So as not to clog up the Open Thread, the comments field below contains some figures on this week’s edition of Question Time from Birmingham, where Baroness Warsi (pictured, for Bupendra!) faced a jeering David Dimbleby – oh, and a jeering audience too.
Here are the basic figures for the programme this week:
Number of questions/points put by DD to each guest above and beyond the question from the audience (not counting such invitations to speak as “Charles Clarke?” or “Max Mosley?” (as a general rule, the more extra questions put the tougher the ride for the guest):
Baroness Warsi – 13
Charles Clarke – 9
Susan Kramer – 7
Max Mosley – 6
Rageh Omaar – 5
Number of interruptions made against each guest by DD:
Baroness Warsi – 13
Charles Clarke – 5
Susan Kramer – 4
Rageh Omaar – 4
Max Mosley – 1
Length of time each guest got in the spotlight (all the time they were speaking & all the time DD was putting a question to them):
Baroness Warsi – 11 minutes 50 seconds
Charles Clarke – 11 minutes 44 seconds
Rageh Omaar – 7 minutes 56 seconds
Susan Kramer – 7 minutes 55 seconds
Max Mosley – 5 minutes 26 seconds
Interruption Coefficients (the number of interruptions/the length of time spent in the spotlight – the higher the number the tougher the experience!):
Baroness Warsi – 1.1
Susan Kramer – 0.5
Rageh Omaar – 0.5
Charles Clarke – 0.4
Max Mosley – 0.2
The sole right-winger on the panel came out worst. The Labour guest came out well. How unsurprising!
Excellent analysis but surely Baroness Warsi was not ‘The sole right-winger on the panel’, how about Max Mosley?
Is Max Mosley right-wing these days? I think he’s shifted ground politically over the decades NotaSheep.
Yes, he tried to become a Conservative MP in the early ’80s but by the mid 1990s he was, like Bernie Ecclestone, a Labour Party donor.
Nothing he said on Question Time this week sounded remotely right-wing. He kept giving the government a good whacking and said that it wasn’t fair that public sector pensions should be reined in, opposed action on capping benefits at £26,000 and also opposed an immigration cap. Of course he could just have been pandering to the audience, but it sounded like he really was ‘of that way of thinking’.
Is he right wing? Decidedly not! Everything he said was more right -on than anyone there, including Charles Clarke and Susan Kramer. From his replies I thought he must be Labour. (Could have been Lib Dem either, I suppose but I didn’t think of them; I just felt he was Labour.)
Mosley was on the Left on every issue this time, regardless of what he was in the past. Dimbleby called on him first on two different audience questions about economic issues. It made no sense, except for bias.
Though coming from Conservative-Lib Dem-run Birmingham (where each of the three large parties gets a sizable share of the vote), the audience on Question Time was the usual Question Time audience, jeering the Tory and applauding all the left-wing points. (Not quite though as, at a few points, Sayeeda Warsi earned herself some strong applause.) So why were all the points made my members of the audience hostile to cuts and hostile to the coalition?
Bankers were duly attacked, the public sector defended, Coulson slagged off, the Tories accused of being in the pocket of the Murdoch media, academy schools called a “farce”, the government accused of being unfair to high earners over child benefit and of being unfair to “the working class” over benefit to the unemployed (oh the irony!).
This week’s comments from the audience break down like this:
Attacks on the Coalition/Defences of Labour – 15
Defences of the Coalition/Attacks on Labour – 0
This was even worse than Manchester last week or Liverpool the week before.
It wasn’t helped by David Dimbleby. On the question about public v private pensions, a woman identified herself as a public sector employee and nodded along enthusiastically to Charles Clarke’s reply to her question about the unfairness of it all. Soon after, DD returned to the audience. Did he counterbalance this by asking for the thoughts of someone with a terrible private pension? Of course not. This is what he said instead: “Anyone with their hand up who’s a public sector worker who’s going to feel the pinch from this? Yes?”
Next week’s programme comes from Cheltenham, whose Lib Dem-run council contains a sizable Conservative opposition and no Labour councillors whatsoever. So next week’s ‘Question Time’ should be a tough one for any Labour representatives and an easier ride for the two governing parties. What’s the betting it’s neither?
You could spot the left wing actvists all at the front to half way up.
It is the BBC at its worst.I had to turn it off.
Me too.
I normally force myself to sit through the whole charade just to see how bad the BBC can be. But after the first question this week and the ludicrous over the top reaction of the audience, I had to hit the off button.
It’s an absolute disgrace they can pollute the airwaves each week with this shameful propaganda. DD is out of control, he seriously needs reeling in.
As was observed by several contributors to the live feed, David Dimbleby (the man the Radio Times earlier this year called ‘Mr Impartiality’) treated Sayeeda Warsi in a very different way to the show’s other guests. Labour’s Charles Clarke was treated throughout with respect, being asked (more than once) what he thought of particular government proposals (inviting attacks). Here are some examples of these soft questions:
“Do you think they (the government) are floundering at bit?” (over child benefit. Mr Clarke did think they were.)
“Do you approve of elected commisioners for the police for instance?”
Like most Labour politicians, he came away pretty much unscathed from the experience.
Against Baroness Warsi, however, DD was frequently gleefully disrespectful, interrupting her repeatedly and trying (and succeeding) to get the audience to laugh at her. That she stood her ground very effectively against both Dimbleby and the audience is to her great credit. Here are a sample of the questions/points he put to her:
“Charles Clarke says it’s a muddle, Sayeeda Warsi?”
“What good are a politician’s promises?”
(interrupting) “Sorry but your whole election..I’m sorry to interrupt you again..your whole electoral campaign was based on the mess that the Labour Party had made?”. Huge applause and laughter from the audience, a smile from Charles Clarke.
(interrupting) “Sorry that’s not the question. No, it’s not the..you maybe… you may want to tell people that but it’s not the question!”
“It was noticable in the hall here in Birmingham when he reached that passage in his (David Cameron’s) speech that the Conservative Party conference was just silent. They looked a bit puzzled Sayeedi. Is it because the message isn’t clear? Is it because the Tory Party doesn’t know what he means by the Big Society, maybe YOU don’t know what the Big Society is?
When she began her reply, beginning to explain her thoughts about the Big Society, he sneered “I thought you might know!”. Laughter from audience.
(interrupting) “All right, all right..don’t ..don’t..don’t ..yet..don’t that’s..no..wait a moment, no what Rageh’s talking about is something slightly different. It’s about schools, the police, the NHS, doctors and you’re talking about cleaning up a little area of a town!!”. Laughter and applause from audience.
At that point, Baroness Warsi turned on DD and said people shouldn’t be laughing. “Who’s laughing? No-one’s laughing at you”, DD replied, mounting his high horse (as if always does if anyone dares stand up to him). “That’s playing politics with the idea, saying people are laughing”. Applause for DD. Yet the audience had been laughing at his remark, which he delivered with all his usual look of smug malice.
(interrupting) “But..No, answer Rageh’s point!”
Later, when the question about the Nobel Prize-winning scientists who complained about the immigration cap came up, DD challenged her about it, ending with the question “They’ve got it wrong?”. When Sayeeda replied that they HAD got it wrong, Dimbleby emitted a high-pitched “Oooh!”. Laughter from the audience.
Later Baroness Warsi turned on him again, after another of his facetious remarks, and said to him “You’re being facetious here”. He was, and had been throughout – at her expense.
As I pointed out last week, it’s not because she’s a government minister. Victims before the election of this sort of treatment include Nigel Farage (twice), Jim Allister of the TUV and various members of Her Majesty’s official opposition at the time. Only Peter Hain got such treatment for Labour, and that was only on the first (of many) editions he appeared on after railing against the show for allowing Nick Griffin on. That was pay-back from Dimbleby.
‘David Dimbleby (the man the Radio Times earlier this year called ‘Mr Impartiality’)’
This would be on the ‘It is because we say so’ basis espoused by Helen Boaden then?
http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/theeditors/2010/09/impartiality_is_in_our_genes.html
Not that it seems to have worked to well for her either.
Though I am guessing the BBC will either soon delete the thread (I keep copies of any where they are likely to get retroactive) or claim views were ‘split’.
Unique.
Whilst Warsi’s different treatment from the other guests is beyond dispute, what I would add is that Warsi did herself no favours.
At the election all the 3 main parties refused to be candid with the electorate on where the cuts would go. The Tories subsequently have peddled the line that hard cuts are now required because the economy was worse than they thought, as if it came as something of a surprise and this is the line Warsi attempted. It’s complete nonsense on stilts and is treating voters like they’re stupid. We all knew cuts were on their way and DD was right to pull her up on this.
What is unacceptable is, of course, that DD didn’t treat the other guests in the same way.
She stood up very well on a number of occasions, as mentioned above, when the audience applauded enthusiastically but on that issue she didn’t put it nearly as well as she could have, while sticking to the line. She could have said they knew there was a mess but they didn’t know just how bad it was instead making it look as if she was denying they knew there was a mess. And she could have mounted other lines of attack, such as mentioning that none of the parties said what they would cut. That said, she was under a barrage a lot of the time from the host which must make it extremely difficult.
David Dimbleby is not unbiased. Maybe he is trying to atone for the fact that whilst at Oxford University he was a a member of the Bullingdon Club? Maybe he is trying to over-compensate for marrying Belinda Giles, a granddaughter of the 9th Earll De la Warr? Maybe the latter point helps to explain why the Countess of Longford’s niece felt able to control him by haolding his arm during a previous Question Time…
– Edit – Moderate
Craig – your analysis is outstanding. When we get a government with the backbone to pay attention to the blatant disregard the BBC has for its charter, you should be honoured with a medal for bravery for having to sit through the BBCs bilge.
Brilliant as ever Craig.
I have emailed the link to Sayeed Warsi asking when the Conservatives are going to do something about it.
They won’t do a thing as they are a bunch of cowards.
I don’t usually watch this programme because it is so terrible but I watched the last bit on Thursday because I was enjoying the comments here.
I remember Kramer making a very good point on public sector pensions, saying that public sector workers have better job security, and being instantly cut off by Dimbleby. Reminded me why I never watch it.
Its just so left wing led by the chairman, why do the Tories bother to go on. They should sort out the BBC.
Its astounding when quantified. It is also obvious that sending sacrificial victims to lend credibility to these absurdly biased programmes (likewise Today, PM and Newsnight) is quite simply a huge unforced error.
Noone I know (of whatever voting habits) pays the slightest attention to the actual politics that is supposedly being debated except inasmuchas they enjoy seeing politicians bated. Its not really important any longer, people no longer make up their minds about important issues because they trust the talentless but privileged sons of the man who commented on the Coronation.
If Dave were simply to cite the figures you so admirably produce and announce that the government wasnt going to put forward any participants QT would simply collapse. Noone would want to watch that atrociously vain git playing peoples tribune with Ed and Yvette and even the BBC would be embarrased by a programme that was so clearly unbalanced and inevitably boring.
Instead we have pathetic sucking up to the absurd concept of a “best in the world” BBC (I recently asked one of thier apologists to name me 5 best in the world things they had done in the last 10 years – we got as far as the i-player and the gay Dr Who); prompted by fear of the imagined power to influence public opinion of an organisation that no longer troubles to disguise the fact that it is an unelected and apparently unaccountable opposition.
I saw ths program last week by accident and frankly couldn’t believe how it was being chaired. I agree with Johnny – this should be sorted out once and for all. Start with the director’s salary (800K+). I’d like to see balance being restored with some logical discussion about the economy. The whole coverage of the labour party conference was presented like a royal event, whereas the IMF support for the government’s policies has hardly been discussed.
I think there are grounds for not paying my licence fee next year – I expected it would change when we voted in a new government, but alas I was wrong.
Baroness Warsi recently intimated that the Conservatives failed to win a majority because of “Asian” electoral fraud.
The subversion of our democracy should have been a huge story, but fizzled out. I wrote about it here.
http://gatesofvienna.blogspot.com/2010/10/banana-republic-britain.html
Not having a telly I missed this QT, but understand Warsi pulled out of a previous QT shortly after her “Asian” statement?
Was she asked about any of this last night? perhaps BBBC readers could let me know.
No Paul, that didn’t come up at all.
Thanks Craig. Unsurprising, yet shocking nonetheless.
I gave up watching QT when the camermen (they are probably black lesbians now) stopped oggling the fit large breated women in the audience. Now the only tits are on the panel.
We really miss you in the live chats though Martin 🙂
My blood pressure couldn’t take it any more, a tight top with a nice pert pair pressing forward helped, but the BBC seemed to stop the camera oggling.
Warsi is an air-headed dimwit – but the very existence of a Muslim Tory must torture the living hell out of the beeboids.
Warsi got her promotion because of the colour of her skin, her sex and her religion.
Strip away those leg ups OK? imagine Warsi without any of those gimme gimme wheres my share perks OK?
Does anyone, anyone at all really think that Warsi would be where she is today with the honours and promotions and leg up if she were just plain old white Warsi?
I tell you in all honesty that this woman would not have risen above the level of a parish councillor.
The tories deserve everything they get at the hands of DD the partisan bigot when they choose to progress a person solely on the basis of skin colour and religion and then allow her to go before what is in effect a Stalin show trial and the politcal equivolent of rotten fruit being thrown at a person in the village stocks.
It’s because she is a Muslim, I would think. Like the Labour Lord Ahmed.
The ‘QT’ panel was 40% Muslim this week; INBBC will soon push it to 60%, then..
She probably is an affirmative action case, but for once she did rather well defending policies and laying out a solid case against the defunct Labour Government.
I say for once because usually she’s not much help at all, and it always seems like the BBC goes to her first for any economic issues, which they know is far outside her remit. I can never tell if that’s because the Tories throw her in as the sacrificial lamb as others have suggested (thus protecting a Minister with a real portfolio from getting a kicking in the public view), or if the BBC just has her on speed dial because they know she’s out of her depth on these subjects.
But I think she was obviously coached in the days before her appearance.
Spot on Cassandra, the Tories need to put people on who will take the fight to the BBC, be it Eric Pickles or Daniel Hannan. They are so thick in the Tory party they can’t see the bias.
Let’s face it, there are no shortage of ‘public figures’ who conform to your opening paragraph; but it’s difficult to imagine a lefty one being scrutinized so.
I would say Warsi actually got treated with deserved disdain; but an equally vacuous female Muslim from Labour would be given an easy ride – that’s the bias.
Ironically, when she stood in Dewsbury in 2005, a town with a significant Muslim population, she lost, but when a white, heterosexual, middle-aged male stood in 2010 he won.
Which prompts me to ask, what elected position does Shahid Malik hold now? Do we have yet another unelected Muslim in power? This one is Shadow Justice Secretary as well!
Sorry, getting mixed up Shadow Justice secretary is Sadiq Khan. Just checked it.
Thanks for your efforts, Craig.
The interesting (to me at any rate) question is why the Conservatives do nothing in the face of the evidence of BBC bias. Craig’s figures alone give sufficient ammunition to allow a Conservative bombardment of the BBC. Moreover, the daily examples set out on B-BBC could be thrown at the BBC by Jeremy Hunt if he was minded to.
It was obvious that, for a short time after the formation of the coalition the BBC, to an extent, trod on eggs where comment/analysis/reportage of political affairs was concered. Even so, the BBC’s coverage has been anti-coalition from the start although it was sensitive to, for instance, the revelations of the greed of its senior apparatchiks. However, the old blatancy had been partially smothered and even the “climate change” propaganda was toned down.
However, to the BBC’s relief, after a few weeks nothing happened. Even before the summer recess it was evident that not only was the BBC (and its income) safe but that the Conservatives had no intention of attacking or highlighting BBC bias (against the Conservatives let alone any other bias). Since the opening of the conference season, the BBC has let rip and effectively the whole of its output comprises an avalanche of right-on Labour-loving greenie drivel.
I can only surmise that the Conservatives – or rather the Conservatives In Name Only – in power actually agree with the BBC view of the world and there seems to be evidence of this. Certainly, Hague’s attitudes towards Israel are a cigarette paper’s thickness away from Jeremy Bowen’s. The Conservatives are happy to be represented on justice and business policy by Ken Clarke and Vince Cable whose views reflect those of the Howard League and the Work Foundation (aka Will Hutton) respectively. The Conservatives have no apparent argument with Huhne on any aspect of his carbon lunacy (despite the annual cost of £90 billion). Theresa May is ecstatic about Harriet Harman’s poisonous legacy known as the Equality Act (which she welcomed when she was in opposition).
Accordingly, the BBC-enabled evisceration of any Conservative representative on QT reflects the wishes of the Cameroons. This way Cameron can point to “public opinion” as voiced on QT and other programmes and as created by the BBC and say “you see – traditional Conservative policies have been completely rejected”. So away with low tax, sound finance etc and bring on increased taxation and expenditure [BTW the “cuts” are a delusion: government expenditure is scheduled to increase every year from now until the next scheduled election] and Labour/LibDem social, educational and immigration policies.
I have no solution to this but looking towards the Conservatives to do something about – or even comment on – BBC bias is a vain hope. The BBC is the voice of the political class and the leaders of the Conservative Party are part of that class. Why should they criticise their PR outfit?
I think you overstate your point towards the end but good post. I think its just sheer funk why the Conservative Party dont tackle BBC bias. Simple as that.
With the risk of being told that my record is stuck, let me say again that, while the Tories are aware that there is bias in some of the BBC News reporting, they simply cannot separate that in their minds from the embedded cultural icon of The BBC.
They agree with all the defenders of the indefensible who say that the BBC provides incredible value for money with the orchestras, great music variety on the radio, history docs, and Cranford. That is an insurmountable obstacle to most, if not all of them.
Umbongo – you have hit the nail on the head. I knew before the election that Cameron would do nothing about the BBC. He wants the BBC to love him so that he can get a massive media corporation on his side. This is why he has gone so far to the left (which are reflected, as you point out above, by his policies). He does not seem to realize that no matter how far left he goes he is still labeled as a “Tory” by the BBC, that is “Thatchers Party” .
If we are looking for someone with backbone to take on the might of the BBC, Cameron and his half baked ministers are not the ones to do it.
eric the man pickles would…
Lets face the bitter and tragic truth of modern political life, these politicians in the very top positions today are as thick as two short planks.
They have become like catwalk models dressed up to look good on the surface concealing a vacuum underneath, Huhne and Dave and Ed and all the rest of them are identikit puppets with no more more intelligence than a shop window manakin.
These empty puppets are designed to appear plausible when in fact they are nothing more than life like tape recorders, the tragedy for us is that these puppets are costing us all our very future, the CAGW fraud alone will break and destroy us and that is just one part of the grand betrayal.
Until people realise that this political class we have been cursed with ARE the problem and NOT the solution, until people wake up and vote these vile people out and keep them out then the slide will continue into the abyss.
This modern political class should be banned from ever taking office, I can think of no other solution.
I loved the moment on questiontime when a woman was complaining about her family allowance being taken away and Dimbleby responded that she must be one of those families where there was a wage earner earning over ££44k a year – see woman back track hastily… and Dimbleby move on quickly…. plant in audience had obvioulsy sprouted!
Much appreciate the picture of the fragrant Baroness, Dave.
When I am Baron of Dewsbury, the Baroness and I shall assuredly invite you to our castellated semi for chai and tiffin.
I heard posters on here giving it full on the message that Cameron’s love for the bBC was a show before the election and after the election win when the Conservatives were in office the real Tories would hammer the bBC with immense dramatic reform or total dissolution.
The secret message mantra.
Stupid childish inexactitudes shown up in all their glory.
They won’t do anything even when its in their own interests.
In the immortal words of Thin Lizzy “Meet the new boss, same as the old boss”.