BBC Panorama

Katarina · Oct 14, 2019

What a load of bias cobblers once again the BBC broadcast on the Panorama programme tonight.

One positive was seeing the vegan cheese being thrown in the bin as it was more than likely disgustingly inedible.

Why do we pay our TV licences to subsidize such utter bias crap and drool that the BBC comes out with !!

Shame on them.

milkloss · Oct 14, 2019

What is this ‘licence’ thing you talk about?

Katarina · Oct 14, 2019

milkloss said:
What is this ‘licence’ thing you talk about?

We all pay a TV license.

wanton dwarf · Oct 14, 2019

Katarina said:
We all pay a TV license.

Haven't paid a TV license in over 10 years.

I refuse to pay someone else to destroy my way of life.

primmiemoo · Oct 14, 2019

I'm worried they stitched up the Rothamstead prof., and unduly promoted another prof. whose kneejerk expertise is to avoid any details of which sorts of meat have smallest carbon footprints in his blanket advice to cut meat and dairy.

milkloss · Oct 14, 2019

Katarina said:
We all pay a TV license.

Oh

Renaultman · Oct 15, 2019

I'm surprised this hasn't had more reaction

I believe we as farmers need to become a lot more aggressive in support of our industry.
Firstly, I think all livestock should be classed as almost carbon neutral as the only carbon used from fossil fuels etc is that used in transport and a few other minor sources, probably considerably less than soya etc.
to do this, imo, we need to prove that the livestock has a far smaller carbon impact and after doing so the cheapest and most effective way to get the facts out is to legally challenge the environment agency and the BBC. To do this we would need to do something we have failed to do, to date, coorporate, jointly raise enough money to make this possible then choose someone/people to take it forward for us. To me @Clive
Or the TFF as a whole would get my vote but he has already stated, and I fully accept and understand his reasoning, that he has enough on his plate, so I don't think that would happen although I am sure he would allow us/you to use the TFF as a springboard to get something going.
I have more to say about why I believe this is happening but the post is already getting to long.
If you like this, don't give me a like, comment. That will keep this post on the top of the page and hopefully catch the attention of @admin who may sticky a more readable appeal of poll to assess real desire to actually do something across our community

Farfrae · Oct 15, 2019

Katarina said:
We all pay a TV license.

No we don't as they have confirmed to me in writing (below); although even that is cobblers - I don't need some pseudo legal document to tell me that. The TV licensing (Capita) try to confuse people with legal fear and pseudo legal documents about investigations. If you don't want to watch TV and BBC iPlayer and just want to watch Netflix etc. then just stop paying the licence and ignore the crap they send. Leaving aside alleged bias (and I would argue that the BBC is just an establishment mouthpiece funded by us) there is virtually nothing worth watching or of any intellectual content on terrestrial TV anyway. If you feel the BBC is biased etc. just vote with your feet and stop watching it. I wouldn't watch Panorarma if you paid me; there is no chance of an independent objective investigation on any topic; so why waste your time watching it? As for tripe like 'Strictly', game shows and celebrities don't get me started.

TV LICENCE RESISTANCE - Index

www.tvlicenceresistance.info

Muddyroads · Oct 15, 2019

Renaultman said:
I'm surprised this hasn't had more reaction
I believe we as farmers need to become a lot more aggressive in support of our industry.
Firstly, I think all livestock should be classed as almost carbon neutral as the only carbon used from fossil fuels etc is that used in transport and a few other minor sources, probably considerably less than soya etc.
to do this, imo, we need to prove that the livestock has a far smaller carbon impact and after doing so the cheapest and most effective way to get the facts out is to legally challenge the environment agency and the BBC. To do this we would need to do something we have failed to do, to date, coorporate, jointly raise enough money to make this possible then choose someone/people to take it forward for us. To me @Clive
Or the TFF as a whole would get my vote but he has already stated, and I fully accept and understand his reasoning, that he has enough on his plate, so I don't think that would happen although I am sure he would allow us/you to use the TFF as a springboard to get something going.
I have more to say about why I believe this is happening but the post is already getting to long.
If you like this, don't give me a like, comment. That will keep this post on the top of the page and hopefully catch the attention of @admin who may sticky a more readable appeal of poll to assess real desire to actually do something across our community

I agree with a lot of what you say, but think you would be strongly challenged on the suggestion that livestock should be considered carbon neutral. See my thread here on carbon audits. Unless these are done to a standard, we have no ammunition to fight back with.

Raider112 · Oct 15, 2019

Renaultman said:
I'm surprised this hasn't had more reaction
I believe we as farmers need to become a lot more aggressive in support of our industry.
Firstly, I think all livestock should be classed as almost carbon neutral as the only carbon used from fossil fuels etc is that used in transport and a few other minor sources, probably considerably less than soya etc.
to do this, imo, we need to prove that the livestock has a far smaller carbon impact and after doing so the cheapest and most effective way to get the facts out is to legally challenge the environment agency and the BBC. To do this we would need to do something we have failed to do, to date, coorporate, jointly raise enough money to make this possible then choose someone/people to take it forward for us. To me @Clive
Or the TFF as a whole would get my vote but he has already stated, and I fully accept and understand his reasoning, that he has enough on his plate, so I don't think that would happen although I am sure he would allow us/you to use the TFF as a springboard to get something going.
I have more to say about why I believe this is happening but the post is already getting to long.
If you like this, don't give me a like, comment. That will keep this post on the top of the page and hopefully catch the attention of @admin who may sticky a more readable appeal of poll to assess real desire to actually do something across our community

You don't need to try to prove that livestock is carbon neutral, that's asking for trouble but the true carbon footprint should be shouted from the rooftops. I agree it's time for a legal challenge, a few individual complaints just get ignored, the NFU challenging something just gets a small apology that is irrelevant compared to the damage already done. A particular programme needs to be identified that has clearly put out an unbalanced and inaccurate message and send the lawyers in demanding compensation for as many reasons as they can think of. One successful case would make them all think twice about what is broadcast and printed.

Renaultman · Oct 15, 2019

Raider112 said:
You don't need to try to prove that livestock is carbon neutral, that's asking for trouble but the true carbon footprint should be shouted from the rooftops. I agree it's time for a legal challenge, a few individual complaints just get ignored, the NFU challenging something just gets a small apology that is irrelevant compared to the damage already done. A particular programme needs to be identified that has clearly put out an unbalanced and inaccurate message and send the lawyers in demanding compensation for as many reasons as they can think of. One successful case would make them all think twice about what is broadcast and printed.

I would support that, and I think it would be a cost effective way to make our case known to the general public. Next question is who would put into a fund to finance this?

thesilentone · Oct 15, 2019

There were two statements that should be challenged:

1) A plant based based diet uses less resources than meat.
2) 75% of farm support go's to the meat sector.

Ffermer Bach · Oct 15, 2019

although not to do with Panorama, this is a letter I have just sent to the New York Times regarding an article they wrote, maybe we should all email every time.

Dear Sir,

I have just read the article in the New York Times regarding red meat consumption.

There are a couple of points in the article I disagree with, the comments regarding the carbon footprint of cattle production would be like talking about fuel efficiency of the motor car when only looking at the Hummer.

Cattle that are grass fed (with mob grazing) contribute to Carbon sequestration and make use of agricultural land that can not be used for arable production (due to rainfall, topography).and are not only Carbon neutral in their production but actually reduce the Carbon in the atmosphere!

Continuous arable production (without animals) has caused the prairies to lose vast quantities of Carbon into the atmosphere, so stepping back and looking at the bigger picture I believe we need to eat meat that is produced with regenerative agricultural systems and integrate more cattle into the arable system, so the advice to eat less red meat is encouraging the degradation of our soil, so if I add that to the finding that eating red meat is health neutral to me it seems an overwhelming argument to eat red meat (that is farmed appropriately).

yours

Stewart Setter · Oct 15, 2019

I haven't seen the program yet so can't comment. To be honest, any BBC coverage of anything agriculture at the moment is depressing, it also sets my veggie mrs off on a moan about farting cows.. I'm really disturbed at the UK's perception of the farming sector. I'm also frustrated by good quality products that are produced here in the UK that get's exported around the world and then the UK imports cheap sub standard produce instead.

I read a report some where recently that if we did not import food we would run out of food because we have insufficient number of food producers in this country. Total rubbish. The problem with the today's consumers is that they are fat on imported products and also demand produce that would typically be out of season in the UK.

Watching the program "What Britain buys and sells in a day", this is a bit of an eye opener from a food producers perspective.

I would support any agricultural movement that highlights the benefits of UK produced food.

Hfd Cattle · Oct 15, 2019

Katarina said:
We all pay a TV license.

Ours works fine without a license !!

PSQ · Oct 15, 2019

Ffermer Bach said:
although not to do with Panorama, this is a letter I have just sent to the New York Times regarding an article they wrote, maybe we should all email every time.

It must be raining with you too ?

I've just emailed Professor Mike Berners Lee about the 'representation' of livestock farming on Panorama:

I watched the BBC Panorama programme last night and I am concerned at the emphasis that was put on the host family's reduction of CO2 from meat and dairy consumption.

While a 10 tonne 'reduction’ of CO2 would be admirable, there was no mention or distinction made between the cyclical nature of the carbon in methane emissions, and ‘new’ carbon irreversibly added to the atmosphere by the households consumption of finite crude oil and gas products.

As you are a professor involved in ‘Carbon Accounting’, please tell me if I am wrong to assume that the methane from livestock oxidises to the very same CO2 that went into growing the grass that 'fed the cow' in the first place, ad infinitum?

The impression left with the viewing public will be that meat and dairy are bad but vegetarian diets are good, when in fact both diets rely on a vast amount of imported South American soya from questionable sources. By all means encourage a ban on imported Amazonian soya meal, but please don't forget that ruminants utilise grass rather well, and well managed grassland sequesters carbon well too.

My background is in arable farming. I grow wheat for the distilling industry, oilseeds for vegetable oil and bio-diesel production, and oats for a breakfast cereal manufacturer. I have no interest whatsoever in the meat industry, other than a desire to consume ethically produced low carbon meat, eggs and dairy products. I do however know the environmental value of properly managed grass fed livestock on upland farms with no other agricultural purpose than to grow ‘inedible’ grass and convert it into edible protein.

When upland livestock farmers reach tipping point and pack the job in, their production capacity will be replaced by intensively fed 'feed lot’ livestock from the USA and south America, reared on a diet of soya and cereals without ever seeing a blade of grass. The true reality of reaching net zero emissions from UK livestock farming will be that we have simply exported our CO2 emissions to countries where meat is produced with fewer ethics and a far larger carbon footprint. We cannot solve a problem merely by ‘externalising’ it to another part of the globe

Finally, having seen the new Tesco 'vegan produce' advert, I really have to ask if the whole climate change message isn't being hijacked by the vegan minority using a scientifically ignorant urban media to further their anti livestock industry agenda. The public are not being told the full story and I think they deserve a better quality of science, rather than this duplicitous rendering of ‘carbon equivalence’ which points the finger at the methane cycle for climate change. I would love to know your thoughts on this matter.

Best Regards,

Muck Spreader · Oct 15, 2019

PSQ said:
It must be raining with you too ?

I've just emailed Professor Mike Berners Lee about the 'representation' of livestock farming on Panorama:

Excellent email.

Ffermer Bach · Oct 15, 2019

PSQ said:
It must be raining with you too ?

I've just emailed Professor Mike Berners Lee about the 'representation' of livestock farming on Panorama:

no, off work today, a silage panel fell on me when I was taking them down, luckily I wasn't a foot to my right! or a step slower!

PSQ · Oct 15, 2019

Muck Spreader said:
Excellent email.

Unfortunately I doubt it will help. I've just done a bit of background reading on Professor Berners Lee, and he literally wrote the book on how to blame the livestock industry for global warming, with the BBC swallowing it hook line and sinker: he is the Beebs 'go to guy', basically says that because Brazilian beef has twice the carbon footprint of chicken, we should avoid all red meat

I guess it shows the difference between 'knowledge' and 'common' sense, when a 'professor' cant see the wood for the trees.

Up until today I thought reason would win through this rising tide of environmental hysteria.
Now, I'm pretty sure we're about to be well and truly f**ked over in the rush to be seen to 'do something' for the planet.

primmiemoo · Oct 15, 2019

PSQ said:
Unfortunately I doubt it will help. I've just done a bit of background reading on Professor Berners Lee, and he literally wrote the book on how to blame the livestock industry for global warming, with the BBC swallowing it hook line and sinker: he is the Beebs 'go to guy', basically says that because Brazilian beef has twice the carbon footprint of chicken, we should avoid all red meat
I guess it shows the difference between 'knowledge' and 'common' sense, when a 'professor' cant see the wood for the trees.

Up until today I thought reason would win through this rising tide of environmental hysteria.
Now, I'm pretty sure we're about to be well and truly fudgeed over in the rush to be seen to 'do something' for the planet.

So the Professor from Rothamstead on the programme who accurately and sincerely told us livestock keepers that we are part of the cycle that's the solution to climate change was stitched up with poor journalistic research and editing by a production company that brought in a known anti-meat academic as a Consultant (Prof. Berners-Lee runs his own consultancy on carbon footprints).

He was the academic who gave almost the exact same patter to another nice, simple, host family on a Horizon programme about reducing their carbon footprint this year. Dr Fry who presented it should be ashamed. She's usually a stickler for accuracy.

BBC Panorama

Member

Member

Member

Member

Member

Member

Member

Member

Member

Member

Member

Member

Member

Member

Member

Member

Member

Member

Member

Member

0 %

Up to 25%

25-50%

50-75%

75-100%

100% I’ve had enough of farming!

Share this page