The BBC’s John Humphrys shot his mouth off about some politicians in a speech to a bunch of PR men on a cruise. Now he faces an exhaustive internal enquiry. Naughty Humphrys. He owes most of his fame to his role with the BBC, so he really ought to wear the mask. Still, boys will be boys, and the internal enquiry would be better directed at what he says on air rather than off it. Sage words from the Times:
Like it or not — and on the whole he seems to like it — Humphrys is a public figure. His views are therefore a matter of legitimate interest. What they are not is a suitable subject for an exhaustive internal BBC inquiry. Michael Grade, the corporation’s Chairman, is said to have requested a full transcript of the cruise ship speech. He should read it, chuckle and move on: he has the more serious issue of institutional bias to confront, and on this score the BBC’s frontline presenters are far from blameless.
And
Humphrys has argued that the journalist’s chief responsibility is to challenge authority. This is necessary, and extremely easy. It is far harder for the journalist to ensure that his own views do not interfere with the presentation, and BBC presenters are all too often impatient with anything other than a soft-left world-view. Humphrys’ performance as an onboard entertainer should not be exploited by the Government to settle old scores, nor by Mr Grade to improve relations with the Government. But it might usefully prompt sober introspection by the BBC’s most senior journalists.
It’s because of the unique, silly way the BBC is funded that we need to be interested in this matter.
By the way I’ve just seen Blue Peter for the first time in many years. It has five presenters. While I watched it as a child, it started with two and ended with three. The BBC is just like many other government funded organisations, overmanned, inefficient and careless with our money.
I’d say, good for Humphrys, i didnt know speaking the truth was a crime..
Besides Grade is New Labour man in disguise, so i can understand why he wants it investigated…
funny as anything if you ask me..
I don’t care what John Humphries says when he’s giving an extra curricular talk, even if it’s full of phony quotes. All I care about is how he presents himself on the air and his obvious prejudice disqualifies him from quizzing politicians
Conflict of interest. Simple. How does the BBC not understand those simple three little words.
How about ‘fair and balanced’ ?
This is all about control, and nothing else. New Labour spin-meisters are desperate to bring the BBC completely on-message, and by and large they have done so.
But one or two awkward, cussed journalists remain, who for some reason are impertinent enough to ask ministers some challenging questions.
It’s a shame a few more don’t follow suit and stop sucking New Labour’s arse.
Humphrys quote that the purpose of journalists is to challenge authority or (as otherwise quoted) bring politicians to account is actually wrong for a BBC journalist. His purpose is to present tha facts as objectively and impartially as possible. For reasons of gross egotism he’s created this rottweiler persona and now feels that he needs to justify himself, but if he was doing his job properly he would be more transparent – just a conduit between the public and the politicians – but then of course there wouldn’t be quite so many £12000 after dinner speeches to give.
What about Kirsty whatever her name is host of Newsnight? It hasnt stopped her working since hanging out with the SNP politician?
Funny how everyone forgets these things
and what about the Inquiry into the london bombings, thats all gone a little quiet?
re: humphrys, so what, he is right, they lie all the time
What about Kirsty whatever her name is host of Newsnight? It hasnt stopped her working since hanging out with the SNP politician?
Actually, Ms Wark (Lab) holidayed with Jack McConnell (Lab), in the “Villagate” affair.
http://news.scotsman.com/topics.cfm?tid=1232&id=245332005
Indeed
Can you imagine Jeremy Paxman spending the New Year Holiday with Tony Blair in Tony’s villa?
That is the equivalent of what Kirsty and Jack did.
But it doesn’t matter, as Kirsty seems to own BBC Scotland anyway.
Kirsty is a woman. Enough said.
But it doesn’t matter, as Kirsty seems to own BBC Scotland anyway.
Too true….conflict of interest yet again…..
Holy Crap!
Anyone seen this ranting from Matt Wells?:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/americas/4214516.stm
Is that what you would call balanced reporting?
Compare that with Paul Reynolds quite balanced piece. (Maybe his recent chats with BBBC and TAE have opened his eyes?;-):
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/americas/4216508.stm
Perhaps Paul can explain why is colleague is so prone to hysterical reporting?
In a recent piece, Matt Wells refered to Nagin as “the heroic mayor”. WTF? The mayor’s failings in this are abundant. But by playing the “black” card, he has made it hard for anyone to criticism him without people screaming “racism”.
-N
I think we should all club together, raise 12000 quid and send Humhry’s on a on a world cruise with the editor of the Guardian (in a bath tub with the plug missing). They will be able to talk about Gilligan (impartially) non-stop. As for his alleged remarks about politicians – he was hardly original and certainly not worth the money. The only audience that he deserves should all be able to get comfortable in into canoe (a leaky one)
should all be able to get comfortable in into canoe (a leaky one)
Sean Penn has one (that sank within seconds of launch when he set off on a humanitarian mission in NO – he was ingognito with only a personal photographer to record his unsung benevolence)
The Telegraph is extreme in its praise of Humphrys
Everybody who has ever listened to the Today programme knows that John Humphrys is one of the least biased interviewers on the BBC. He is every bit as tough on his Conservative and Liberal Democrat interviewees as he is on New Labour and its supporters.
Have they never heard him fawning round Sir Ming?
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/opinion/main.jhtml?xml=/opinion/2005/09/06/dl0601.xml&sSheet=/opinion/2005/09/06/ixoplead.html
Dan, you are joking aren’t you. Sean Penn took a canoe in NO to … do what exactly?
Verity – read of his exploits, admire his white flak jacket.
http://atangledweb.typepad.com/weblog/2005/09/penn_sunk.html
Verity
Here;s the story. There was room for four in the “”rescue” boat. So he took four buddies along – including a personal photographer.
You really couldn’t make this stuff up ! I suppose the only thing that could cap it would be Michael Moore in a boat.
http://www.heraldsun.news.com.au/common/story_page/0,5478,16494464%5E1702,00.html
Here’s the photo — he was using a red beaker to bale out LOL
http://www.smh.com.au/articles/2005/09/05/1125772436185.html
dan
sorry — you beat me to it
Kirsty Wark and her financial connections to firms in the Scottish Parliament building fiasco – are we still not allowed to speak of that??
She was one of the ones who choose the ridiculous and expensive design we are still paying to have corrected. Half a billion quid wasted and they actually had the gall to install a hot air heating system when there was no need…
“It is a perfect recipe for a timid and self-censoring journalistic culture that is no match for the masterfully aggressive spin-surgeons of the Bush administration.”
Is Wells actually serious when he says this? The majority of the media have been in anti Bush mode for years now – so when the likes of the Washignton Post and NY Times actually write supporting Bush it is a rare event! Come on what planet is he on? Katrinagate gave the emdia its spine back….if the media hadn’t lied about things like Rathergate etc then they wouldn’t be losing viewers and readers as fast as they are!
Sack him. Sack him now.
Sorry for the odd spelling – typing left hand due to broken arm
“But what about the children?”
What was he going to, do just rescue children? Did he have secret knowledge of places where only children were waiting or was he going to remove children from their families? Or worse is that regular rescuers leave the children behind – “Sorry lady, you’ll have to leave those kids in the attic, we’ve got our orders from the President”
I think we deserve the truth.
Old Wellsy seems to be losing it big time..
We still havent had an Inquiry into the 7/7 London Bombings, any news on that?
It sounds like this Kirsty Wark would fit right in with the Louisiana State government. In fact, with credentials like that, she’s qualified to be the governor!!!
I wonder if she ever thought of emigrating?
Susan wonders:
“I wonder if she ever thought of emigrating?”
Kirsty Wark?
Good God! Have pity on the poor alligators and crocodiles. They wouldn’t stand a chance.
Only Florida has both gators and crocs, GCoop.
Great news fellow taxpayers! The “Humph” (John Humphrys, or is it Humphries? is called that because of his editorial “humphs”, a gutteral type of emission from the throat signalling his opinion of an interviewee)is finally getting what he deserves.
This is an “announcer” whose diction is so bad, he swallows many of his words in an up and down tonal performance that would put many singers to shame. Al-Beeb would be wise to give this character basic elocution lessons! The list of his rude confrontations would be too long and tedious for this blog. If he retired,(a good thing for the listeners) we would have to pay his pension ( a bad thing).
What is interesting is tht “Today” has a model besides whom the “Humph” is puny. Step forward Jim Naughtie.
His interviews with Ralph Nader and the Republican Congressman this morning were magnificent – challenging (e.g. to Nader “You complain about Bush but some think if you hadn’t stood the Democrats might have won”) in both cases, but polite and exactly the sort of thing I thought I paid my licence fee for.