Media Websites

BBC has FORGED the Voting of commercial whaling?

(May 2002)

This site closed in March 2021 and is now a read-only archive
YA
yam
I found this article at
http://corn.2ch.net/test/read.cgi/news/1022644163/-100

If this is true, I will be quite disappointed and BBC must explain about this. If not, the writer of this article must be punished.
----------------------------------------------------

BBC has forged the numbers of internet voting which asks yes/no opinions of visitors over the commercial whaling.
(http://ime.nu/www.bbc.co.uk/bbcfour/)

They secretly changed the number of 'Yes' for that of 'No',
as you can see on the pictures:
http://ime.nu/mappy.mobileboat.net/~seek/up/img-box/img20020529094721.jpg
and
http://ime.nu/mappy.mobileboat.net/~seek/up/img-box/img20020529032051.jpg

On the first picture, the number of 'Yes' votes is put above that of 'No', but the position of two numbers are reversed on the second picture. Strangely enough, the number of 'Yes' votes has fallen from 916 to 622, while that of 'No' has suddenly increased from 89 to 1739.

It is shame of the world's most effective institution to make a false opinion as if it is real visitors' one.
BBC should give a reasonable explanation for this strange reverse, as long as they want to be a fair and credible news medium.
------------------------------------------------
Reference:
http://www.geocities.com/Athens/Styx/9189/whaligcon.html
YA
yam
You can refer also
http://www.bbc.co.uk/cgi-perl/h2/h2.cgi?thread=%3C1022229538-3963.6%40forum1.thdo.bbc.co.uk%3E&find=%3C1022229538-3963.6%40forum1.thdo.bbc.co.uk%3E&board=bbcfour.welcome&sort=Te
YA
yam
I found also this.
I wonder how "some technical difficulties" happened.

-------------------------------------------------------------
BBC Four Whaling Vote Nigel S - HOST - 15th post - 29 May 2002 15:16
The BBC Four website vote on 'whether whaling should be banned' which ran yesterday at www.bbc.co.uk/bbcfour unfortunately experienced some technical difficulties which reversed the 'yes' and 'no' voting tallies. The vote was taken down from the site as soon as the web team were aware of the
problem. The figures represented by the vote do not purport to represent public opinion as a whole on this issue or the opinion of BBC Four or the BBC
itself.

We'd like to apologise to all our users who experienced difficulties with the voting function yesterday. Any offence caused was not intentional.
PE
Pete Founding member
erm excuse me but you cannot accuse them of rigging a vote when a technial error occured. Computers are dodgy you know.

There is a big apology/explanation on the BBC Four site and quite frankly the website that you mention should be ashamed of accussing the beeb of this.

And before someone goes on about me being in the BBC briggade I would say the exact same thing for anyone else, except Fox.

Plus why has this strange person got last weeks results up?
YA
yam
I think they had better use most reliable computer system to prevent providing wrong information.

>Plus why has this strange person got last weeks >results up?

He or she must have it in cache.
PE
Pete Founding member
yam posted:
I think they had better use most reliable computer system to prevent providing wrong information.

>Plus why has this strange person got last weeks >results up?

He or she must have it in cache.


No, I'm talking about the open popup of last weeks poll about classical music on one of the pictures.
YA
yam
Hymagumba posted:
yam posted:
I think they had better use most reliable computer system to prevent providing wrong information.

>Plus why has this strange person got last weeks >results up?

He or she must have it in cache.


No, I'm talking about the open popup of last weeks poll about classical music on one of the pictures.


Sorry, I had misunderstood last night.

Normally, "Yes" is above and "No" is below.
But it's in reverse on the whaling voting.
He or she showed that pop up window to compare.
CA
cat
The New Statesman made a worse mistake a couple of weeks back where they had so many votes that the computer couldn't cope and the Yes result went to 99% and the No result 1%, it was probably, knowing the NS, "Should we abolish the monarchy". They did issue a correction.

Anyway, BBC votes have been rigged before, although not by the BBC themselves. Don't you remember Today Man of the Year Vote having to be closed because of all of the MPs phoning in?
YA
yam
c@t posted:
The New Statesman made a worse mistake a couple of weeks back where they had so many votes that the computer couldn't cope and the Yes result went to 99% and the No result 1%, it was probably, knowing the NS, "Should we abolish the monarchy". They did issue a correction.

Anyway, BBC votes have been rigged before, although not by the BBC themselves. Don't you remember Today Man of the Year Vote having to be closed because of all of the MPs phoning in?


This is the first time I used their voting.
So I don't remember it.
CH
chrisb
Could be down to some people multiple voting and the beeb hadn't disabled this. So they disabled multiple votes and corrected the figures?

Newer posts