BBC Misrepresents Al-Megrahi Prognosis

This is perhaps a bit off-topic, not relating directly to independence, but many of my friends (from those I have spoken to--I should, perhaps, say most) are extremely concerned about inaccurate reporting by the BBC, and today I heard to blatant examples on BBC Radio.

I was listening, reluctantly but I like to hear what they're saying, to Good Morning Scotland at around 07:35 when correspondent Tim Reid stated:

"Scottish Justice Secretary Kenny MacAskill released Megrahi who has prostate cancer and was given three months to live by doctors."

This is a blatant inaccuracy.

The fact is that al-Megrahi was never "given three months to live by doctors".

To make such an inaccurate statement in a case as important and controversial as the al-Megrahi release is unconscionable.

Here is a direct quote from the official medical advice released by the Scottish Government:
"The clinical assessment, therefore, is that a 3 month prognosis is now a reasonable estimate for this patient."

No physician claims to know exactly how long a terminal patient will live. NONE. It was never more than an estimate. Mr MacAskill's comment on the time frame was this:

"There are no fixed time limits but life expectancy of less than three months may be considered an appropriate period...."

Further, Mr. MasAskill stated:

"A report dated 10 August from the director of health and care for the Scottish Prison Service indicates that a three-month prognosis is now a reasonable estimate. The advice they have provided is based not only on their own physical examination but draws on the opinion of other specialists and consultants who have been involved in his care and treatment. He may die sooner - he may live longer.

"I can only base my decision on the medical advice I have before me...."

Mr. MacAskill never claimed to know how long al-Megrahi could live but acted on reasonable medical advice on an ESTIMATE of how long he might live, knowing that it might be less than three months or more than three months, but that al-Megrahi does have incurable, terminal cancer.

During the evening of 24 November at approximately 17:10, the Westminster correspondent David Porter made exactly the same claim, again incorrectly stating that Megrahi had been given three months to live.

This is twice in the same day the BBC blatantly misled Scottish listeners over a very serious issue. The fact that this issue has been politicised by the opposition parties at Holyrood make this appear even more serious on the part of BBC. It gives at the least the appearance of partisan bias on their part.

Indeed the Labour MSPs have made exactly the same claim and attempted to cast doubt on on the honesty of the physicians who gave the medical advice and the honesty of Mr MacAskill.

This misrepresentation by the BBC may well serve to support political claims in the opinions of listeners not aware of the truth, that the three months period was at most an estimate and was never given as an exact time period.

There seems to me to be a serious problem both in the fact that both of these BBC correspondent gave exactly the same inaccurate report and that this report is politically sensitive serving to attack one particular political party.

The actions of BBC needs to be closely examined. At the least, I urge all Scots to make a formal complaint to BBC regarding the inaccuracy of their reporting. Scotland deserves and should expect accuracy, especially on a matter as important as this one.