1: President trump is a liar, by use of quotation marks.
2: President Trump is lying by saying Coronavirus came from China.
3: President Trump is lying repeatedly, by use of the word ‘repeatedly’.
4: President trump is racist by calling a virus that came from China a Chinese virus.
Imagine the editors’ reaction as they listen to Trump. ‘How dare he call a virus which came from China a ‘Chinese virus’ they cry, as they plan their attack pieces.
The sentence continues, ‘[Trump]…. alleged it originated from a Chinese laboratory’. Once again shock and horror. How dare he allege it came from a Biosafety Level four institute of virology, which stores 100s of viruses only 13km from the market place in Wuhan where the CCP originally reported the virus first struck humanity. How outrageous can you get?
But the best is yet to come. We progress to the sneakiest manipulation of all, the turn of phrase that most readers wouldn’t necessarily catch.
Quote: ‘Trump….. alleged it originated from a Chinese laboratory, ‘despite his own intelligence officials saying it was not manmade.’
And there you have it. The ultimate deception, the pinnacle of logical fallacy masquerading as an editorially styled statement of fact. The editors have triumphed in exposing the ‘idiot’ Trump as a President who cannot even make an allegation without contradicting his own intelligence experts.
How could anyone get out of this one? Even his own experts say it was not man-made.
The problem is the statement ‘A virus which escapes from level four virus laboratory is necessarily man-made.’ is a logical fallacy.
Unfortunately for the BBC this statement is false. Do the editors know they have produced a falsehood or are they conniving to introduce the falsehood in the knowledge that most readers won’t notice?
The first option would indicate that they are idiots themselves, while the second option would be a purely Machiavellian deception. Either way, it doesn’t matter because the statement is false.
There is NO contradiction between the statement that the virus may have escaped from a laboratory and that the virus was not man-made. It could have been one of the many unaltered viruses stored there.
The Wuhan institute’s function was to gather 100s of viruses, and conduct research on them. While some were being researched, others were being stored. Some of the biological material cold have escaped due to failed safety procedures. China’s desperate attempt to become a world super power makes it rush into ventures without having he technical knowhow. If you decide to build an extremely hazardous level four security biological institute it might be a good idea to know how to secure the lethal biohazard materials stored there before you proceed.
So, when Trump’s intelligence officials said they thought the virus was ‘not man-made’ this view was entirely compatible with Trump’s suggestion that it may have originated from the lab.
You cannot Fool the Public Forever and Survive
So, the BBC not only secures its position as a biased organization they also try to fool the reader into believing logical fallacies.
Meanwhile millions of unsuspecting readers are exposed to manipulative editorial text.
If we only took a few minutes to unpack what we read on the BBC, with a bit of probing and careful thought, we’d discover that the BBC is in fact fully engaged in promoting an activist anti-Trump left-wing agenda.
By unpacking the wording, we start to realise we’re consuming the ‘British Brainwashing Corporation’ instead of the BBC.
The more people realise this the sooner the BBC will have to change.
Without such change, the BBC will no longer survive in its current form.