Anyone catch John Humphyrs “interview” with Andrew Lansley this morning on Today? Here it is if you didn’t. The sneering patronising and hectoring tone is what we can now expect each time a member of the new Government is interviewed. The Labour attack dogs are located in Broadcasting House. Any idea of balanced neutrality is shot to pieces – the bit at the very end in particular is worth a listen.
ATTACK, ATTACK, ATTACK…..
Bookmark the permalink.
I don’t listen to the Today protramme any more, it makes me so angry, i can’t stand it !
“We are still in debt up to our eyeballs” Do you even remember John Humphrys starting an interview with any Labour minister like that?
Er no!
Listening to Lansley this morning – and granted that Humphrys was at his sneering, hectoring best – how depressing it was to hear the same old, same old crapola unloaded into the public domain. What Humphrys didn’t explore was that Lansley (and his predecessors of the past 13 years, indeed his predecessors back to 1946) are creating an economy which will end up consisting solely of the NHS and a private sector whose wealth generation will go to support the NHS (plus all the other beneficiaries of Labour’s client state). I know that all the political parties ring-fenced the NHS so that its funding would be maintained/increased in real terms but there’s no quid pro quo except Lansley’s limp assertion about “efficiency savings” (reminiscent of our last PM before the present one) to be made – tomorrow, of course, never today.
Anyway, Lansley’s now in office – he doesn’t have to take the crap thrown at him by Humphrys. He could have resisted Humphrys attack or, horrors, thrown a few missiles back.
Anyone remember John Humphrys remembering that there are different levels of inflation in different departments? Strange how he has just worked it out now there is a Conservative government.
Just listened to the start of the interview when Humphhrys states that the problems haven’t gone away but may be more difficult to solve as there are two parties sitting at the table.
Now, I wonder if he would have said the same about a Lab/Lib coalition.
He and the BBC make me vomit. They really are worse than vermin.
Do you remember John Humphrys ever criticising a Labour Minister for being ‘obsessed with hospitals’? Quite a vile interview by a clearly biased interviewer.
Notasheep
Great point. That was so obvious – two sorts of inflation apparently, one for the State and one for the rest.
How about the uncritical aclaim for the new left/labour buzzword, ‘Progressive Parties’ . Listen to labour mongs compete to see who can get the most Progressives into an (uninterupted, natch !) sentence, whilst the beeboid interviewer simpers quietly on the sidelines !
just like some of the rest of you – I have stopped looking at BBC TV & stopped listening to their Radio news programmes. I find ITVand Sky better at News.
Whilst my heart says Boulton should have “decked” Campbell, my head says that I am grateful that at least he stood up him. Everyone needs to!
New Labour have attempted to manipulate the news media for far far too long.
I pray that it shows in their audience figures (not just one less in Enfield).
I’m starting to think that Michael Gove should be the governments official spokesman for the BBC. He seems to neturalise them, or at least expose their partisanship with great aplomb.
If they’re angry now just wait until the government refines terms of FoI to ensure that the BBC can’t hide behind the a ridiculous high court ruling that prevents license payers from knowing how their money is spent.
Then they will be exposed well and truly.
Gove actually has been very good over the election. Gone up in my estimation as has Hague.
Still not convinced about George Orborne though.
I see Sarah Tether is now a Minister!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Huw Edwards yesterday cut to a Professor of Economics at a US university to ask him what his thoughts were on the Lib-Con immediate cuts (read – slowdowns in the rate of increase) as opposed to Captain Insensible’s ‘sometime in the future’ cuts.
Edwards knew the answer he would receive – that cutting now is an awful policy – before he asked the question; as we all did. Otherwise he would have asked the question of someone else who would give the right – ie BBC/Nulabour approved – answer.
Usual BBC ‘analysis’.
The speed-dialled Professor was David Blanchflower who spent a nearly three years on the Bank of England’s Monetary Policy Committee finishing in May 2009… during which time, astute observers will have noticed, our country’s banking system imploded.
And we should listen to him because…?
It was an extremely hostile interview, yes, with plenty of gratuitous sarcastic remarks from Humphrys. But Lansley was awful.
Notice that the BBC are going totally negative on the new Government. Every comment is about the differences between the two parties. No shit it’s Lib Dems and Tories. But the Liebour party was hardly united was it?
Notice as well that the BBC interviews some Aussie bar worker as their ‘sample’ of non EU immigrants.
Hmm, why didn’t the BBC pick on some Muslim take away worker from Pakistan? normally the BBC gives us the Moozlum angle on everything.
David P.
Yes, Lansley is grim and he could have shot back at the hectoring leftist Humphrys.
He could also have given an honest answer to the question about closing hospitals rather than dodging it and spouting platitudes about change and choice. That doesn’t excuse the biased sarcasm and open recommendation of policy from Humphrys, though.
Sometimes I feel really bad about myself for not realising what a perfect world we would live in if it was run by John Humphrys. Sometimes I feel really bad I dont have the regard for him he has for himself. How on earth does his ego fit into the studio?
Quite, he is an utterly vile creature.
A rotten choice, but:
“Hundreds of BBC viewers left furious after EastEnders is dropped for Gordon Brown’s resignation speech”
Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/tvshowbiz/article-1278180/Hundreds-BBC-viewers-left-furious-EastEnders-dropped-Gordon-Browns-resignation-speech.html?ITO=1490#ixzz0nqSZ1lJx
Yes quite right, Humphrys was appalling. He was simply trying to interrupt the flow of argument rather than genuinely find out information.
John Humphrys clearly has not realised the change in atmosphere in the country where everyone is trying to pull together. This old Labour warhorse seems very old fashioned now.
I would like to ask this arrogant, self-important man some questions.
1. What entitles you to do this very powerful job?
2. You talk very arrogantly to elected people, who elected you Humphreys?
3. If you were just appointed, who appointed you?
4. Who gave you a Divine Right to control the airwaves like this?
5. Why cannot we the listeners have a say or even a vote on who does your job?
6. Why cannot we the listeners have a say or even a vote on who does the appointing?
Spot on !
The BBC is in full-on petulent teenager mode. They didn’t get what they wanted at the election so they are sulking. They hate the Lib/Con government simply because it has put their beloved labour party out of power. Some bbc bint stated yesterday with a hearty laugh that labour is referring to the lib/con arangement as the CONDEM alliance.
The BBC bias has got even worse since labour lost. It will continue to do so unless iDave gets a grip and sorts them out, but I for one doubt he has the balls.
Did anyone catch the BBC Business News on Wednesday morning at about 6.45 a.m.? Cen’t remember his name (sorry!) but the guest speaker said that El Gordo was entirely responsible for this countried financial woes – giving me the distinct impression that like me he thought GB had been the worst Chancellor ever – and the two girly presenters gasped at this heresy and quickly changed the subject. As if most intelligent people don’t think that. They can dish it out but they sure can’t take it.
Two observations:
(1) Humpty again demonstrate he lacks any class as an interviewer of politicians;
(2) The politician should have given Humpty straight forward answers to each question, even if it was a yes followed by a pause waiting for the next question.
Why do politicians always try to fill the “gaps” like used car salesmen? Keep it simple and make the journo work hard. Too often a politican answers in a manner that comes across as avoiding the question.