Mysteries :  The Official GrahamHancock.com forums
For serious discussion of the controversies, approaches and enigmas surrounding the origins and development of the human species and of human civilization. (NB: for more ‘out there’ posts we point you in the direction of the ‘Paranormal & Supernatural’ Message Board). 
Welcome! Log InRegister
Please read below the response I received from Auntie in relation to the Horizon Scandal. Did anyone else receive a similar response from the makers of Horizon following our attempt to express support for fair play following last years Horizon joke programme. A week tonight we will have a rebroadcast of the show in the UK.

Best wishes Graham Hancock, Robert bauval and all regulars on this board.

Sion Ward



Dear Sion Ward

Thank you for your recent message. If you read the full version of the
Broadcasting Standards Commission adjudication regarding Horizon, you will
find that only one point of unfairness was upheld, amongst the many
complaints that Mr Hancock and Mr Bauval raised.

When the BSC directed us to broadcast a summary of its finding, we offered
to do so immediately before a repeat of Horizon: Atlantis Reborn which would
be revised to take account of the finding. Mr Hancock, and Mr Bauval,
welcomed this offer, and the Commission accepted it. We shall ensure that
the revised repeat takes full account of the one point on which the
Commission found some unfairness

Though the Commission found some unfairness in our treatment of one aspect
of the debate, this cannot be interpreted as support for Mr Hancock or Mr
Bauval's theories. The Commission made no judgement on the evidence for and
against those theories, and did not cast doubt on Horizon's scientific
assessment of them.

I attach below a synopsis of all the points of the BSC adjudication for your
interest.

Sincerely



JOHN LYNCH
Creative Director, Science
BBC Television


SYNOPSIS OF BROADCASTING STANDARDS COMMISSION ADJUDICATION
FOR "HORIZON: ATLANTIS REBORN", BROADCAST NOVEMBER 4th 1999

The BSC considered 8 points of complaint from Mr Hancock and 2 from Mr
Bauval. Only 1 of Mr Hancock's 8 points was upheld, together with a point of
Mr Bauval's which concerned the same issue.


The Adjudication

The Commission concluded that "the programme makers acted in good faith in
their examination of the theories of Mr Hancock and Mr Bauval".

Mr Hancock complained that he had been treated unjustly or unfairly in that:

The programme gave an unfair account of his case for a significant
correlation between the Great Sphinx and the constellation Leo.
Adjudication: The Commission finds no unfairness to Mr Hancock in these
matters.

The programme gave an unfair account of his case for a significant
correlation between the Angkor temples in Cambodia and the constellation
Draco.
Adjudication: The Commission finds no unfairness to Mr Hancock on this
point.

The programme unfairly omitted arguments in support of his belief that the
Great Sphinx was much older than generally accepted, and wrongly implied
that he had originated this theory.
Adjudication: The Commission finds no unfairness to Mr Hancock on this
point.

The programme unfairly excluded the views of a supporter of Mr Hancock's
belief that Yonaguni, an underwater formation off Japan, was man-made.
Adjudication: The Commission finds no unfairness to Mr Hancock in this
regard.

The programme wrongly credited him with originating the theory that Atlantis
was Antarctica.
Adjudication: The Commission finds no unfairness to Mr Hancock in this
regard.

The programme did not fairly represent his views on carbon-dating.
Adjudication: The Commission finds that the programme's treatment of this
aspect did not result in any significant unfairness to Mr Hancock.

The programme had created the impression that he was an intellectual
fraudster who had put forward half baked theories and ideas in bad faith,
and that he was incompetent to defend his own arguments.
Adjudication: [The Commission] finds no unfairness to Mr Hancock in these
matters.

Mr Hancock and Mr Bauval both complained that they had been treated unjustly
or unfairly in that:

The programme unfairly omitted one of their arguments in rebuttal of a
speaker who criticised the theory of a significant correlation between the
Giza pyramids and the belt stars of the constellation Orion (the
"correlation theory").
Adjudication: [The Commission] finds that this was unfair to Mr Hancock and
to Mr Bauval.

Mr Bauval complained that he had been treated unjustly or unfairly in that:

The programme had not allowed him an opportunity to respond to a further
point of criticism of the correlation theory.
Adjudication: The Commission finds no unfairness to Mr Bauval on this
point.

The programme had created a "strong implication" that his theory was a
"con".
Adjudication: [The Commission] finds no unfairness to Mr Bauval in these
matters.

You can also visit the BSC official summary page:
[www.bsc.org.uk]


> -----Original Message-----
> From: Sion Ward [SMTP:sion_ward@hotmail.com]
> Sent: Friday, November 10, 2000 7:16 PM
> To: jsl.only@bbc.co.uk
> Cc: mark.thompson@bbc.co.uk
> Subject: Horizon - Atlantis Reborn
>
> To all those concerned.
>
> I am very pleased to learn of the BBC's decision to rescreen its Horizon
> programme 'Atlantis Reborn'.
>
> I was shocked by the original broadcast, and was not then surprised to
> discover what had gone wrong when I discovered the Graham Hancock web site
>
> and news of the BSC ruling.
>
> I would like to add my support to the authors Graham Hancock and Robert
> Bauval whose views and theories were so badly misrepresented by the makers
>
> of Horizon. While I do not necessarily agree with every view they have
> expressed about history I am convinced that they are right about many
> things
> and entitled to air their views using whatever media is available to them.
>
> Please consider allowing a live debate between the historians and authors
> of
> differing viewpoints to take place after the re-screening of Atlantis
> Reborn
> on the 15th December 2000. I would also urge the BBC to allow Graham
> Hancock to publish his full interview with the Horizon team responsible
> for
> the very dubious broadcast in November 1999.
>
> Thank you for your attention.
>
> Sion Ward
>
>

Options: ReplyQuote


Subject Views Written By Posted
What the BBC said to me 446 Siôn 07-Dec-00 23:29
RE: What the BBC said to me 182 Julia 08-Dec-00 02:32
RE: What the BBC said to me 185 Andy 09-Dec-00 00:29
RE: What the BBC said to me 230 Julia 09-Dec-00 02:24
RE: What the BBC said to me 163 vince 09-Dec-00 10:59
RE: What the BBC said to me 189 Andy 11-Dec-00 15:16
RE: What the BBC said to me 168 Barbara 11-Dec-00 16:49
RE: What the BBC said to me 192 Andy 11-Dec-00 17:21
RE: What the BBC said to me 184 Barbara 11-Dec-00 17:38
RE: What the BBC said to me 117 Andy 11-Dec-00 21:40
RE: What the BBC said to me 200 Barbara 11-Dec-00 23:53
RE: What the BBC said to me 213 Scanda 12-Dec-00 12:23
RE: What the BBC said to me 211 Julia 12-Dec-00 13:15
Please be precise 237 Fuzzy 09-Dec-00 10:46
RE: Please be precise 192 Bryan 09-Dec-00 11:37
RE: Please be precise 185 laura 09-Dec-00 11:59
RE: Please be precise 205 Sky 09-Dec-00 14:57
RE: Please be precise 168 Bryan 09-Dec-00 15:14
RE: Please be precise 133 Andy 11-Dec-00 15:19
RE: Doh!!! 196 Walter E. Kurtz 12-Dec-00 11:00
RE: Please be precise 208 laura 12-Dec-00 20:08
RE: Please be precise 244 Brad 12-Dec-00 20:52
RE: What the BBC said to me 192 Scanda 12-Dec-00 12:27


Sorry, only registered users may post in this forum.