Talking-up Scotland

From yesterday’s Crown Office & Procurator Fiscal Service press release on Hate Crime in Scotland, 2017/18:

1. Racial crime – 3,249 charges reported in 2017-18, 4% less than in 2016-17 – 9% less than the peak in 2011-12, lowest number reported since 2003-04.
2. Sexual orientation aggravated crime – 1,112 charges reported in 2017-18, an increase of 3%.
3. Aggravation of prejudice relating to disability – 284 charges reported in 2017-18 – 51% more than in 2016-17. This increase may be partially due to efforts to raise awareness of this type of crime, which is generally thought to be under reported.
4. Religiously aggravated charges – 642 reported in 2017-18.
5. Offensive Behaviour at Football and Threatening Communications – 198 charges reported in 2017-18

http://www.copfs.gov.uk/media-site/media-releases/1765-hate-crime-in-scotland-2017-18

However, from the above, BBC Scotland chose to headline:

Disability-related hate crime up 50%

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-44497881

Meanwhile in England & Wales, hate crimes based on race, increased by a massive 27% from 2015/16 to 2016/17.

https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/652136/hate-crime-1617-hosb1717.pdf

So, cheap tabloid titillation, selective misrepresentation and no context?

My complaint just about having to click on the same thing – ‘Make a complaint’ – three times:

Full Complaint: Why do I have to confirm three times that I wish to make a complaint? Searching for BBC Complaints takes me to this: http://www.bbc.co.uk/bbctrust/contact_us/making_a_complaint.html I click on Make a complaint and it takes me to this: http://www.bbc.co.uk/complaints/ where I must click on Make a complaint again It then takes me to this: http://www.bbc.co.uk/complaints/complain-online/ where I must for the third time click on Make a complaint. Surely this is a mess?

Their reply one day later (!):

Thanks for contacting the BBC. I understand you feel the online webform process contains barriers. We appreciate that you are annoyed with this online process, however it has been set up so that your complaint can be managed and responded to efficiently and quickly. The main reason we ask people to use our webform, even when replying to an email we’ve sent, is because we deal with over a million audience contacts every year and we have to ensure they can be efficiently tracked using our handling system. In addition, our complaints and general enquiries webforms ask for essential information such as channel, programme name and transmission date which means we don’t have to write back to people unnecessarily. Using a webform also guarantees we can match a return contact up with the previous contact from that person without the need to cross-check thousands of unformatted emails which would then have to be manually transferred into the tracking system. We appreciate this may be annoying, but we did not take this decision lightly. Our policy takes into account what is operationally efficient and avoids the need to employ additional staff at additional cost to licence fee payers.

Rest assured, your comments have been added to our audience feedback report, which is compiled daily and circulated among BBC senior management. This report is one of the most widely read reports within the BBC. This helps inform their decisions about current and future programmes and services.

Thanks for taking the time to raise your concerns with us.

My second complaint:

Your reply in no way addresses my complaint. I am not complaining about the need to submit a complaint online per se but about the need to click on the term ‘Make a complaint’ three times before getting a chance to actually make the complaint. Why is this?

 

(stock image, NOT the RS ed)

(c) pixabay.com

MY COMPLAINT: Case number CAS-4952019-6JPNYG: 4^th June 2018

Complaint Summary: Reporting of research on Organised Crime

Full Complaint: Extended, headlined, report, with 24 long, compound, sentences on organised crime. Despite, the length, RS failed to mention the researchers’ own repeated warning against generalising the findings beyond their small sample to the national situation in Scotland. This is a key responsibility in reporting research. As early as page 3 in the report, ‘Community Experiences of Serious Organised Crime in Scotland’, we see this: ‘188 individuals participated in the study, which mostly involved semi-structured qualitative interviews, but also a small number of focus groups, unstructured interviews and observational research.’ So, this is a small-scale piece of qualitative research. Such research can be very useful in explaining the complexity of social situations and, in particular, helping professionals, such the police, to develop effective strategies. However, such research, cannot be used to tell us how common something is or how widespread it is. For that, you’d need a much bigger sample, randomly selected and spread across the country. The researchers are not to blame for Reporting Scotland’s misuse of their findings. On page 3 and again on page 25, in the methods section, they say: ‘While the case study areas had traits that were similar to other communities in Scotland, however, it should be noted that these findings should not be read as a generalised picture of SOC-community relations in Scotland.’ Given their prominence in the report, it’s difficult to explain the failure to mention the declared limitations on interpreting these results, as other than deliberate and then we’re left to wonder why.

REPORTING SCOTLAND EDITOR’S RESPONSE: 14^th June 2018

I am afraid I am not clear about what your complaint actually is, because you produce not a single example of what you are complaining about. The closest I can get to understanding your point is your statement: “Such research cannot be used to tell us how common something is or how widespread it is”. As we did neither, your complaint – if that it be – is without foundation.

The reporter Reevel Alderson spoke to three people with something to say about serious crime in Scotland – Chris Kerr of Family Action in Rogerfield and Easterhouse, who amongst other things are organising activities to keep young children away from crime groups; one of the leaders of the study, Dr Alistair Fraser of the Scottish Centre for Crime and Justice Research, who outlined how a map of organised crime in Scotland correlated closely to a map of economic disadvantage and who emphasised how ripe such communities were for exploitation; and the Scottish Government Justice Secretary Michael Matheson, who agreed with the finding that more needed to be done to win over communities with high levels of mistrust in the police, with all-round cooperation by interested parties being “an important element” of a wider package of measures.

The research findings paper 67/2018 published on the Scottish Government website concluded “Serious organised crime has deep roots in Scotland and extends the corrosive reach into a wide range of communities, businesses and institutions.” That sobering assessment is reason enough to report an issue of concern to most Scots and that was what we did using three important players in this story.

In view of what I have written above I hope that you will understand why I find wholly without foundation your statement ‘it’s difficult to explain the failure to mention the declared limitations on interpreting these results, as other than deliberate and then we’re left to wonder why’.

MY SECOND COMPLAINT: 15^th June 2018

Yours is quite a tetchy wee response. I know it can be upsetting when you don’t or are not allowed to understand something but that’s no excuse. Luckily, it’s simple. My complaint is that by giving headline attention at some length to research about organised crime without mentioning the researchers’ own clear and repeated warning about the extent to which their small number of cases can be generalised to the wider Scottish context, you suggest to your viewers that it may well be widespread. I know that you did not explicitly state that it was widespread (duh) but it was your responsibility (in your charter) to make sure viewers were aware that you were not saying that, by referring to the researchers’ warning. There is a serious danger than many viewers, trusting your coverage, will now think that this is a more common phenomenon than it is – see your own website which reveals that there are only 164 gangs in Scotland yet according to a BBC Salford broadcast on May 14^th, there are 4 500 in the UK as a whole. Thus, Scotland has, per capita, far fewer gangs than the rest of the UK. Indeed, Scotland has 8% of the population yet only 3.5% of the gangs. Try again?

(c) Insider

Today on BBC Scotland News, six times before 9am:

‘Scottish retailers recorded their best month’s performance in more than four years, last month. Figures from the Scottish Retail Consortium showed total sales increased by 2.4% compared with May 2017. Food sales were up 4.2% while non-food sales rose 1.4%. The SRC says garden furniture, barbecues and summer clothes and footwear all performed well.’

This will, no doubt make the three Reporting Scotland shows today, too. So, who says BBC Scotland doesn’t give us good news on the Scottish economy? Well, in the last few days, they missed:

1. Scottish growth ‘outpacing UK as a whole’
2. Scottish growth three times UK level
3. ‘Foreign Direct Investment in Scotland at ‘unprecedented’ levels
4. 8% of the population, nearly 9% of the exports but only 5.25% of the imports

from these reliable and easily accessed sources:

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-scotland-business-44436783

https://fraserofallander.org/scottish-economy/latest-nowcasts-of-the-scottish-economy/

https://www.insider.co.uk/news/ey-foreign-direct-investment-scotland-12669006

https://www.uktradeinfo.com/Statistics/RTS/Pages/default.aspx

Before I offer an explanation as to why some good news on Scotland’s economy gets reported but other examples do not, one wee detail. Notice ‘best month’s performance in more than four years’ but ‘2.4% compared with May 2017’, only one year back? Would the percentage increase on the level more than four years ago have looked too good?

Anyhow, here’s my thesis:

1. The sales figures are allowed because they are the result of retailers ‘performance’, weather or horror of horrors, borrowing, and not, apparently anything to do with the SNP though you could say that sales reflect wages and jobs and that the government of the day gets some credit. Of course, Westminster policies can also be given credit for this.
2. Sales figures are not evidence of core economic strength of the kind suggested by growth, investment and exports. It seems certain that these owe something to inherent strengths plus SNP economic policies and should not be mentioned.
3. The growth, investment and export/import figures allow favourable comparison with the rUK and this, too, does not fit the Unionist agenda.

(c) Allia

I know that much still needs to be done to eradicate homelessness in Scotland but from Scottish Housing News today:

‘New government statistics reveal there were 11,677 affordable homes approved in 2017/18, 14% more than the previous year and the third consecutive annual increase since 2014/15. This includes increases in affordable rent approvals (which have more than doubled, up by 1,433 homes), and affordable hom ownership approvals (up by 5% or 92 homes), with a decrease in social rent approvals (down by 2% or 124 homes).’

http://www.scottishhousingnews.com/21876/affordable-housing-approvals-up-14-to-11680-in-latest-year/

Back in January 2018, Scottish Housing News had been able to report:

‘Scotland has delivered a third more affordable homes per capita over the last decade than England, according to figures from the Scottish Government. In answer to a parliamentary question from Edinburgh North and Leith MSP Ben Macpherson, housing minister Kevin Stewart revealed that over the 2007-08 to 2016-17 financial years, the government’s supply of affordable housing per capita has been 33% higher than the UK government’s supply in England. According to the figures, 70,861 affordable homes have been delivered in Scotland in the ten years since April 2007.’

The SHN report also presented figures showing the performance under SNP government, increasing, notably, as the legacy of Labour underperformance faded:

Number of Affordable housing units delivered in Scotland and England, financial years from 2007-08

Scotland		England		Percentage difference between Scotland and England per capita  rates
	Units delivered	Per capita	Units delivered		Per capita
2007-08	5,670	110	53,180	104	6%
2008-09	6,221	120	55,720	108	11%
2009-10	8,092	155	58,290	112	38%
2010-11	7,231	137	61,090	116	18%
2011-12	6,882	130	58,330	110	18%
2012-13	6,009	113	43,120	81	40%
2013-14	7,012	132	43,030	80	65%
2014-15	7,069	132	66,700	123	8%
2015-16	6,518	121	32,630	60	104%
2016-17	7,336	136	41,530	75	81%
Total over 2007-08 to 2016-17	68,040	1,285	513,620	967	33%

Sources: Scottish Government Affordable Housing Supply Programme management information system and Ministry for Housing & Local Government live tables.

http://www.scottishhousingnews.com/19574/scotland-streets-ahead-england-affordable-housing-delivery/

In the Flagging Scotsman today:

‘Scotland is punching above its weight in terms of charity donations, a report has revealed.’

‘An analysis from the Charities Aid Foundation (CAF) found that Scotland accounts for 11.8 per cent of all UK charitable donations, despite representing 8.4 per cent of the UK’s population. Scots gave an estimated £1.2 billion to charity in 2017, significantly up from the estimated £813 million donated in 2016.’

https://www.scotsman.com/business/scots-donations-break-through-1-billion-mark-1-4752994

 

More evidence that we are just a bit different? See these earlier reports:

Scottish Nationalism is a very different and a better thing than English/British Nationalism and, at last, BBC Scotland seems to have faced up to the fact.

Only in Scotland! ‘A review of small country’s approaches to public policy reform in response to economic, demographic and other pressures found that only in Scotland could this ‘golden thread’ be so clearly discerned’

Scientific evidence that Scots tend to be different from the other groups in rUK?

8% of the UK population and 28% of living wage employers. More evidence that we are different enough to want to run the whole show?

Who said Scots were not more left-wing than those in the rest of the UK?

 

More 8% stories:

8% of the population, nearly 9% of the exports but only 5.25% of the imports

Return of the meme? Only 8% of the population but Scotland has 21.7% of all independent renewable projects in the UK

Still 8% of the population but now 30% of UK food and drink exports?

8% of the UK population and 28% of living wage employers. More evidence that we are different enough to want to run the whole show?

With only 8% of the population, Scotland’s maritime sector accounts for 25% of the UK maritime sector’s (GVA) contribution to the economy and is 17.5% more productive than the UK marine oil and gas sector. Once more, too wee, too poor?

Once again, it’s the ‘8% of the UK population but much more of something good’ meme. This time it’s 33% of employee-owned firms in the UK

 

My initial complaint on May 31 (compact format to enable compliance with word limit):

Complaint Summary: Entrance to HE in Scotland

Full Complaint: The report, broadcast six times between 6am and 9am: ‘Fewer students from the most deprived parts of Scotland are entering university. Figures from the Scottish Funding Council show there was a 0.2% drop in the number of entrants from the poorest areas last year.’ It’s not inaccurate, in itself. It is, however missing key facts required for informative value, balance and overall accuracy. The figures used for the broadcast were taken from the Scottish Funding Council Report on Widening Access 2016-17, published on 30th May 2018. Easily found, on the same page as the figures used by BBC Scotland (3) we can read this crucial piece of information: ‘Combining the number of entrants to full-time FE and HE courses at college and full-time first-degree courses at university, there were 25,490 total entrants from the most deprived 20%, and 15,635 from the least deprived 20%. This means that those from the most deprived 20% have the highest total number of entrants across these full-time levels of study.’ Further reinforcing this as the news worth reporting, we have already seen from UCAS: ‘The problem is that there is rather less sub-degree HE in the non-Scottish parts of the UK than in Scotland but most of what there is appears to be recruited through UCAS; meanwhile in Scotland there’s a much larger amount of HE provided in FE colleges, pretty much all at sub-degree level, which is not recruited through UCAS at all…. Indeed, it’s the HE provided in colleges which gives Scotland the edge in overall participation rates.’ https://www.ucas.com/sites/default/files/jan-16-deadline-application-rates-report.pdf This suggests a headline directly contradictory of the BBC Scotland one, today: ‘More students from the most deprived parts of Scotland are entering Higher Education’

BBC Response on June 12th

Reference CAS-4946569-HBKWHG

The data reported came from the Scottish Funding Council – the government body which distributes government money to universities. We correctly reported the figure in the report – a small drop in the number of new university entrants from SIMD 20 backgrounds. We also included this sentence which for some reason was omitted in your version of what we said: “The Scottish Government says the drop reaffirms that it is taking the right action in focussing on widening access.” The figures we used are official and they are not disputed by the Scottish Government or Universities Scotland. The Scottish government’s aim is to have 20% of new university students come from SIMD 20 backgrounds by 2030. These figures show, at best, that no year-on-year progress is being made. The Scottish government used the figures to demonstrate the need for renewed action by universities. We regularly look at the issues surrounding widening access to universities and, when appropriate, we do discuss the important role colleges play in this – in particular how some college courses offer their students “direct routes” into degree courses.

My second complaint

Your response fails to address my key complaint which is that your report did not inform viewers of a fact which is necessary for the full understanding of access to HE in Scotland – that, according to UCAS itself, the Scottish system is characterised by ‘the much larger amount of HE provided in FE colleges, pretty much all at sub-degree level, which is not recruited through UCAS at all’ and that …. ‘it’s the HE provided in colleges which gives Scotland the edge in overall participation rates’. That you do discuss the role played by colleges, at unspecified times/places, is not relevant to my complaint. To fulfil your own charter, you needed to include this contextual information, crucial for understanding the UCAS news, at the same time, in the same report. Not doing so, you left the viewers with a misleading and partial account which does them a disservice and which may be perceived as damaging to the reputation of Scotland and the Scottish Government. That the Scottish government have not disputed your figures is not relevant; this is my complaint as a citizen and licence-payer.

I hesitate to offer this moan in case it is just me, 67 years old and confused, but here I go, anyway. If I’ve clicked it all wrong, let me know.

Search for BBC Complaints:

Choose the first one and get:

 

 

Click on Make a complaint and get:

 

 

Click on Make a complaint AGAIN and get:

 

 

Click on Make a complaint for the third FN time and get:

 

Start the complaint.

So, I had to repeat my desire to make a FN complaint three times before they would let me start the FN complaint?

Or….is it just me?

THEN when your complaint is rejected, have to go through the whole thing again.

From the EY report on foreign direct investment (FDI) yesterday, the key findings are:

1. A new record for FDI projects in 2017 for the third consecutive year with an increase of 7% compared to 2016
2. Scotland secures its position as the most attractive location in the UK for R&D projects for a second consecutive year with an increase of 70% compared with 2016
3. The digital sector experienced a 56% increase in FDI projects and was the second largest sector to attract investment into Scotland behind business services
4. Manufacturing activity experienced a 25% increase of FDI in 2017 compared to 2016
5. 2nd place ranking, behind London, as the most attractive place to invest in the UK
6. FDI job creation increased by 104%, from 3,131 to 6,374

https://www.ey.com/uk/en/issues/business-environment/ey-scotland-attractiveness-survey-2018

This good news follows four reports in the last few days on the robust Scottish economy but somewhat neglected by our media:

Reporting Scotland serial offender as it misses good news on Scotland’s economy three times in one day!

and several other recent surveys telling a similar story:

Business confidence high across Scotland. 80% of Highlands and Islands businesses optimistic about future

Scottish business confidence higher than in any other region of UK

Scottish businesses more likely to be stable than those in rest of UK: News from a parallel universe unknown to our mainstream media

Scottish Government supports economy with new business rates unique in UK

Scottish business confidence soars above UK level as sales increase

Business growth in Scotland well ahead of UK average

(c) Scottish Enterprise

In Energy Voice today:

‘The chief executive of Ghana’s Petroleum Commission has said Aberdeen will play a “vital part” in the country’s upcoming “oil boom”. Ghana is set to award nine licensing rounds in the lead up to next April, with opportunities for “supermajors, contractors and service providers”. Ghana’s laws mean any company wishing to execute a contract in its upstream sector has to create a joint venture with an indigenous Ghanaian company, with the latter getting at least 10% equity.’

https://www.energyvoice.com/oilandgas/africa/173900/aberdeen-to-play-vital-part-in-ghanas-oil-boom/

The value deriving from Scotland’s oil and gas expertise has been growing for some time now. On June 16^th 2017, I was able to write:

‘It’s not just the oil and gas exports that make the money now. After decades of experience gained in the North Sea and in west of Shetland’s deeper stormier waters, Scotland now earns just over half of its income from international business supplying equipment and expertise across the globe. The survey producing the £11.4 billion figure was carried out by Aberdeen Chamber of Commerce for Scottish Enterprise and had responses from 295 companies employing 63 000 staff’:

Scotland’s oil and gas expertise earned £11.4 billion in 2015/2016 supported by Scottish Government investment

For more on this theme, see:

Scotland’s oil and gas extraction expertise continues to earn millions

Scottish Subsea expertise to make billions raising World War 1 and 2 wreck cargoes

Scotland’s sub-sea expertise earns £15 million research fund to work with Japan