The Beeb’s editor of political news, Steve Mawhinney, has posted on the Editor’s Blog to defend the coverage of Osborne. There has, as he puts it, been a particular accusation from some complainants [read “almost all”] that we did too much on the allegations against George Osborne and not enough on those against Lord Mandelson.
You won’t be surprised by what follows, which sticks closely to the Editors Blog template: “There have been some suggestions that the BBC [insert criticism or straw man here]. I disagree because [insert excuse here (optional)].”
What is remarkable, though, is how weak this excuse is, resting as it does on two entirely false propositions: First, that there was a specific allegation of wrongdoing – indeed possible law-breaking against Osborne. That’s not true. It was pretty clear from the get go that whatever his other failings, Osborne had not broken the law.
Also, as Casisus notes, he seems to invent an entirely new allegation – that Osborne talked about ways to secretly channel that donation to the party. At their worst the allegations never suggested this. It seems extraordinary that the Beeb’s political editor defends the corporation against accusations of over-egging the Osborne story by going further than any in doing the same thing himself. Needless to say, from the comments it doesn’t look like he’s winning many people over.
That really is disingenuous rubbish from Mawhinney. The BBC should have been investigating Mandelson’s dealings, not simply taking the creature’s word that he was acting honourably.
Mandleson has previous, after all!
Then there is the second recent scandal the Corporation has been trying to brush under the carpet – the Ecclestone affair.
Still, the fact that the lady doth protest so soon and so loudly suggests she knows she’s been rumbled!
Yes Mawhinneys response is slippery and utterly uncompelling though he does appear to have the decency to allow critical comments through, unlike his smug cohort Justin Webb.
Having said that I’m waiting to see if he’ll let mine through…
I know it should go in ‘general’, but it’s sort of related:
Gordon Brown ‘has been told Labour will win Glenrothes byelection’
http://www.guardian.co.uk/politics/blog/2008/oct/23/glenrothes-gordonbrown
Actually, from the site itself,
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/scotland/edinburgh_and_east/7670670.stm
..I find it even more intriguing as to the mindsest at play:
The BBC has learned that Gordon Brown has been told..
Now, one can only imagine the degree of journalistic expertise and editorial skill that went into coming up with that one.
Sorry if this is deemed anti-Labour as I merely share it as an example of what my national broadcast news network cranks out, but most of the arguments I have seen so far on this tack have amounted to jack… shilling for the indefensible.
“Still, the fact that the lady doth protest so soon and so loudly suggests she knows she’s been rumbled!”
That’s no lady,that’s the BBC.
Amazing Nat Rothchild writes a letter to a newspaper alleging Osborne solicited a rather trivial £50,000 from a billionaire and the BBC acts as if it were a serious as Mandelson’s iffy mortgage.
Odd that Rothchild is an advisor to the billionaire Deripaska who,in turn,had dealing with Mandelson concerning the importation of aluminium to the EU.
Mawhinney – when in a hole stop digging etc.
Anyone reading the details of whole grubby affair might arrive at the perfectly obvious conclusion that it was a classic mandelson entrapment operation into which the gullible Osbourne walked into!
Ooh, apart from the BBC that is,the BBC heard nothing,saw nothing,said nothing,did nothing untill a Tory could be fingered at which point the BBC suddenly woke up and attacked along with all the other MSM toadies!
One phonecall from the NuLab bunker to the intrepid BBC agitprop dept and it was a full on no expense spared hold the front page search’N’destroy mission for the BBC spetznaz!
It’s amazing, isn’t it ? Just when you think the BBC can’t sink to new depths , they prove you wrong.
There is no reason why anybody should believe a single word they say about anything.
But, there are encouraging signs that some people normally sympathetic to the BBC are beginning to see the light, but the BBC just don’t seem to care. In some ways it just seems to make them more reckless.
It is impossible to predict what will happen next. On a day-to-day basis , it is like watching the stock markets in the last few weeks, without the opportunity of buying at a low and making some money.
Peter:
Well spotted.
“However, The BBC has learned that Gordon Brown has been told that Labour will win the Glenrothes by-election.”
Translation: Gordon’s people told me to tell you, the BBC, so you can tell the listeners/viewers…
So what do we gleam from the next paragraph: “The BBC understands that campaign strategists – who just three weeks ago were warning the prime minister that Labour would lose — have now told him that the tide has turned in the constituency, partly the result of Mr Brown’s handling of the banking crisis.”
This is more ‘word in your ear’ propaganda, more Labour spin (“the tide has turned”) which goes UNCHALLENGED? And if it is true, it deserves some figures to back up the assertion independently researched by the BBC.
Was Mawhinney the one who tried to instruct BBC political journos to go soft and pull their punches on criticism of McBean?
At 15:48 today this story appeared on the BBC website – “Huhne donor probe call rejected”.
I learnt from Sky News LAST NIGHT that the elctoral commission had ruled that Osborne had committed no offense. Why did it take our National Broadcaster a further day to acknowledge this fact?
Moreover, the choice of headline is odd. Why not – “Osborne cleared” or “Osborne donor probe rejected”. A suspicious mind might suggest that the BBC is trying to bury the story i.e. put up a headline that doesn’t immdiately equate with the Osborne story.
And to rub salt into the wound – by 17:30 the story has slipped off the front page of the BBC Politics web-site and was relegated to the side-bar.
So having thought the inital allegation worthy of 2 1/2 days of full coverage on-line, on TV and radio, the BBC drops Osborne being cleared after just 2hrs. Classic!!
Interesting that the comments on the McWhiney piece are pretty much all along the lines of – “Bollocks”
Arthur – Have you read the comments on Nick Robinson’s blog? The Man from Auntie isn’t doing so well there either 🙂
The beeb better carry the Osborne cleared story on the news tonight…
Are you kidding? the lib dems have got involved now –BBC says “let’s wring the last drop out of this one” —of course lying about national knife crime statistics takes second place
The Nick Robinson blog made my skin crawl.
The fact that two self justifications have been published show that somewhere in the bloated socialist hive-mind that is the BBC recognition that they have really fuc*ed up is gradually dawning.
Not only are they smug, culpable but stupid. Even useful fools resent being ‘used’ when they find out and boy, has Lord Mandy used them.
I would love to see some heads roll, but of course that will never happen.
Just as a matter for discussion – do the BBC understand proportionality? If they cannot tell blatant petty political mischief making from say a million pound transaction that resulted in a direct policy change then they deserve to be treated as contemptible fools
The B-BBC “community” – if we are allowed such an appellation should consider a campaign of Freedom of Information requests targeted at finding out, in forensic detail, the sources of this story including details of who tipped off whom and when and the number, content and detail of the complaints that the BBC has received.
why don’t we get a petition together to get rid of the BBC —or a least demand it is available as subscription only? Surely there are enough people pig sick of their pinko brainwashing? With digital stations it would be easy to block people who don’t want it as per Sky Setanta etc
Seems like a plan to me.Perhaps EU might be interseted in BBC and unfair competition laws??
Its all too much,
I read Robinsons blog and the weak excuses had me spilling my coffee over the keyboard!
Does he think that anyone will believe him?
Deluded beyond reason or finally shocked into the realisation that the anti Tory feeding frenzy went too far and the further realisation that repercussions may follow?
Robinson doesnt take orders from the Tories eh? He had no such qualms taking orders from Labour did he?
I suppose McMental could walk into a crippled orphans home and shoot everyone in sight and the BBC would see no story UNLESS a Tory once handled the same gun years before!
Nick Robinson was a Young Conservative. He has to prove he’s not a “Tory” because at the BBC, those are quite simply not worthy of wiping your nose on – well Thatcher stole the childrens’ milk didn’t she? You only have to dip into Robin Aitken’s book about his 25 years at the Beeb to understand quite how utterly destructive Tory tendencies can be to a BBC employee.
Peston’s father is a Labour Peer. I don’t think the same obligation to prove he’s not a Labourite was forced with quite the same level of urgency.
To say the least…
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/7687240.stm
BBC down adding Osborne to every single political story they can. I don’t remember the recession being shoved into every story about Labour…
No mention of Osborne on the News at Six just now. Haven’t watched it for some time, but was amazed at the lack of professionalism and sheer infantile level it was aimed at.
And the big crime lie got top billing with Jackie Smith lying through her teeth and not challenged by George Alagiah.
Basically, crap.
Steve Mawhinney is STILL spinning against Osborne — even on his so-called “explanation” on his blog. They just can’t help it can they?
He says the accusation was that Osborne tried to get a donation “secretly channelled” to the Tory party. In Rothschilds letter to The Times there was no mention of “secrecy” at all. Donations to political parties from UK based companies are perfectly legal, even if those companies are foreign owned – there would have been no need for any secrecy. But of course the use of the word “secrecy” makes the whole thing sound much more sordid and underhand — something the BBC is obviously still keen to do. A little smear here, a little innuendo there…
No mention of Osborne on the News at Six just now.
No there wouldn’t be. There’s real news to report for a change: the Electoral Commission have said Osborne has no case to answer and consequently there’ll be no investigation.
But that doesn’t fit the BBC narrative.
Grant: Yes Jacqui Smith was allowed to explain away the crime figures as a statistical blip on the BBC — a claim that went unchallenged. ITV news to the trouble to examine the figures in detail and revealed that there had been a very real increase, irrespective of any change in recording procedures. They put the Home Secretary on the spot and made her look very uncomfortable. In stark contrast to the BBC.
The BBC bias just get worse and worse — I never thought I’d see the day when you had to watch ITV news to get some decent journalism.
Tom, it’s plain that the BBC doesn’t do corrections. They spent a couple of days smearing Osborne and even though it is now plain he has done nothing wrong they can’t be bothered to tell the public. Just as when they spent the weekend promoting the Phil Woolas “clamp down on immigration” and then didn’t bother to report his massive U-turn on Monday when it became clear that it was all spin and lies and no new measures were proposed.
Bogus bad news stories about Conservatives — no correction issued.
Bogus good news stories about Labour — no correction issued.
The BBC should be looking at Mandelson on another yacht (Paul Allen’s of Microsoft) in 2005 when MS were appealing a massive multi million euro fine. So why does the man in charge of trade then go onto Allen’s yacht? Hmm….
Reporting Scotland added the Osborne tale to their report on the Glenrothes by election tonight at 1830! What the heck it had to do with Glenrothes – even the SNP MSP they interviewed said people don’t CARE about Osborne – they are more woried about their gas bills! BBC – getting really stupid and desperate! Wait for Question Time to push this silly non story yet again tonight!
That fact is Nu Liebour are the ones who’ve been caught out taking bungs. The Bernie Ecclestone bung was proven that Liebour and Bliar lied. We also know the fat one eyed one MUST have known about it as he’d have known about every penny that was donated to Liebour.
We need a full investigation alright, but into Nu Liebour and the Bernie bung.
Can we expect Newnight or Panorama to offer us one?
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/933676.stm
In the Daily Mail’s extracts from Andrew Rawnsley’s book ‘Servants of the People’ that final quote is rendered as “I have not been told and I certainly do not know what the truth is.”
Admission and denial
On Tuesday, a spokesman for Mr Brown confirmed that the chancellor had in fact been told something about the donation by the prime minister two days before the interview, while they were returning from an Anglo-French summit.
dave t 7:21
Well the first question on Question Time tonight has to be about the crime figures, doesn’t it ?
bodo 7:01
Yes, the contrast between BBC News at 6 and Channel 4 in the treatment of the big crime lie was amazing.
Grant, that or the recession. So it will, of course, be about Osborne. It will also be asked in a ‘coded’ fashion by the audience – is it right for leading politicians to solicit donations from illegal donors (without names being mentioned) – and it will be directed to Roy Fattersley first of all.
http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/david_hughes/blog/2008/10/23/the_bbc_defends_its_hounding_of_george_osborne
David: Followed of course by a big cheer from the ‘carefully selected’ studio audience.
G Cooper
Still, the fact that the lady doth protest so soon and so loudly suggests she knows she’s been rumbled!
Yes my dear, exactly the case.
It seems you are really starting to understand how the BBC works. Now all you have to do is work out the real reason WHY, and who EXACTLY pulls the long strings at the BBC.
Here is a clue. It is most very likely the last person you think it is. When you do eventually work it out, then you have to understand that just when you think you have reached the very top of the pyramid, there is usually one more level to go at least.
Here is another clue.
There has never been a ruler president prime minister or king ever placed in a position of power that stayed there for long if the ‘priesthood’ did not want him to.
The king maker is the the one who is controlled by the priesthood. So work out who EXACTLY the priesthood are and you are almost there.
Another clue, just in case you still ant got the brains you where born with.
It is not The ABofC, but you are getting warmer, or should I say, much
closer to the FIRE?
Got it yet?
No I didn’t think so. Still thats no reason to stop trying. So here is one more bit of advice.
Get a BOOK on the subject and read it.
I haven’t been following the entire Osborne saga on here – so I’m not sure if the backgound of the PR professionals involved has been discussed.
Apparently Rothschild is represented by Roland Rudd and Deripaska by Tim Allen.
… Rudd also has longstanding links with the New Labour hierarchy and counts Peter Mandelson and Tessa Jowell among his close friends…
..Representing the Russian tycoon Oleg Deripaska is Tim Allan, a former New Labour spin doctor ..
http://www.guardian.co.uk/politics/2008/oct/23/osborne-rothschild-mandelson-corfu
Rudd pops up all over the place as “very close” to NULAB – especially Mandelson.
Roland Rudd… has been cosying up to “new” Labour for many years…Finsbury previously hired the former private secretary of the Dear Leader¹s close pal, the Lord Chancellor Lord Falconer. Such contacts and support for Labour events at conference time perhaps helped merit the 2002 contract to advise then Transport Secretary Stephen “Liar” Byers over the Railtrack collapse.
So look out for the pay-off… Finsbury was 75% owned by Roland Rudd….. He is a friend of Peter Mandelson, spending time during the 2001 election campaign to help him at his Hartlepool constituency.
http://www.nuclearspin.org/index.php/Finsbury#New_Labour_links
And oerhaps even more interesting, Rudd is a real good old buddy of one Robert Peston.
…How Peston landed that scoop remains a mystery but he is a close friend of PR powerhouse Roland Rudd, whose firm, Finsbury, manages the PR for Northern Rock. Their friendship dates back to their time as reporters on the FT in the early 1990s…
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/media/tv-radio/peston-finds-his-voice-and-now-the-citys-ears-are-burning-958351.html
So, joining the dots, a classical NULAB spin production from beginning to end – including the BBC in-house team.
(Apologies if this has ben covered already)
Your BBC – Machiavelli was an amateur compared to us
BBC 10 News – Mark Easton stating that serious violent crime has fallen, yet on ITV at 6.30 the interviewer forced Jacqui Smith to admit that it had gone up, and that it was a real rise, despite her initial claim it was all just because recording methods had changed.
Easton is at it on his BBC blog too – and not for the first time.
Every Beeb correspondent is spinning for Labour these days.
LITTLEJOHN:
“The cast list of The Corfu Connection reads like something out of an Agatha Christie novel”
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1080087/The-cast-list-The-Corfu-Connection-reads-like-Agatha-Christie-novel.html
Atlas Shrugged writes: “Get a BOOK on the subject and read it.”
Sorry, Mr Shrugged, I find David Icke a bit hard to take.
Excellent investigative journalism from ‘John Reith Is etc’!
What a shame the BBC can’t afford someone like him.