Hi, Thank you all for signing this petition and a big thanks to Malcolm Stephen and Andrew MacGregor who have similar petitions, that we have tried to merge. The response from everyone has been nothing short of stunning. On reading this update (which is quite lengthy), it would be good for you to once again share on social media. However the main thing I would like is that you get this information in front of people whose only form of news is the mainstream media. Those are the ones who are being affected the most. Yesterday, The BBC responded. Their response was put out after much criticism from “viewers who felt Nick Robinson's report on the Scottish First Minister's press conference implied that Alex Salmond had not answered a question put to him.” They issued the woolly response stating that Robinson did ask two questions, but that his report “showed the second question on trust, with a script line noting that Mr Salmond had not answered that point.” Whatever that means. Here is the full Complaint Response - http://bbc.in/1oDxKwX For complete clarity, this was the full text of what Mr Robinson asked: “Two if I may. (Q1) One specifically on RBS, that you raised. Are you suggesting that the decision of RBS has no consequence or do you accept that by moving their base to London tax revenues will move to London? In other words, Scottish taxpayers would have to make up the money they would lose from RBS moving to London. (Q2) And on a more general point. John Lewis’ boss said prices could go up. Standard Life’s boss says money will move out of Scotland. BP’s boss says oil will run out. Why should a Scottish voter believe you, a politician, against men who are responsible for billions of pounds of profits?” In his BBC report, only the last sentence is broadcast. Divorced from the opening of the question, it is utterly decontextualised. Robinson then asserts, “He didn’t answer. But he did attack the report of what he calls those in the metropolitan media.” This is followed with a few choice cuts to back up this very obvious framing and editing. In this report, it seems very much like Salmond does not answer. The complaint question said viewers felt that Robinson “implied” a lack of response, when in fact he directly stated there was no response to the question. Since we have the full exchange, let us analyse this to assess whether Robinson can be seen as having created a biased report, and if Salmond did infact answer his points. It is too lengthy to transcribe all of what Salmond says, but I will surmise and give the exact timing within the video so that you can watch for yourself. Video here - http://bit.ly/1sv8Swn From 1:09 - 1:49: Salmond corrects Robinson’s misunderstanding of how Corporation Tax is calculated. Thus directly answering Q1 and weakening some of the aspersions in Robinson’s report. From 1:50 - 1:54: Salmond says “In terms more generally, of this issue. Let’s go on to the generality...”Salmond is being explicit about the fact he is going to answer Robinson’s questions more broadly. This could not be more clear and is important. From 1:55 - 2:20: Salmond posits his belief that “people of Scotland have moved beyond these warnings and scaremongerings.” He also points out that the David Cameron’s business advisor had called on business leaders to make negative statements about independence. In fact it turned to be Cameron himself, reported here in the FT - http://on.ft.com/1xYmTr1. These are exactly the type of statements referred to by Nick in Q2. Therefore, by calling into question the motives of business bosses Salmond is directly responding to Q2. From 2:47 - 3:25 : Salmond address the RBS news by quoting directly from their statement, thus highlighting that they are not moving jobs, at all. This brings into focus the tenor of the BBC reporting and Robinson’s question. Salmond answers Q1 and Q2. Only some of this made Robinson’s report. From 3:27 - 4:04 : Salmond mentions the BBC story about Lloyds moving to London, saying they are already HQ’d there, and thus have no jobs to move. Again, this generally addresses the concerns of Q2. From 4:05 - 5:30: Salmond then comes to the issues about the RBS information being leaked by the Treasury. A matter confirmed in a report by the BBC themselves - http://bbc.in/1uACTdT. From 5:30 - till end: Salmond deals with the heckling of Robinson. This is merely a reiteration of the earlier points Robinson failed to understand. Robinson has both questions answered. He just does not like it what he hears. In reporting it the way he did, Nick Robinson made his report an attack on Salmond for being an evasive, potentially dishonest politician. However, Salmond has taken Robinson’s questions, answered them thoroughly and informatively and turned this into an assessment of the motives, morals and trustworthiness of business leaders, the Treasury, the PM and, in fact, the BBC. That in itself is a clear breached the BBC Charter Agreement, Article 44. One last point. A large percentage of Scottish voters are genuinely, agonisingly undecided. Clear information is required to help them decide. Imagine this scenario: an undecided sees this video and is swayed by Salmond’s evasiveness, his attacking nature and his inability to prove himself trustworthy, which is how the BBC news item is framed. They are swayed to vote No. Had such an undecided voter seen the longer video post-election, this person would see not only that Salmond answered, but that he directly addressed many of the big, big worries undecideds are being bombarded with. How do you think that person will feel? They will feel manipulated. They will feel like they have been deliberately misled. They will feel like their vote had been swayed for the wrong reasons.Scotland deserves better. The UK deserves better. Luckily, we have the internet. Unfortunately for Mr Robinson, we do not only use it to look at cats. The real question should be this: Why should a Scottish voter believe you, a journalist, against the First Minister of Scotland? At the time of writing, more than 11,500 feel that the report was biased. The complaint response is woefully inadequate. Again, we call on the BBC to suspend Mr Robinson, pending full independent investigation and explanation of this report. If you still feel strongly about this, please share this again on social media. Again though, try to share with people who are not online. Many thanks, Patrick