Please help!

[-TJ-]

[FONT=&quot]The BBC has been unfairly attacking businesses in the UK, regardless of the current credit crunch. We need to unite and stop the BBC from encouraging prejudiced remarks about small businesses' products and services in its attempt to increase its ratings. In such difficult economic times the BBC, supposedly an honest and independent organisation, have been airing programs with prejudiced 'experts' to make a 'story' with no heed to the irrevocable damage inflicted upon products and services of their choosing. Is this really independent, impartial and honest journalism?[/FONT] [FONT=&quot]Sign our petition today and help us fight the rating obsessed, bullying, Journalism the BBC has decided to adopt. http://www.ipetitions.com/petition/BBCBullys/[/FONT][FONT=&quot] [/FONT][FONT=&quot]The BBC states: Trust is the foundation of the BBC: we are independent, impartial and honest. However my experience with them is rather different.[/FONT][FONT=&quot] [/FONT][FONT=&quot]This is my story[/FONT][FONT=&quot] [/FONT][FONT=&quot]I am a 24 year old entrepreneur working in our small family business, www.crystalspring.co.uk , importing and selling Crystal Spring Salt of the Earth Deodorants, Detoxology Footpads and J-Rub organic massage oil. [/FONT][FONT=&quot] [/FONT][FONT=&quot]On Monday 6th April BBC Watchdog aired a programme on detoxing, if you didn't see it you can watch the detoxing part at this link [/FONT][FONT=&quot]http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/watchdog/2009/04/do_detox_products_deliver.html[/FONT][FONT=&quot] [/FONT][FONT=&quot] (scroll all the way to the bottom of the article to find the replay – only available until 12/4/09).[/FONT][FONT=&quot] [/FONT] [FONT=&quot]1.[FONT=&quot] [/FONT][/FONT][FONT=&quot] [/FONT][FONT=&quot]Whatever your personal views of detoxing and our Detoxology footpads do you think Watchdogs report on Detoxing was independent, impartial and honest? [/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]2.[FONT=&quot] [/FONT][/FONT][FONT=&quot] Unlike most of the companies that are investigated by Watchdog we were not mentioned because of any customer complaints, illegal or dodgy business practices, but because the presenters, and their panel chose [/FONT][FONT=&quot]ratings over impartiality[/FONT][FONT=&quot]. During our correspondence with Watchdog we gave them evidence to show our products work and referred them to bodies that support the principle of detoxing and that have published evidence that detox works. [/FONT][FONT=&quot]http://www.anhcampaign.org/news/detox-works-%E2%80%94-we-can-prove-it[/FONT][FONT=&quot] [/FONT][FONT=&quot] [/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]3.[FONT=&quot] [/FONT][/FONT][FONT=&quot]The BBC’s own Editorial Guidelines state “we should not automatically assume that academics and journalists from other organisations are impartial and make it clear to our audience when contributors are associated with a particular viewpoint”. The Watchdogs panel were Tom Wells a member of the Voice of Young Science, who openly states on their website that “We’d like to see an end to detox products on the British high street”, Ben Goldacre, a Doctor who recently published Detox Debunked, in The Sunday Times Style magazine and Lucy Jones, a member of the British Dietetic Association, who state on their website “the idea of ‘detox’ is a load of nonsense”. Watchdog made no attempt to make it clear that their experts were not impartial and were associated with a particular viewpoint. Despite our request that they include an expert on their panel who did believe in detoxing (and there are many, but, as I stated earlier my purpose is not to convert you), it didn’t happen. [/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]4.[FONT=&quot] [/FONT][/FONT][FONT=&quot]This is the second time this year that the BBC have picked on our products. The One Show, on which the same presenter Anita Rani worked at the time, also rubbished our products with biased one sided reporting.[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]5.[FONT=&quot] [/FONT][/FONT][FONT=&quot]If Programme makers and presenters are found to have knowingly broken the BBC’s codes of conduct and unfairly impacted on peoples businesses and lifes, we think they should be personally accountable. They are in positions of huge power and can do a great deal of harm if they chose ratings over substance, choose to ignore evidence that doesn’t suit their opinion instead of “independence, integrity and honesty”. An apology does not restore the damage, especially if its tucked away on the BBC website and it’s just not fair.[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]6.[FONT=&quot] [/FONT][/FONT][FONT=&quot]What we want to see is independent debate and honest reporting of facts, so if you agree with me that all Presenters and Programme makers (not just Jonathon Ross and Russell Brand) should be held personally accountable for the damage caused by their programmes, which are proved to have contravened the BBC’s own standards please sign here http://www.ipetitions.com/petition/BBCBullys/[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot] [/FONT]
[FONT=&quot] [/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]Kind Regards and thanks for your help,[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot] [/FONT]
[FONT=&quot] Thomas Laird[/FONT]

 

[mke]

1. If you want to take on the BBC, you have no chance. There is no more hated tax in the country than the TV licence but the establishment will not allow any public action against it. It should have been abolished the day ITV was launched, as a serious competitive barrier to any other entrants. Instead they are now crippling the news industry and many others by taking over huge slices of the web and other broadcasting media.

Look at the Woss debacle. You or I would have gone to prison for that. The luvvies got up and lauded his praises. They should have been sacked. Instead, he's back and they're still preaching and prattling about how wonderful they are. You think a petition will prevent that?

2. You got your name mentioned on national television. Big companies pay huge sums for that. All publicity is good publicity. Enjoy. Watch the cash roll in and enjoy.

 

[-TJ-]

Well call me stupid but I want to have a go. Its has got our products in front of a huge audience but not in a good way. If you aren't a license fee fan even more reason top sign the petition ; ).

PS I'm sorry my above post has turned out so illegible, it looked good before I posted it, so I'm not sure what happened there!

 

[vvaannmmaann]

Find a lawyer to take your case? If you have been treated unfairly,this will come out in court.Good luck.

 

[BusinessIdeas]

Find a lawyer to take your case? If you have been treated unfairly,this will come out in court.Good luck.

If you follow this advice, make sure ou have very deep pockets

 

[Dawg]

I hold no brief for the BBC which I think should be disbanded and the segments privatised. However their work to show what utter bunkum is talked and sold under the name of Detoxing is quite respectable. To claim that this expose is an attack on all small companies, or indicative of an anti small company bias is cobblers.

Basically they alleged that your product is rubbish, and that most if not all detoxing products are also rubbish. In the report that was critical of your product, the Gillian McKeith 24 Hour Detox Plan was criticized too, (before your product).
Given that McKeith is notoriously litigious, (she is married to a QC who acts for her), I imagine that Watchdog/The BBC are certain of their ground, and that you would have trouble finding a lawyer to take any case you might seek to bring.

Furthermore, given that Dr Ben Goldacre of Badscience.net supported to, and was a party to, their findings lends a great deal of credibility to the report.

I take no position as to the efficacy of your product, as I take no position on Snake Oil, but this approach of yours does seem Shakespearean: "Methinks he doth protest too much".

 

[BusinessIdeas]

The point that the op makes is surely valid, that the BBC should allow both sides of an argument. I too have seen totally biased reports on newsnight about an industry that where all the facts and figures are totally wrong, with no representation of the alternative view. It is only when you see reports about something that you personally know to be absolotely false that this sinks in.
it isnt just the snake oil sellers that suffer when this happens, but the whole of society can be ill informed on any subject the BBC chooses.

 

[Dawg]

The point that the op makes is surely valid, that the BBC should allow both sides of an argument. I too have seen totally biased reports on newsnight about an industry that where all the facts and figures are totally wrong, with no representation of the alternative view. It is only when you see reports about something that you personally know to be absolotely false that this sinks in.
it isnt just the snake oil sellers that suffer when this happens, but the whole of society can be ill informed on any subject the BBC chooses.

Various points arise from this:

Firstly it seems as though the OP's company was in correspondence with the BBC. The link is in the first post and leads to a bit of "evidence" from employees of an organization set up to promote detoxing and similar rubbish. Given the poor quality of this rebuttal I'm not at all surprised that it was not given limited and valuable airtime: blather is not the other side of an argument. Blather is blather.

Secondly: "the BBC should allow both sides of an argument". OK, who are we going to get to give the argument promoting pedophilia? Promoting Drunk Driving? Sometimes no argument is needed, we know from prior knowledge and experience what a reasonable position is.

The OP is trying to attack a reasonable criticism of a product which is of a type widely criticized worldwide. They are trying to make out that it is the Big Bad Corporation at fault, deflecting away from the cyrstalcrap voodoo of the detox industry. It may be that the product type is the source for more alarm and disquiet than the behavior of the BBC on this occasion.

 

[Ashley_Price]

I too have seen totally biased reports on newsnight about an industry that where all the facts and figures are totally wrong, with no representation of the alternative view.

The BBC have always been like this! They have grown to the point where they can do what they want and no one is going to make them change, until the licence fee is scrapped (which I don't see happening any time soon), despite all the noises to the contrary of late.

They are just as sensationalist as some of the papers out there (I'm looking at you Daily Mail and The Express).