Monthly Archives: March 2010

ONE FOOT IN THE GRAVE

By | |
12 Comments

I’m just hoping that the BBC will afford Lady Thatcher the same warmth of tribute as that afforded to Michael Foot, who, as you know, has passed away aged 96. Today has been running a series of tributes to him this morning and whilst I fully understand that it is civilised to not speak ill of the dead, I look forward to the same standard being applied to the former Conservative leader when that sad moment arrives. That would be fair, wouldn’t it?

Click through to read and contribute comments on this post.

Question Time 4th March 2010

By | | ,
7 Comments
Question Time this week comes from London; soon to be the first city in the world to host the Summer Olympics three times. So don’t expect any questions on how much money that will lose.

The panel is Mayor of London Boris Johnson, the improbably named Lord Adonis, BBC favourite Shirley Williams, AllSeeingEye’s childhood fantasy Carol Vorderman and the mind-numbingly smug Will Self.

For those who wish to take part in the Biased-BBC Buzzword Bingo, we will be playing by the “One Foot In The Grave Rules” meaning that anyone with “Hero“, “Principled” or “Idealism” on any line will win a guided tour of Broadcasting House by an impartial newsreader of your choice, and those with “Ashcroft” in any corner should play their Joker early. Players must be fully domiciled in the UK for tax purposes unless they support Labour.

TheEye will be joined again by the excellent David Mosque in the Moderators’ Box, and we look forward to the pleasure of your company at 10:30pm UK time.

Click through to read and contribute comments on this post.

Battle of the First Night Stand-Ups

By | |
22 Comments

Richard Bacon (Radio Five Live, August 27, 2009) vs Sarah Palin (Tonight Show, March 2, 2010)

Varying levels of cringe arise from both first-time efforts (and, yes, some people in Palin’s Leno crowd seem overly keen to express their support, though no more so than your average please-reinforce-our-worldview Now Show audience) but I think she wins with the better gags and snappier delivery. The self-obsessed BBC presenter (and renowned Palin-hater) is simply dire. One-nil to the Barracuda?

Richard Bacon:

Sarah Palin:

Click through to read and contribute comments on this post.

Shhhh

By | |
15 Comments

I’ve been busy recently, but yesterday I started to write this:

*****

What with the election, the fuss about Lord Ashcroft, and the BBC falling apart, you’d think they would tell us about this.
The infiltration of the IFE into the British political system – I hear it’s not just Labour, — that’s news, isn’t it?
I mean it’s as significant and deeply troubling, if not more so, than this, wouldn’t you say?

*****

I didn’t post it then but having read this, I thought I’d better have another go.

Also, I was waiting for something to appear on the BBC, even a review of C4 Despatches, or some oblique mention, but so far nothing comes up when I search the BBC website. Please tell me if I’m wrong.

Even if I’m only a bit right, I am surprised and disappointed that the BBC has made little or nothing of this issue.
It may be that Andrew Gilligan is not the BBC’s favourite person, who knows, but the problem he lays before us is not something to be brushed under the carpet by our state broadcaster.
The BBC is in trouble at the moment I know, and its future is in flux.
But if, as they pledge, the quality of journalism is to be upgraded, how can they ignore something so central to the democratic political system we’re supposed to be so proud of?
Can things be so bad that they are afraid to tackle the subject?

In sharp contrast, they have chosen to promote, quite heavily, a long-awaited declaration by a Muslim leader that violence and terrorism are not quite the ticket. The obvious response would be ‘too little too late.’ It is a start, but the orchestrated political infiltration into the UK major political parties by an Islamist outfit is more pressing; a worrying trend that is beginning to look like another nail in Britain’s coffin.

Click through to read and contribute comments on this post.

Naughtie: Can I Plump Your Pillows, Lady Ashton?

By | |
10 Comments

Jim Naughtie to Baroness Ashton this morning:

You’re a hundred days into the new job now. I mean, this is the kind of long term work that you have to do. Do you feel at all drained by some of the arguments that have been erupting in Europe about the settlement after the Lisbon Treaty was ratified and the way the appointments were made and so on?

What touching concern for her “long term work” and the wearisome distractions she has had to endure, the poor never-elected thing.

Click through to read and contribute comments on this post.

BLACK AND PEW….

By | |
9 Comments

Behind the BBC’s warming fanaticism are a series of financially-driven motives. Richard Black, as readers of this site will know, is the BBC’s web environment correspondent. He – like many of his BBC colleagues – also makes a tidy income from chairing conferences. Back in 2008, for example, he was a lead facilitator at a Pew Symposium in Tokyo which considered the likely impact on whales of climate change (!), a role for which he is likely to have been paid several thousand pounds. The conference was funded and organised by the Pew Charitable Trusts, a US body which, like the BBC is an ardent believer in climate change. Their website leads its relevant section with this:

The world’s leading scientists agree that the planet is warming and that human activities—especially the burning of fossil fuels and the clearing of forests—are a big part of the cause.

Indeed, Pew is so focused on forcing the world to adopt carbon trading and the like that it has its own climate change centre.

Somebody else who works for Pew is a public relations consultant called Kate Moffat, whose employer is PR outfit Luther Pendragon, who say on their website that they specialise in the environment and also have on their books those with vested interests in the climate change scam. Ms Moffat handles the Pew Charitable Trusts account on behalf of Luther Pendragon, and in that role, she has just been appointed to the so-called independent committee that is looking into the leaked emails from the University of East Anglia. Bishop Hill notes today that the committee appears increasingly to be heading towards carefully-orchestrated conclusion through the guidance of Ms Moffat (and anbother PR sidekick).

So, Mr Black and Ms Moffat are both firmly within the paid orbit of Pew, one of the little-known but hugely influential bodies that pull the strings of the climate change debate. It shows yet again, in the world of climate science, the more you scatch the surface, the more there is evidence of strange linkages and vested interests at work; and that BBC employees are well and truly in bed with those shadowy forces.

Click through to read and contribute comments on this post.

More on that Now Show Green thing

By | | ,
30 Comments

As the John Hathorne character in the ongoing witch-hunt against the poor, voiceless, victimised comedians of The Now Show it would be remiss of me not to note (with ignorant sadistic crypto-fascist foam-flecked glee, naturally) that the Tory candidate for Brighton Pavilion is asking the BBC for a bit of clarification.

Update. Brigstocke: “we had to be very careful to ensure that The Green Party were not hosting or organising it”

Update 2. It’s getting weirder. In the comments to the original blog post Brighton-based musician Chris T-T (no, me neither) is demanding money for use of a photo freely available via Twitter. Happy to give him credit – but not money – for the photo. Mr T-T, who apparently played at the Green Party benefit gig on Saturday, is also a columnist for the Communist Party of Britain’s house rag The Morning Star.

Click through to read and contribute comments on this post.

Another Twitter Genius

By | | ,
28 Comments

One more from Twitter:

Piotr M. Kaczynski works for the Centre for European Policy Studies (CEPS), a think tank which claims “high standards of academic excellence” through “quality research”. Roughly a third of its funding comes from EU institutions and national governments, and one of its main research areas is climate change (it gave a number of presentations at Copenhagen).

And one of its leading “thinkers” believes that the earthquakes in Haiti and Chile were caused by climate change.

But remember, it’s the sceptics who need educating.

Update. Piotr responds in the comments – unconvincingly but (and please note) very politely.

Click through to read and contribute comments on this post.