I listened to an outrageous item on the BBC Radio 4 Today programme this morning around 7.20am concerning the forthcoming Crewe by-election. As you know, the portents suggest Labour may well lose this rock-solid seat held until her recent death by Gwyneth Dunwoody and it seems to me that the BBC is absolutely determined to bail out poor Gordon. The Great Leader is due on in about 15 minutes time to discuss his long term “vision” for Britain – myopic I would suggest and I can’t stomach listening to it but this earlier item has set it all up very nicely for Mr Brown. It took the form of interviewing people in Crewe and oddly enough – the majority of those the BBC found indicated they would, albeit reluctantly, be voting Labour! The BBC even managed to find Liz Dawn – Vera Duckworth of Coronation Street – urging voters in Crewe to vote Labour. Apparently voters are keen to get the “long-term” vision from Labour which nicely dovetails into what Brown will drone on about shortly. It’s my view that this item was constructed entirely to set up the later Brown interview in a way which accommodates the PM and it gave no sense of the mass dissatisfaction that every other opinion poll has found in Crewe. It’s a remarkable insight into how the BBC operates, biased in favour of it’s BBC pimp and shilling for a Labour victory even though WE know that a defeat is MUCH more likely. I can’t wait until the result of this election becomes known although the BBC also got in the pre-emptive strike that by-elections are by no means indicative of the result of a general election. I suggest that the BBC – like Labour – is in full-on denial mode – and it is a pleasure to watch.
END OF THE LINE?
Bookmark the permalink.
You are far too charitable, saying the beeboids are in self denial.
There have been a hard core of left wingers at the bbc for several decades and they have successfully managed to hire in thousands of left leaning types.
They probably believe that even if labour fall, the bbc will be able to hold the fort untill they re- group.
A similar downing street press release was read out in the middle of the radio 2 news bulletin at 8.00am telling us more on Gordon’s forthcoming interviews and “that this draws a line under the 10pence tax row” …. bet he won’t be seeing Fern Brittan this morning though.
While, in perfect lock-step, the BBC’s ‘News’ website leads with yet more puffing of the hapless Broon.
This time, ” I can save economy again – Brown”
Again?
Even by the shameful standards of the BBC during the past couple of decades, this recent period of synchronised sycophancy represents a new low.
But in a way, we should be grateful – the single biggest disaster in the whole NuLabour project is Gordon Brown. He has to be kept there as long a s possible.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/7401846.stm
They also let him get away with saying that he has saved the economy on a previous occasion. Does he not actually remember the low inflation, low interest, budget surplus and high employment he inherited in 1997, or does he still think he came to power in 1989?
How perfectly delicious, the ghost of Vera Duckworth votes labour and haunts Crewe.
Nu-Labor… Dead leader. Dead ideology. Dead wrong.
I thought there were rules about political coverage during bye-elections.
Forget thousand dying in Burma and China the top news story on BBC4 News this morning, why of course the economic genius (who didn’t realise removing the 10p tax bracket would make the lowest earners poorer) is sitting on various sofas churning out exactly the same crap about stering us through world economic difficulties that he’s sais a thousand times before.
Cutting Edge News indeed.
When Richard Nixon won the Presidency in 1972, Upper East Sider and the New York Times film critic Pauline Kael is said to have been shocked, shocked I tells ya… thus giving any oft mocked line
How could Nixon have won? No one I knew voted for him.
Clearly the BBC is full of people totally shocked that Boris Johnson won, and Labour lost, because everyone they knew voted for the lefty socialist.
According to Brown the economy is suffering due to international factors beyond his control.
But apparently he can “save” us from those same international factors that he cannot control?
So why did he not do something sooner?
We should all take a deep breath, reach for the bullshitometer for some detailed measurements.
Humphrys completely laid into Brown on the Today programme this morning and did not give him an easy time at any point.
Have a listen here, it’s very enjoyable:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/radio4/news/audio/0810_20080515.ram
I fail to see how that is anything other than a well-deserved kicking.
However, even beeboid me struggles to understand how you can generate the article David links to from it (the Today article is clearly the source, even if the meaning is a million miles away).
“Today article” should be “Today interview”
I agree that the BBC are in a state of shock and denial – but maybe Victoria Derbyshire can help them out of it; I hear she’s an expert at that sort of thing.
On a more serious note; is it just me or does there seem to be a tone developing on this site which is not merely concerned with the BBC, its biases and publicly funded incompetences, but more and more with sheer hatred of the Labour government and socialism in general?
Don’t get me wrong, I have nothing against anyone who thinks the Labour government is rotten to the core; I just worry that this site, especially since the local elections, has lost its focus somewhat, and people seem to spend as much time being openly hostile to Labour as they are critical of BBC bias.
And before anyone tries the standard “Yes, but you’re not forced to pay for this site, you are for the BBC” response, can I just say that that is hardly the point: I worry that this increasingly party-political line diminishes the integrity or credibility of the site. If we are nothing more than a sounding board for people who literally hate anything remotely left of centre then we should perhaps have the honesty to admit it. As it stands at the moment, when I direct interested people to visit the site (people who are open to the possibility that there is indeed bias in the BBC’s input and want more information) I wonder whether they read the recent postings and comments, and simply conclude that BBC bias is only an issue for people who rabidly denounce anything they disagree with as lefty scum or marxist shit.
Can we lose the gloating anti-Labour tone that has now openly entered the postings? I’m not trying to censor anyone, merely suggesting that it doesn’t do anything to further the discussion of BBC bias.
Well said gt. There’s plenty of BBC bias to keep us going. There’s no need to attack the organ-grinder as well as the monkey.
Though whether the actual organ-grinder is doing himself any favours by going on the Toady show every other day must be open to question.
Despise Labour as I do, I can only agree with gt’s feelings. It’s far too easy for BBC apologists to dismiss us as ‘Daily Mail readers’ and ignore the, often very valid, complaints people have about the BBC.
Thanks for the link Sarah Jane!
Humphreys gave him a kicking, talking over him and interrupting. He’d even done some research. No bias at all.
Website is running the banner headline
I can save economy again – Brown (note no exclamation marks, no word such as “claims”, it is presented as a statement of fact.
In the manner of a Guardian editorial the BBC reports: Gordon Brown says he has kept the UK economy growing during tough times before and insists: “I can do it again.”
This isn’t just propaganda…it’s BBC propaganda.
More importantly, this morning (Thursday) there was an item on radio 4 about the naqba which I thought bordered on the anti semitic. It contained so many outright lies, omissions and half truths. it amazes me that it is not possible for the BBC to make a balanced programme about anything really
The Crewe by-election is well covered by Melanie here:
http://www.spectator.co.uk/melaniephillips/698806/fighting-the-last-indefensible-war.thtml
What a palaver, trying to get that link to work. I’ve given up now. Isn’t it available on iPlayer or Youtube?
Victoria Derbyshire is off the airwaves today; nothing trivial I hope.
Obviously the BBC puts absolute trust in the Republican government and its scientists to decide which species it considers endangered. So much so they didn’t mention any other studies on Polar bear habits or population, simply the government’s decision.
Excellent point, but I can’t see the Republicans winning in Crewe.
The “Republicans” are also the minority party in both houses of Congress. .i.e. They are not the “government.”
“edward Bowman:
More importantly, this morning (Thursday) there was an item on radio 4 about the naqba which I thought bordered on the anti semitic.”
D’you mean, the one on Today about Nachla for whom things got even worse when a Palestinian builder ‘turned on her’ ? Or the From our Own Correspondent by Katya Adler about the Naqba?
http://www.bbc.co.uk/radio/aod/mainframe.shtml?http://www.bbc.co.uk/radio/aod/radio4_aod.shtml?radio4/fooc_thu
– 18:17/29.59
Everyone’s entitled to cool running shoes and a Harley-Davidson, innit?
“The war that happened in 1948” It just happened, like an earthquake or a cyclone. Baffling really.
Unless the Labour Party is fielding a bear for this election, I put that comment in the wrong thread.
David Vance:
“It’s my view that this item was constructed entirely to set up the later Brown interview in a way which accommodates the PM and it gave no sense of the mass dissatisfaction that every other opinion poll has found in Crewe.”
David – perhaps you would listen to the 8:10 (linked to above) and then say if you think your view was correct?
gt,
I would agree,but the BBC often seems to be the Pravda of the New Labour Junta.
Sarah-Jane,
As I said, I tuned out before the 8.10 but let me say that if Broon was grilled, then fair play and I withdraw my comment. The thing is that I think it also depends on who conducts some of these big interviews, I’ve said in the past that I think Humphyrs is OK in certain conditions, others are hopeless. The reality is that not every listener got both items, those such as myself left with one impression and it may be that it was wrong. I hope you think that is a fair response on the specific, of course I stand by my general point that the BBC is institutionally in favour of the awful Labour policies, which Cameron will most likely continue.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/7403168.stm
What the blinking Ed Balls is this?! Hazel Blears says words so the BBC copy them down in full?
I wonder if she would care to comment on a certain Mr. Hain’s endorsement of Picture Loans…
David thank you. It’s worth a listen, Humphrys was back at his ‘best’. To me it feels like he’s been just dialling it in recently and I think there was a perception that younger (in the case of the Today prog that means 35-45ish 🙂 ) were fed up with the combative approach. Which (I think) is why they got Tinsel Tits in.
However it was a good performance today, I think I can say, totally impartially, that recent decisions such as buying off the backbench with a unfunded tax cut totally patronise the intelligence of the electorate, of whatever political persuasion, and the Supreme Leader needed taking to account.
I know you all think we are up his backside but he is not well regarded as he comes into interviews, ignores questions and just says whatever he is was going to say. Hence The Dementor.
Still, how Online got the ‘I can still save economy’ headline out of it has me baffled, he said it, but it’s not really a reflection of that interview. I will give you that one.
These views are my own, not those of my sometime employer etc etc
I’m listening to the interview right now and I am laughing my arse off listening to Brown lie and squirm.
The only person who could have ridiculed and scoffed at him any more would have been Alan Partridge.
Just listening to Humphrey’s at the start talk about Brown in the third person in a derogatory way, turn and say “He’s in the studio with me today” and the tone in Brown’s voice as he says “Hello” is brilliant.
Humphrey’s is clearly pissed at Brown and practically laughs at everything he says, contradicts him, humiliates him, constanlt interrupts him and wipes the floor with him.
I’ve never liked Humphrey’s but he definitely came away with blood on his lips. I only wish Humphrey’s could influence the Labour suck-ups at the BBC that this is how you deal with hypocritical, incompetent liars like Brown.
Sarah Jane, if you find any more interviews like that, please post them. That’s made my day that is.
Brown would need skin as thick as a mattress to have not gone into the toilets right after that interview and had a big cry.
Merciless.
“It’s far too easy for BBC apologists to dismiss us as ‘Daily Mail readers’ ”
Well, Abu Alex does just that – but anyone who reads this site carefully and is not a Bean a***licker knows that this is nonsense. As I said to Abu Alex, I have never read the Daily Mail in my life, not once.
Hi Sarah Jane nice to see you back.
If not agreeing with all your views I think of you as the acceptable face of the BBC.
Don’t get to listen to R4 anymore so thanks for the link. Entertaing comes to mind.
Shouldn’t Liz Dawn be sacked for backing McLiebour? Why did James Whale get the push? Double standards by Ofcom?
gharqad tree: Judging by the local elections I’d suggest the comments on this site reflect the nation as a whole (i.e.fed up with McBean and McLiebour)
BUT what really annoys people here is the refusal of the BBC to reflect that feeling. Last weeks Questiontime from Tory heartland of Dorking sounded like it was coming from the heart of Liverpool or Glasgow with almost every mention of McBean being loudly applauded.
Martin writes: “BUT what really annoys people here is the refusal of the BBC to reflect that feeling.”
I’m not trying to put words into gt’s mouth but what I was getting at when I endorsed his opinion, wasn’t that people shouldn’t complain bitterly about the way ( pace Humphrys) the BBC is more or less openly spewing out pro-Labour propaganda.
The problem is when they make comments about the Government, almost without reference to the BBC.
“Well, Abu Alex does just that”
I have never done such a thing as well you know.
Listening to the link that Sarah Jane helpfully supplied confirms my theory:the BBC know that they HAVE to get rid of Gordon Brown for NuLabour to survive!
The Labour Government, especially Gordon Brown, does not understand the nature of capitalism, and the limitation of state intervention, after all these years.
Many years ago, (in the 1960s), namesake Labour Chancellor George Brown, went so far as to attempt to institute a ‘National Plan’ to control the rate of growth of the British capitalist economy, with predictably lamentable results.
Economists (including BBC ones) have indicated the inability of a national government, such as Brown’s Labour one, to counteract the international pressures on food, oil and housing markets.
But Brown still deludes himself with what is a poor grasp of economic principles, after all these years. His economic self-delusion continues: “We are now in a new economic cycle.” No, we’re not; it’s simple another stage in an economic cycle, a stage called ‘recession’. And who does Brown think he is: Canute?
“Listening to the link that Sarah Jane helpfully supplied confirms my theory:the BBC know that they HAVE to get rid of Gordon Brown for NuLabour to survive!”
This is the point, Humphreys was doing a little damage limitation,he might possibly be an old Blairite.Scuppering Brown is the only chance Labour have got,the country is incandescent with anger,there will have to be a sacrifice.
It is however,naive to think that Humphreys was being tough on our behalf,the BBC isn’t like that.
“The Labour Government, especially Gordon Brown, does not understand the nature of capitalism, and the limitation of state intervention, after all these years.”
On the contrary,they understand too well,but being Marxists,communists and socialists,they are trying to destroy it.
That makes sense peter but if the Beeboids want Brown out to save nulabour then why is the BBC news website doing it’s utmost to support and protect him.
Surely an old hand like Humphreys would have caught onto the BBC agenda fast. Protect Brown no matter what. Or are you suggesting that all the Beeboids are about to do a U-turn and put the boot into Brown.
If that is the case, then it’s safe to say that Humphreys is a key player in setting the agenda of the groupthink of the BBC.
SOMEBODY has to be responsible for telling the Beeboids what to think, as we well know that they are incapable of doing it for themselves.
An interesting theory Bored With It All, but there is a much simpler explanation; I have it on good authority that Humphreys is an avid Daily Mail reader (amongst other newspapers I must add) and he wants his interviews to reflect what ‘middle England’ is thinking.
(Sorry if transmissions have been lacking in alacrity recently, the bit of me that doesn’t work at the beeb is rather dependant on the good fortune of the City so having to put quite a bit of effort into finding work, so less time to post here. This will continue to be the case for a while I fear.)
I’m not so sure about the save NuLab stuff either (obviously), putting party politics aside, Notting Hill Dave and Islington Boris are media liberals and really very like a lot of the BBC. Most importantly they are v charismatic, not at all dull, and try to answer the question, so are good to film and make easier bedfellows than you might imagine. If you subscribe to the “BBC is biased to the Establishment” argument then this makes perfect sense.
Anyway, before I put my foot in it any further, must get pimping!
TPO | 15.05.08 – 7:45 pm | #
Likewise TPO
TPO | 15.05.08 – 7:45 pm
You think of Sarah Jane as the acceptable farce of the BBC?
“That makes sense peter but if the Beeboids want Brown out to save nulabour then why is the BBC news website doing it’s utmost to support and protect him.”
You have to understand Labour’s traditional loyalty to the leader,look a foot and Kinnock.Also they don’t seem to have a mechanism for removing a leader as the Tories do.But,there are factions within the Labour Party,it is obvious some are briefing against Brown.There are probably factions within the BBC.Getting rid of a leader without pulling down the party is a tricky affair,it will all unfold in the fullness of time.
One thing you can be sure of,the BBC won’t be batting for the Conservatives.
And who does Brown think he is: Canute?
Nearly a perfect anagram.
Bryan – dont give up the day job 🙂