Well, the BBC agenda on Saint Vince has been spelt out by that intrepid example of independent thought, Nick Robinson. Talking on Today this morning, (8.10am) he explained that the Daily Telegraph has more likely done more damage than good to “political transparency” since our totally honest MP’s will now be even more careful what they say to anyone outside their immediate circles. So Cable’s only crime was to speak his mind and the DT stands in the dock as the enemy of freedom. You have to admire the delusionalism that reigns within the State Broadcaster.
CABLE – THE FALL OUT
Bookmark the permalink.
Mr. Robinson’s blog has been quiet for a while now.
Evidently the BBC and it munchkins prefer a more broadcast only style of narrative enhancing, free of challenge.
9.55am Nicky Campbell, after some phone in comments says. ‘Bit of a clash there, just like the coalition’; yet another jibe at the non Labour gov.
I took Robinson to mean that the Telegraph was against the Murdock aquisition of all the shares and that by exposing Cable’s biased view and the consequent removal of him from the decision making process, they had made it more likely Murdoc woul;d succeed.
Anyway I am glad the idiot Cable has been exposed for the unreliable dithering idiot he really is rather than the sage he was built up to be prior to the Election.
Cable was lionised by the BBC in the lead up to the election, given a staus far beyond his capabilities. He was not right on the economy, not even close – his reputation is purely down to the Toady program’s constant attention.
Now the BBC are hoist on their own petard, having bigged up the Lib Dems to try to ensure a left of centre Lib/Lab coalition, they have what they don’t want and are trying different ways to attack it at every turn.
However, what has hapened is that the Coalition has been shown to be weak. If the PM had a position of any considerable strength, he would have fired Cable instantly. But the truth is that this is a goverment of neither one thing or another, rather two hostages tied to the same mast in a heavy storm.
I’ve been puzzled by the repeated shock expressed by various BBC reporters, particularly Mr Peston, that the Daily Telegraph might have held back some of the story to suit its own purposes. Why, the very thought that a newspaper might have a political agenda of its own!!!
The lovely irony of a newspaper, the Telegraph, being the subject of a leak itself!
I don’t think the DT did emerge with credit actualy. To put commercial opportunism above such a big story is poor. One expects that of the stinking BBC and its bald cheerleader, but not of the DT.
As I pointed out yesterday Toenails and Peston have been cut out of the loop of the new Government, in fact Kelvin McKenzie said exactly the same about Peston last night.
The BBC are in a right old pickle here though, they HATE the Tories so what to pile on in, but they also know they HATE Sky and Murdoch even more, so piling in is more likely to give Murdoch what he wants.
Personally I don’t see the problem, if the wankers on the left like the Guardian don’t want Murdoch to take over Sky why don’t they buy into it? After all the Guardian pays no tax in the UK so it has plenty of money.
Throughout the day yesterday 5Live presenters were criticising the Telegraph for being against Wikileaks but for leaking Cable. A very fair point one might say, but without inviting someone on from the Telegraph to challenge it?
I guess the affair shows how antiquated the Telegraph is though. Wikileaks leaks by internet and the Telegraph links by Cable (OK, sorry, my bad).
The BBC withholds key information to protect an agenda all the damn time. Hypocrites, the lot of them.
On Old Academician Nikki Campbell’s show/car-crash this morning Old MP Lembit Optik was trying to pretend that the messenger was the problem rather than the message.
‘How can an MP ever look his constituents in the eye again… breach of trust… blah blah. blah-de-blah’.
Still, al-beeb was duly minded to pick this one up and run with it (as you might expect)
I’d love to have seen the two giggling birds, mini skirted, low cut tops, the works, Cable is just another sad old git fooled by a couple of tarts.
What is it with Lib Dems and young bits of skirt?
Jesus, Peston really is milking this story, he looks like a man who hasn’t had any real food for 6 months and now is dining in the finest restaurant.
Piss off Peston, you’re a tool a man who makes Gordon Brown look like an intellectual
BBC-NUJ has a longstanding political opposition to Rupert Murdoch, to BSkyB, to Fox News and to News Corp; BBC-NUJ gives its political support instead to billionaire George Soros, who funds parts of the media which BBC-NUJ politically supports, e.g. ‘Huffington Post’, ‘Media Matters’ and part public broadcaster in America: ‘National Public Radio’.
I find ‘Fox News’ politically stimulating and is an effective challenge to the US ‘liberal-left’ dogma of most of the American MSM. Glenn Beck, of ‘Fox News’ has good educational critique of Soros, e.g.:
14 min video –
http://www.foxnews.com/on-air/glenn-beck/index.html#/v/4469223/beck-meet-the-radicals/?playlist_id=86917
A serious concern I have about News Corp is the growing Islamisation of its ownership (notably by the Saudis) and the consequent andinevitable Islamisation of its media content:
‘Wikipedia’ extract:
“Prince Alwaleed bin Talal al-Saud of Saudi Arabia, through his Kingdom Holding Company, owns 7% of News Corp.’s shares, making Kingdom Holdings the second largest shareholder. Bin Talal is the main contributor to the efforts to construct the Park51 Islamic center near ground zero.”
BBC-NUJ is not transparent about its own political opposition to Rupert Murdoch. The following article (and extract) is relevant in this respect:
“Underrated: Rupert Murdoch”
(by William Shawcross)
[Extract]:
“At the end of the 1980s, Murdoch launched Sky TV to break the monopoly of the BBC and ITV. Sky was derided by intellectual snobs as ‘council-house television’. Building it was a huge struggle but now BSkyB, of which Murdoch’s company owns 39.1 per cent, has 10 million subscribers. Sky News is a constant challenge to the BBC and its conventional, left-of-centre wisdoms.”
http://www.standpointmag.co.uk/node/3596/full
William Shawcross’s biography of Murdoch was a fine book – hopefully now updated – describing Murdoch faults and all, showing how much he gambled stage by stage to build his empire, how professional a press man he is, how shrewd in moving into new fields.
The UK TV establishment – BBC, ITV and all the various ITV shareholders – and the Home Office spent decades trying to freeze him out. He is remarkably tolerant of the whole lot of them.
Stumbled upon the VD and Nicky Campbell shows on 5Live today. They could hardly disguise their disapointment. Instead of the masses going after Cable what they got was the majority tearing into the grubby nature of journalism today. I had quite a chuckle listening to that.
http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk/2010/dec/22/liberal-democrats-norman-baker
More Libbers quoted as attacking the Conservatives, this time in the Guardian. I think we can safely say that the BBC will be running with this story all day tomorrow, probably top item.
And Lo , so it came, as foretold by the Wise Men ! With half an ear on the first hour of Toady, it appeared to be exclusively devoted to attacks on the Tories and ernest explanations as to why the limp dims had been foolish virgins to get into bed with them !
The backlash against the DT is gathering, because it undermines the MP/constituent relationship. So much that on morning tv they had to quiz one of their political correspondents Donovan about it.
People only go to MP’s with problems, they don’t go there to discuss politics!!!WTF Another beboid living on planet bBC.
Mr. Robinson emerges from his multi-week Xmas exile to huff and puff…
http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/nickrobinson/2010/12/somethings_bugg_1.html
… and is being filleted for how his arrogant, views expose BBC bias on news.
Fred Bloggs is spot on above. Nick Robinson’s and Vince Cable’s argument that the Telegraph’s sting will make it harder for MPs to discuss matters with their constituents really is a pile of horses**t. For a start, the Telegraph (rightly or wrongly) didn’t publish Cable’s remarks about Murdoch – that was, er, Robert Peston. So is Peston at fault as well Nick? But the more obvious point is how can Cable expect to tell a constituent that he is declaring war on Murdoch and not have it relyed to others? In what way is that possibly an MP’s constituency business? Do MPs really expect to be able to say anything to their constituents about politics – even comments about how they intend to discharge sensitive ministerial resposibilities – without it being reported? And why should it be kept confidential? Since when did any confidentiality in an MP’s surgery exist for the benefit of the MP rather than the constituent?
These two arrived into my twitter feed literally in sequence. No prizes guessing who of these ‘politics’ ‘reporters’has interpreted events with all due objectivity and lack of tabloid hyperbole…
BBCPolitics BBC Politics Cable fury over Telegraph sting http://bbc.in/fHobfQ
GdnPolitics Guardian politics Vince Cable ‘quite angry’ about Daily Telegraph sting http://bit.ly/gQWu3W
Oddly, consistency was not noticeable.
Guessing if there had been a series, the one from @TelegraphBlogs would have been ‘Business Secretary a bit miffed… but accepts that being in high office and behaving like a spoilt, very biased prat is probably not optimal’
New entry…
MailOnline Daily Mail Online Vince Cable blasts undercover reporters who secretly taped him criticising the coalition: Tactics employed by jo… http://bit.ly/hsh4bh
Feeling in good, professional media company there, Aunty?