A selection of BBC News website readers have been telling us what they thought of his speech, says the Beeb’s vox pop on Gordon’s speech. “Selection” is the right word. There’s Denise Curtis, who thought the speech “fantastic”; Pat Morris, “born and bred Labour” (and her verdict is the most critical); Garry McNulty, who has voted Tory only once in his life – so the typical floating voter, then; and Catherine Couston, a teacher from Glasgow – oh, and she’s “worried that the Conservatives might get in”. The verdict? All but one supportive. Here, on the other hand, is what BBC New website readers have really been telling them. Spot the difference.
Just four regular voters…
Bookmark the permalink.
BBC Radio 5. Spinning the lie that Ruth Kelly has resigned to spend more time with her family.
No mention of the fact she’s fed up (we all are luv) with the fat one eyed jock.
Oh and the BBC is coming over all sympathetic about Kelly, yet for Sarah Palin all we got was sneering of “have my tits fallen out of my dress again” Emily Maitlis over Palin not being able to look after her family.
Yup – I’ve just been counting ’em.
You have to plow through around 90 odd “Crap speech -just go now!” posts before you reach the first one that supports the official NULAB/beeboid “Gordon’s greatest triumph” line.
Enjoy while you can folks – can’t be long before HYS goes the same way as “Pollwatch”.
Your BBC – Always first with the Tractor Production figures
Firstly, the comments from the third person indicate that whilst he appreciated the speech, he still isn’t sure on Labour – surely this counts as a negative for a 50/50 split?
Secondly, a sample of 4 can never be representative of the current attitudes towards Labour.
Thirdly, HYS is most definitely not a representative sample given it’s bias towards people that are unhappy with everything. Nobody is at fault, it’s just turned out that most of the people that post there will complain about anything and this has led to a particular culture on the boards.
Any idea when Ruth Kelly suddenly realised she had four children? Spinning is right…
Anon: a sample of 4 can never be representative of the current attitudes towards Labour.
Perhaps not, but a good start would be to find at least one conservative supporter. So far the only people the Beeb seems able to get (witness also the recent Newsnight focus group and other case studies) are traditional Labour supporters, some of whom might vote Lib Dem.
Given Gordon’s appalling personal approval ratings in every recent poll the Have your Say is infinitely more representative.
The interesting thing for me about this conference is sheer level of misunderstanding by Labour and the BBC of how the country is feeling about the current government.
Yes there is some negativity about the government’s performance on the BBC but it is only being put into the context of the global capital crisis, which of course is the USA’s fault, or the leadership challenge, which is just coming from a few minor blairites.
Talking to some Labour voters recently (soon to be ex), there was real disgust and anger over how this country has been run into the ground, and some of this disgust has moved onto the BBC as it continues to present a false narrative that is just not recognised by voters.
If the Conservatives do want to reform the BBC, and I know quite a few do :), then the BBC are opening the door for them. A rule in politics is never to believe that the voters are wrong when they are telling you that you have got it wrong, the same applies in business; the BBC are going to find out it applies to them soon.
Thirdly, HYS is most definitely not a representative sample given it’s bias towards people that are unhappy with everything. Nobody is at fault, it’s just turned out that most of the people that post there will complain about anything and this has led to a particular culture on the boards.
Anonymous | 24.09.08 – 9:42 am |
Care to share with us how you know what motivates HYS posters?
Are you God?
– or just a distressed beeboid with Godlike aspirations.
Your BBC – firmly in touch with at least 10% of our audience
The BBC article doesn’t say that the samples are Labour supporters or left leaning.
You just know that next week, for Cameron’s speech the BBC will give us liberals to comment on the speech.
“most of the people that post there will complain about anything and this has led to a particular culture on the boards.”
Hey give HYS contributors some credit, at least they’re consistent. Labour, the Tories, the Lib Dems, Bush, Obama, McCain, environmentalists, climate change sceptics, Israel, Palestinians, the young, the old, the sick, the unemployed, bankers… every single damn one of them is an utterly incompetent tosser. In fact they’d probably hang themselves if the rope and trapdoor weren’t guaranteed to break due to todays appalling British manufacturing standards…
One reason Labour isn’t going to win in Glenrothes is that no-one wants to go and canvass for them because it’s too dangerous. I’m told there have been incidents of Labour campaigners getting abused and even assaulted when they knock on doors in what should be Labour areas.
Beeb hasn’t quite got to that story yet.
this has led to a particular culture on the boards.
Anonymous | 24.09.08 – 9:42 am | #
Well yes, that’s right. And it’s a culture which reflects the views and opinions which people are expressing in everyday life. You’d need to be living in a bubble not to realize this.
When I read the HYS comments, its usually just what ordinary people are talking about in the pub, in the canteen, at the bus stop.
Immigration, rising prices, traffic jams.
The one exception is when they have their weekly chance to bash the USA -when all the fruitcakes seem to pile in with their leftist tosh.
I have never heard anyone discuss Iraq or GW Bush in the canteen or at the bus stop or in the pub. Never.
Here is a summation of the same spin going on in the US media for Obama :
http://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2008/09/the_man_who_never_was.html
John Reith spins in his grave | Homepage | 24.09.08 – 10:22 am | #
Well said.
Is Anonymous saying that the four (yes four!) people cherry picked for the BBC News site are a true representation and those hundreds of people on HYS are not?! Pheeeeew!
Don’t talk bullshit Anonymous it fool nobody.
Just watched a bit on Fox News listing out the Biden gaffs. Endless comments including one where he threatened to rip a journalists throat out.
And this man could be a heartbeat away from being President?
Their constant disregard for the people who pay their wages disgusts and amazes me.
O/T slightly, but I’ve just finished reading Inspector Gadget’s new book about the police, ‘Perverting The Course Of Justice’ (available HERE and on amazon etc though I actually got my copy from Waterstones) – a brilliant expose of the shameless political bullsh*t foisted upon them. I’ve just written to the publishers asking them to look here and think about doing the same thing re the BBC. It’s a bestseller in waiting in my opinion.
Strange how the HYS for the subject of the credit crisis, which is populated by anti-capitalist ranters is allowed to continue unabated, while the one for Gordon’s speech, which is populated by anti-labour ranters is suddenly classed as ‘Read Only’- i.e, no more contributions, after only a day
Jack Hughes
Spot on!
Carlos
Try http://www.coppersblog.blogspot.com/ which is a good site and includes links to Inspector Gadget and others.
If the Inspector Gadget book got you agitated borrow “A Land Fit For Criminals…” by David Weston from your Library. It will open your eyes to the biased tosh about the poor criminal we are endlessly fed by items on the BBC.
Also, strange how the HYS site for ‘ do sexist men earn more ?’received shed loads of comment about BBC sexist / feminist bias, so they shut that one down after only two days. Obviously the comment didn’t fit their agenda. Has anybody got a definitive answer from the BBC as to when a subject becomes ‘read only’ ?
somethiing similar an 10pm news last night.
“I have never heard anyone discuss Iraq or GW Bush in the canteen or at the bus stop or in the pub. Never.”
Please tell me you’re having a laugh???!!!!
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/7633536.stm
Has Harperson really just said Cameron is some sort of date-raping man-whore?
Oh, and the reason I mention is is because the ‘something not quite right’ quote is currently flashing across the BBC’s news page.
I know it’s the Labour conference. But is this really necessary?
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/default.stm
Every single story linked about any particular party or politicians (over 90% of them) are about Labour and Labour politicians. Not a single thing about anyone else. It’s like no other party exists…
David | 24.09.08 – 2:22 pm |
I thought she was talking about Bill Clinton. This reminds me of Ann Widdecombe’s infamous “There’s something of the night about him”. The BBC happily played that up, and then gave her plenty of air time to tell everyone that she was innocent and Michael Howard really did something nasty back when she was prisons minister.
I seem to recall that this gave others the opportunity to pile on as well.
Tom FD | 24.09.08 – 3:40 pm |
Don’t worry, in a few days time they will have a guilt trip and will restore the balance by ensuring that there are plenty of Labour stories placed on the site to balance out the stories from the Tory conference.
I expect they will also ensure that there are plenty of Labour comments generously scattered within those Tory stories to counter any pro-Tory slant.
Just like they haven’t put any Tory balancing soundbites into all of those Labour stories currently on their site.
Unlike the BBC, today’s Wall Street Journal doesn’t think much of the socialist Brown. In fact, they offer the most concentrated thrust into the dead heart of Labour it has been my pleasure to read.
Check it out and note the Talking Points for future use.
SEPTEMBER 24, 2008
Britain’s Brown Bust
By RUPERT DARWALL
This week’s Labour conference was billed as Mr. Brown’s last chance to show his critics that he can turn around this view of him. Yet his keynote speech yesterday was filled with stale claims that Labour alone can solve Britain’s problems, with no new plans for doing so…CONT…
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB122220166509568319.html?mod=djemEditorialPage
Would you like the BBC to be more like Fox News?
Goebbels would have been very proud.
Fox News is far more balanced than the BBC. True, it features Right wing opinions. But it also features Left wing ones, too. The BBC almost exclusively features the latter.
You are simply suffering from the shock of seeing any Rightist views represented at all.
Would you like the BBC to be more like Fox News? But the BBC is exactly like Fox News, just from a left wing rather than a right wing perspective.
The BBC’s statutory obligation is to be UNBIASED not a propaganda outfit for readers of the Guardian.
whitewineliberal:
Would you like the BBC to be more like Fox News?
whitewineliberal | 24.09.08 – 4:44 pm | #
————————————————–
The BBC could be whatever the hell it likes, if we weren’t forced under duress to pay for the increasingly biased shit it churns out. I wouldn’t give a toss.
It could be left, right, fascist, Maoist, whatever it wanted. So I say liberate the BBC now from the tyranny of the telly tax, open up the possibilites for them…
That view has a logic. You object to the license fee per se; not because you perceive it doesn’t represent your political views. I think Fox News is a stain on the name of journalism, but free country and all that The Hannity Palin interview was quite staggering.
Interesting. Personally, I’d have said Newsnight or Today were more deserving of that title. Red stains, too.
I actually thought Brown’s speech was good but this morning was reminded that they are all accomplished lyers. Ruth kelly is resigning because she is not happy with government policy. We all know that Brown and kelly are lying when they say that it is because Kelly wants to spend more time with her family ( it was O.K. for kelly to neglect her children for the last 11 years , what has suddenly changed?). so they lie about this with out any shame , how can we trust Gordon Brown and his conference speech?
BBC coverage i’ve heard has wondered aloud whether policy differences (embryology in particular) is behind the decision. More time with family is a well know political euphemism, invented by the previous administration.
I actually get offended when any politician, of whichever party, says they are quitting to ‘spend more time with their children’.
It shows a blatant disdain for the majority of us who would have dearly loved to have spent more time with our own kids, but didn’t have the financial or social option to do that…
More like Fox News as in less biased, more like Fox News as in professionally made, or more like Fox News as in given the option whether we want to fund it or not? Never mind, yes to all three.
Dear BBC, try to be more like your superior, Fox News from now on. There’s a good girl. Thanks.
whitewineliberal:
That view has a logic. You object to the license fee per se; not because you perceive it doesn’t represent your political views. I think Fox News is a stain on the name of journalism,
You are clearly an ill-informed doofus. Sean Hannity’s weekday NEWS OPINION show is called Hannity & Colmes.
Colmes is a loony leftist idiot, and they each get equal time to question each guest (who are equally left and conservative).
In big one off whole or half show interviews, Hannity sympathetically interviews conservative guests and Colmes ditto for leftists,
No. That’s not a “stain” on “journalism.” But the BBC News division is. But to be honest, alleged “journalism” has long since passed any staining given its Institutionally Leftist corruption in the UK and the US.
Dear BBC, try to be more like your superior, Fox News from now on. There’s a good girl. Thanks.
Gibby Haynes | 24.09.08 – 5:51 pm | #
And that goes for Sky too. Fox has the format down with huge variety, diverse opinions, interesting fast paced opinion shows.
Sky and Sky Sports News are formatted around the laziest, cheapest shows they can put on. At least 20 years out of date.
Tune in at 9, 10, 11 et al day, and see the same “news” reported almost by the minute. The only thing that changes are the announcers. It’s AWFUL.
Unless some disaster happens. Like watching paint dry.
I know all about Colmes. A patsy. Al Franken writes very amusingly about the coupling. Who balances out Loofer O Reilly?
yes please.
Two points
most of this week the BBC politics web page has only had one reference to David Cameron – something like ‘Camerons helmet in posh car boot sale’ the relevant word being “Posh”. Pure Labour image management served up by their bolshevik friends at the BBC.
Point two – incredibly I have just heard an item on views-24 discussing Labour in the opinion polls. This is the same organisation that only discusses polls where there is a ‘relevant story’ – where the Tories gaining 52% support as of Sunday was NOT a story – but the Brown eagerly anticipated ‘Brown conference bounce’ IS a story. Yougov were grilled to the effect ‘how big is the Brown bounce’ in the polls – where the poll isn’t yet published (appears in the Sun tomorrow). This was added to a pile of oleaginous praise on the great leader.
Can the BBC trolls explain to me, given the demise of pollwatch, how an anticipated upswing (temporary) becomes a real story and polls are now back on the agenda.
OT – unrelated to BBC bias (other than they transmitted it)
why has no one pointed out that the entire Brown performance was scripted, including the cringe worthy kissing of his wife, and heavily rehearsed – having been written by a team of spin doctors paid for out of my tax money.
BBC – keep Labour in at all costs
Who balances out Loofer O Reilly?
whitewineliberal | 24.09.08 – 6:13 pm | #
Greta van Susteren. Left/Democrat
Geraldo. Left/Democrat
Shep Smith. Very Democrat. And he heads FNC’s prime NEWS hours where he lets his leftist opinions bleed into his commentary.
Chris Wallace. Liberal/Democrat.
I assume you are working under the misapprehension that O’Reilly is a “conservative.” He ain’t.
Want any more? I can go through all Fox News opinion contributors and name at least as many leftists than conservatives.
Whether or not there is a bounce is newsworthy. If there is, interesting. If there isn’t, very interesting. Another poll, pre the speech, showing a large tory lead is news of the dog bites man variety.
whitewineliberal:
Any objections to Al-Jazerra? Or just Fox?
US Treasury Secretary Hank Paulson rejected Gordon Brown meeting
Hank Paulson, the US Treasury Secretary, is understood to have rejected a request for a meeting with Gordon Brown, delivering a snub to the Prime Minister during his visit to America.
George Osborne, the shadow Chancellor, expressed surprise over the apparent snub. “I cannot believe that after telling us yesterday that he’s the man to sort out the international crisis, Gordon Brown is flying all the way to the US and not meeting the man at the centre of resolving that crisis,” he said.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/newstopics/politics/labour/3074014/US-Treasury-Secretary-Hank-Paulson-rejected-Gordon-Brown-meeting.html
Well of course the BBC aren’t reporting this.
Give them a couple of days and the BBC/Labour headline will be Prime Minister snubs Hank Paulson. He’s too busy getting on with the job.
whitewineliberal | 24.09.08 – 6:29 pm | getting on with the job
White wine liberal
Why is a brown bounce, however marginal, interesting? My concern is that polls are explicitly used by political parties as political tools. BBC Partiality in reporting them is clear evidence of political bias. Personally I would love to hear lots of detailed analysis of why the Tories are now at 52% with a fair dose of excoriation of the Labour party. Obviously this will never happen primarily because the editorial policy that this is no longer news, although massive Labour poll leads were quite news worthy at the time.
Is it me or does the BBC use the word “Tory” in a scornfull way, only occasionally using “conservative”?
David “Boy Gollum” Miliband showing he has what it takes to be Labour leaderMine’s this big,follow that Harman
whitewineliberal “I think Fox News is a stain on the name of journalism”
Ok, imagine you lived in a country where the people who make Fox also had control of 2 of the 5 terrestrial channels, several other PPV/Freeview channels, half of the available radio stations and a massive chunk of the internet news and entertainment media too.
Imagine also, if you will, that all those outlets spewed out the same ‘stain’ like opinions as Fox does (in your opinion). I think this would doubtless disturb you no?
How about if we add in the awful thought that even if the shows they foisted upon you became unpopular and not commercially viable that they still continued anyway due to an endless supply of cash. Scary?
Finally, in this imaginary world I present, living with your loathing of its output, fear of what it might be doing to young minds, disgust at its bias, one thing angers you most of all. You have to pay Fox £140 a year to be entitled to watch tv! Fail to pay and a prison sentance awaits!
This is my reality. My ‘Fox’ is the BBC. Not so nice huh?