Is the BBC trying to mastermind the attack on Murdoch? Here’s the assistant editor of The Independent Ian Burrell a short while ago (h/t MySiteC2E in the comments):
Fishing around for a “safety in numbers” line of attack, perhaps?
And as an update to my earlier post about the BBC and Guardian combining forces, the BBC’s Kevin Bakhurst has explained how they are able to claim the Gordon Brown interview as an exclusive when the Guardian’s Nick Davies says it was “an interview with the BBC and the Guardian”:
Hope that clears things up. No? Well, for the time being perhaps it’s best we all just assume that the BBC and the Guardian are one entity.
Listening to 5.00pm news. bBC are towing the party line and kicking the police. What they failed to say was that the original investigation was in 2006 in the middle of the terror attacks and was done with 10 officers. So that at the end they stopped as other important investigations were under way.
The current investgation is taking 50 officers and they have just finished transcribing the 11,000 pages of evidence onto a computer database to make it manageable. Unless the public get the full story they will never understand why certain decisions were made. Well they will never understand with the bBC reporting.
This is _very_ interesting. Why does the BBC need to find out what line the Independent is taking?
Are they trying to assemble a coalition of the willing? Are they trying to advocate a common position? Are they trying to influence the media view? Or, are the unable to think for themselves?
I wonder if the Daily Mail has also been getting these pesky calls?
“a coalition of the willing” – that very same phrase occurred to me.
‘A coalition of the shilling’ might be more apt.
“Press officers “, “spin doctors “. The use of words to conceal lack of qualifications.
BBC-NUJ:
“BBC Strike Materials.”
Are they striking over:
-pay?
-pensions?
-conditions?
-Salford?
-EDL?
-Murdoch?
-Or just to deprive licencepayers of programmes?
http://www.nuj.org.uk/innerPagenuj.html?docid=2163
Another BBC-NUJ repeat, Uncut, starring ‘Newsnight’s Father of the Chapel, Paul Mason.
Here’s one they did earlier:
http://www.guardian.co.uk/media/2010/nov/30/bbc-strike-threat-lifted-dispute
Great work DB.
The BBC scandal of rigging and quashing public debate on issues such as immigration, Europe and homosexuality doesn’t get the airing it needs because people are far more afraid of the BBC than they are of News International.
The propaganda power that NI had over influencing Government policy over Europe is that truth was on their side if they publicised Government betrayals, the exact opposite applies to the BBC. It’s a lot more powerful and a lot more subversive.
Another cracking contrarian piece by Brendan O’Neill.
Who will they blame when Murdoch’s gone?
Oh the BBC has a long hit list.
>>what will these political Harry Potters do if they actually succeed in vanquishing the dark lord and sending him packing back to Oz or the US? Who’ll be their Voldemort then? They’ll need to find a new evil entity<<
If and when Murdoch goes these ‘Harry Potter’s’ will unleash their ‘inner Voldemort’ on us all.
Eurozone in collapse?…kids excluded all over the place…but still their vendetta against all things Rupert continues…as if we civilians give a monkeys!
As long as SOMEONE stands in the way of this heaving bandwagon of spite and self righteousness that is Radio Gaga and its house rag, then I`ll be happy.
Time for Fox!
Alistair Campbell and fatty Prescott were both on the radio AGAIN this morning.
However, where the bloody hell is the Tory party? Can anyone think of one back bench Tory MP or former cabinet minister who has had airtime on the BBC to put the boot into Red Ed and co?
The lefties have been sticking it to Cameron for ages now on this story, there is either a desire from Cameron to keep his sides powder dry or a lot of Tory MP’s are simply fed up with Cameron or the BBC are not prepared to give them time to have a say.
Now we have the Tories backing Liebore’s bid to block the takeover of Sky (no doubt being cheerled by the BBC/Guardian again).
Most of the media has been spinning this lie about McBust’s son and his illness being leaked, this is of course the usual BBC trick where they spin up a story and it doesn’t matter if it’s a lie or not, only ITV news (Tom Bradby) has shown any balance today, even Sky who seem to be crapping themselves are kicking the Tories and anyone else harder than the BBC, I guess they don’t want anyone to point the finger at them and accuse them of bias, unlike the BBC of course.
Cameron needs to cowboy the f**k up and soon, he’s letting a retarded idiot with the face of a plastercine toy walk all over him.
I think Willets got kicked around for a couple minutes yesterday on the News Channel. Otherwise the closest they got I think was Fraser Nelson on Marr on Sunday.
Martin – you seem to believe that Cameron is a conservative with idealism. Cameron is a PR man and when times get tough he either agrees with his enemies so as not to appear “nasty” or he hides
Cameron doesn’t want to pick a fight with his friends. Cameron is part of the elite, he wants to be heir to Blair, not run a party once lead by Churchill (who I suspect is revolving violently in his grave)
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/politics/article574814.ece
The “modernising” of the conservatives involved getting rid of the people with conviction and bringing in the clones of Mellor.
‘even Sky who seem to be crapping themselves’
Certainly the offerings of the various ‘political’ young peroxide sink moppets and ‘guest’ selection would suggest so.
You get some bob spouting what Miliband ‘will say’ like he is the voice of God, with ‘insight’ from Maguire, Hassan or Penny to agree with that.
The whole politico-media estate is unfit for purpose.
‘You get some bob spouting’
When you get Sophy Ridge gushing ‘I think Ed. Miliband is leading the way’ about six times in one report, you have to wonder if the Invasion of the Body Snatcher entity has left Laura K and entered another peroxide sink host.
Political ‘reporting’ has really become pointless when we are treated to what folk of such calibre ‘think’.
A co ordinated news output from the leftist MSM, each outfit feeding each other news from the lefts perspective, allied integrated strategies to peddle pre determined narratives. A strategic axis of the left out to destroy the competition. There can only be one side of the story for the left because once the public see both sides they invariably choose the right side. The majority of the visual MSM news is now leftist, BBC/CNN/ABC and others have an almost total stranglehold on the 24hr TV news output. Only Sky and Fox offer a truly unbiased product and they are funnily enough in the crosshairs of this latest highly organised concerted attack strategy by the leftist MSM.
BTW the drooling mental case has just been on the BBC, soft focus? They must have smeared one kilo of the stuff on the lens but the funniest part is that McRuin was lying through his teeth and the BBC swallowed it with no critical analysis whatsover.
His story has now been shown to be a pack of made up lies, there was no hacking of medical records, the story was obtained by legal methods. oooops! I suspect the BBC having found out their mistake in believing anything that the drooling fantasist tells them will drop the story in short order.
The Tories have been practically invisible since May 2010, a lot due to the BBC of course but the Tories are either playing a very long game or just have a totally crap media department. I suspect the latter.
It is uncanny how the BBC seem to follow the tactics of certain Germans from the 30s.
“The art of leadership… consists in consolidating the attention of the people against a single adversary and taking care that nothing will split up that attention.”
Adolf Hitler
“The most brilliant propagandist technique will yield no success unless one fundamental principle is borne in mind constantly – it must confine itself to a few points and repeat them over and over”
Joseph Goebbels
“Not every item of news should be published. Rather must those who control news policies endeavor to make every item of news serve a certain purpose.”
Joseph Goebbels
Russia is no longer threatening us directly. China has the strength but is not overtly threaening us.
The threat that every person in Britain knows is the threat of militant Islam.
The threat from nutter Arabs and Pakistanis and and Yemenis and Somalians and Indonesians overseas – but much worse, the threat from people here in Britain – specifically from (mostly) Pakistan. Dudley, Luton, Bradford, East London (only 1 million Muslims so far).
It is only a matter of time before these nutters attack us again. Frome outside – or more likely from within.
Does the BBC care ? Does the BBC investigate?
Does the BBC even talk about the terrorist threats we face ?
No, of course not.
To the BBC, the biggest threat to the UK is Rupert Murdoch. The guy who as a young entrepreneur
– saved the NoW,
– who took over the dead Daily Herald from the TUC and started the tabloid Sun
– who saved the Times and Sunday Times from certain bankruptcy, – who fought the epic battle against the print unions at Wapping – that ha kept the ENTIRE UK press alive by allowing a much lower cost structure
The same Rupert Murdoch that risked his whole firm on UK satellite TV when the BBC and ITV were too chicken to try it
I was “there at the time”. Murdoch was willing to do partnership with the BBC andf ITV. They deliberately blocked him.
He has always been a pariah to the “TV establishment”.
Fools.
Blocked from being allowed to invest in the “officail” UK satellie project, Murdoch launched Sky TV under a Luxw bourg lixence. using SES-Astra satellites, Anyone my age remembers Radio Luxembourg, the Principality was more than willing to let Sky use its channels.
That was back in the mid-1980s. Murdoch bet the farm. The BBC sat on its complacent hads – and our licence fee.
The Sky TV operation gave us plebs what we really wanted to see on TV – FILMS and SPORT !
The BBC is now under threat from an HONEST broadcasting threat. The BBC has been arrogant about satellite TV since 1983 – I have letters from the the then BBC Chairman to prove it. Now the BBC faces its Nemesis. COMPETITION.
……………….
I have watched – even dealt with (and successfully sued for a few peanuts) Rupert Murdoch for 3 decades.
My bet is that he will win through. There is no proper cause to stop him buying the entire BSkyB stock, his lawyers will win that battle, even if there is some delay.
He may have to make some compromises.
But he has more gut feel about business, which means “what does the public want” than most politicians have had fraudulent expenses claims
There was a time where I thought Godwin had a point, but now his law has been so abused by those who see deploying it merely as another tool in an armoury of faux-PC suppression (usually those who invoke him are too lazy to do more than dash of a one-liner bereft of any actual argument), I am feeling these analogies have to be made.
Those three quotes are chilling in how the techniques of propaganda have been embraced so seamlessly into certain edit suites.
Its awards night at the B-BBC for hypocrite of the year/hypocrite of the decade/lifetime achievement award for services to hypocrisy and the nominations are:
David Cameron
Gordon Brown
Alistair Campbell
Its been a close run race but after much deliberation it seems all three have won all three categories, all three have shown breathtaking hypocrisy so all three fully deserve 1st prize in all three areas.
The term hypocrisy in the dictionary should have pictures of these three and three words, the political class.
My interest is mainly observational, but I do have serious concerns of the composition of the political media estate, and how democratic process is perverted by the power of media monopoly, and the views of unrepresentative minorities being shoved out as the so-called voice of the country.
Miliband was voted out. The Mirror, Graun or New Statesman do not speak for very many either. Yet the MSM pretty much gives them all daily eminence grise billing (Laurie Penney shown up for the cut price NUS activist pea-brain she is by a paparazzi). Why?.
This all reminds me of the politics of a primary school playground combined with the ethics of The Chronicles of Riddick.
A bunch of political Pygmies are dashing in from the back of the crowd to get a kick in on whatever they hadn’t dared go near until wounded.
Meanwhile, some media seem to be adopting a ‘you keep what you kill’ approach.
NI is reaping much that poor leadership and oversight has sown, but the principles of purging the entire army because of the actions of some officers on The Eastern front can only appeal to a certain mindset.
ps: Whatever the moppets and SKY are capable of, I have to give credit to the SKY interviewer Mark Longhurst just now who filleted an opportunistic Yvette Cooper, who was constantly reduced to bluster and ‘I don’t think so’ when finding not all is going quite they way she had thought even when trying to convert and open goal.
From Gordon and his ‘people’, to attributed quotes of NI ‘sources’, I am finding this petty spatting is doing no ‘side’ much credit, from various journos to SPaDs saying they and their team is going to ‘get’ the other. Classy.
Thing is, any in the private sector are welcome to engage in that and reap the consequences of perceptions, and while some in the so-called ‘qualities’ are smart enough to not be caught saying it, their actions betray a totally complicit mindset.
However, that MPs and Cabinet Ministers are now bathing in gutter waste is unsuprising but unedifying.I can vote those low-lives out every few years.
But I pay for the BBC and what is issued forth from breakfast news highlights to ‘not the views of my employer’ tweets, yet at present I still seem to have zero means to change or even influence that. Why?
That all said, from some mutterings even from ‘ists whose blood lust has now subsided a bit, they may be in danger of getting what they wished for, and not in a good way for free speech.
I can’t see how the BBC can function in the unique form it claims whilst also claiming credible impartiality, so is welcome to offer its product on subscription and let the public decide. Equally criminal actions by any medium need to be dealt with to the full force of the law.
However, getting the media ‘run’ by Cameron, Miliband or Clegg does not sound a great result.
ps: Saw an interesting tweet last night with a counter view to the notion that Mr. Murdoch has lost a fortune. This one noted he has managed to buy stock at bargain levels.
If he shrugs off the attempts at media manipulation faltering on the back of public outrage over scores being settled clearly taking precedence over sincere ‘outrage’ over abuses, it may be his media stake may even end up higher.
Law of unintended consequences?
Speaking of coordination, I wonder when Gardener’s World or the flush with funds Ceebeebies can work an angle in?
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-14129459
‘The Sunday Times newspaper finds itself splashed this week with a little of the hot water that has swept away its stable companion the News of the World.’
Is every ‘story’ on anything on the BBc going to have this cut and pasted intro?
Unsure if harking back in history and making loose connections is quite the smart play for any BBC ‘reporter’ to be making. Especially in areas of objectivity or science. There are other media beyond NI stablemates that Mr. Black’s body of work could stand some scrutiny from.
Ian Burrell has two BBC-related articles in the Independent today – one on Robert Peston’s close links to Will Lewis, the other about the annual report. The BBC spin doctors who bombarded him with calls were probably concerned with the line he was taking on these stories rather than the Indie’s line on the phone hacking.
I was intrigued as to what the #controlfreakery alluded to.
Still, nice to know the BBC is above trying to influence other media in how stories get spun.
If any in the Uk media could get back to stuff crippling the county soon, that would be nice.
It is now sinking in that when Newsnight has Chris Huhne on and decides our energy policy is not really that gripping enough, a few in our MSM have skewed priorities.
Speaking of priorities, before AP the spelling bee buzzes in with a ‘gotcha’, I am hoping there is no unnecessary perception of homophobia to be gieaned as not intended, and that should be ‘country’.
We regret the error.
Jeremy Vine has been winding it into the MET with regular guest, self style gangbuster, police whistle blower, hand wringing liberal, cockney geezer and ……..Guardian columist Peter Blexley.
Are they having a bubble ?
BBC 5 Live brings us PMQs and Cameron’s statement on phone hacking with rejoinders from Ed Miliband, leader of the opposition (in Parliament that is).
All well and good.
It’s the commentary that I find biased.
None other than Kevin Maguire (Mirror/Guardian) to tell us how the Guardian has been leading the way pushing the story. (Presumably the BBC has just followed in their wake. Of course the BBC can’t take credit when things become too political – that’s what the fig leaf Guardian is for).
John Pienaar (BBC) has two main memes going:
1. The great ‘public outrage’ (oh the power of that wonderful 260,000 circulation broadsheet! (April 2011 figures – down 9% on last year)
2. How well Ed Miliband has led the way.
So there you have it. But what does this BBC/Guardian/Labour tripod of attack rely on?
Public outrage. Well if it exists its the BBC ‘what done it’ and by using the very tabloid-like tactic of focusung on the hurt of crime victims. Now this might be excusable but we know that the feelings of crime victims are normally far far from being at the top BBC priority list.
Norman Smith over at Radio 4 has had exactly the same two main memes going for a couple of days now.
Pienaar is either a liar or an idiot. He’d have people believe that we got from the Milly Dowler angle to where we are now, solely on a wave of public outrage. He just pretends that the BBC/Guardian driving of the story isn’t that important.
Novel.
http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/news/janetdaley/100096693/has-david-cameron-shot-labours-fox/
‘Labour are demanding that this rule be made retrospective – but only back to the last general election.’
As ‘demands’ go, not bad on the stretching the public’s faith front.
I wonder what the mason-Peston-Easton-Robinson ‘line’ will be?
Wild guess… I’d reckon they will probably think that ‘they’ve got it about right’.
Unique.
It’s going to be interesting to see if any BBC reporters mention Miliband’s very convenient but extremely unprincipled cut-off point and, if they do, how they spin it. So much for the moral high ground!
All sorts of fun across the new BBC blog network, which is ‘so much better’ it crashes more than Aeroflot.
Wonder if the new batch of ‘we’re having problems’ is anything to do with the vast triumphal ‘we killed BSKYB’ (I have interpreted events a smidge to enhance the narrative) red banner that spattered across near all pages no matter what topic…. and then, rather oddly, has now disappared.
Glad I took a page grab.
I wouldn’t put it past the BBC to tell all those in the UK for whom they speak, that what they saw didn’t happen.
I think some people are getting a little carried away:
@GeorgeMonbiot GeorgeMonbiot This is our Berlin Wall moment.
It is their Berlin Wall moment. Only in this case the wall is going up.
Well, Mr. R seems to have regained wind enough to return to the fray (briefly… the thread could turn and need closing pronto) and reap the plaudits.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-14137972
Will he and Ed share an open top bus?
Might not look quite right, but…. who cares? What’s the worst that could happen?
I wonder how Milly’s folks are really feeling now.
I don’t sense that is a major part of ‘the narrative’ any more.
Like Luke’s parents, a brief moment just to set the scene and work up the audience.
Curious that now Robinson is now calling it the “so-called Tory press”.
And Gordon Brown the liar is now in Parliament grandstanding about how he is standing up for those who cannot speak for themselves, and all victims of crime. He lied about having his personal records obtained illegaly, but the BBC will not call him on it.
The BSkyB deal is dead. The next target is Fox News.
Rupert Murdoch has withdrawn the bid, yes – but it will probably be renewed next year, after the various enquiries have reported.
Gordon Brown just told Parliament that NI’s true goal all along was to shut down the BBC as we know it. I think we’re seeing the real story now.
I’m watching the fat lying slug right now DP, he hasn’t presented any new evidence, just more blatant bias and propaganda as might be expected. Blathered on in this fashion for around 20 minutes with Bercow’s indulgence, massively overplaying NI’s influence over the country and it’s politics and acted to protect the disproportionate and seditious influence of the BBC.
True to form, he dodged the question about if he regretted allowing that slumber party for Mrs. Muroch and Rebekah Wade/Brooks at Chequers. He was also allowed to declare Murdoch as being in league with a criminal underground.
So far as “Gay Gordon” is concerned, hell hath no fury like a woman scorned.
Oh Lordy!
It must be a big thing then when Gordon Brown is able to find his way back to “The Mother of Parliaments” to speak on the “Labour Party Amendment” as sculpted by the commanding and charismatic leader of the people that is Miliband Minor.
Must have taken all his courage to get the minivan booked from Kirkcaldy-to be carried in on a sedan chair by the disability access champions from the BBC-and to have an onion wafted under that craggy sad face that has cried a thousand tears-mainly at the wedding of our Miss Brooks!
This ladies and gentlemen is what passes for news amongst the political classes and their mirrormen!
Wonder if we could hire a few “stewdent protestas” to channel their angst into something more in tune with the instincts of the British people. At least remove Browns ramp in protest!
You know, it is one thing to observe the continual left-wing bias in the BBC’s news output, but I’ve never seen anything quite like this before. This doesn’t just amount to a bit of “bias”; this is something of a wholly different order.
For the BBC, our supposedly ‘neutral’ state broadcaster, to actively manipulate the news, for it to effectively say “THIS is going to be the headline story, with wall-to-wall relentless coverage, for as many days as it takes until we achieve our objective of stopping, or at least seriously damaging a private business deal”, – that is not “biased”, it is outrageous.
For the BBC to do this by repeatedly making (what are, after all, let’s not forget, at this moment nothing more than) unsubstantiated claims and allegations of wrongdoing, and for the BBC not to bother with things like waiting for those claims to be proven…indeed, for the BBC to studiously ignore and not broadcast the fact that the particular claims made by an ex-prime minister (I ask you!) have already been substantially falsified and shown up as lies… words fail me.
I am this evening currently weighing up whether to dispose of my freeview box, thus rendering my TV set unable to receive on-air broadcasts, and cancel my TV licence altogether. I am coming close to the viewpoint that it would be a price worth paying (or should I say not paying?) to watch no television at all, rather than be forced to continue to fund the BBC in its current state.
Not sure if this has been posted yet. James Delingpole in cracking form.
http://biggovernment.com/jdelingpole/2011/07/12/the-bbc-is-at-least-a-thousand-times-more-evil-and-dangerous-than-rupert-murdoch/
I agree with the accusation that the BBC/Guardian/Leftoid axis is doing this out of hatred of Murdoch and a desire to shut down their political opponents in media. But like I said on another thread, it ain’t going to work in the US.
The Wall Street Journal and Fox News will still exist if Uncle Rupert is sent to jail. Somebody else will own them and very little will change. Murdoch doesn’t own Rush Limbaugh or Neal Boortz or the idiot Hannity or anything like that, and they will all be in business just fine if Murdoch ever loses his empire. Even so, he’s not going to shut down Fox News or anything else next week like he did with NotW.
If Congress or somebody tries to go after him and say he can’t own Fox or the WSJ, they’ll have to equally go after Carlos Slim who owns the NYT. They can try, but it won’t work and will only anger millions of people who are already sick of the partisan dishonesty of the rest of the media.
Is anyone else watching the Ni hatchett job on Newsnight – I find the entire agenda a disgrace. Ine woman was almost laughed out of the studio for admitting she read the NOTW.
I get that NI need to clean up their act, but in chastising people who have informed themselves on NI output should we forget that in tapping phones NI grubs will likely have been closer to the truth than the conjecture of the BBC tonight.
Just a thought…
In the interests of balance…
http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/news/danielhannan/100096817/the-phone-hacking-scandal-is-not-a-leftist-conspiracy-for-heavens-sake/
Maybe he doesn’t know things others do? Guess it depends on what he reads or watches.
Having watched across today’s commentariat, perhaps it’s best (except, perhaps, for the future of this country as a free-soeaking democracy) to let things play out.
Let all these fat old blokes with beards, skeletal young blokes with shaved heads, odd blokes with jam-jar lensed glasses or young ladies with poor hair-dying skills and odd scarf preferences (OK, I am stereotyping, but not all DMRs are necessarily ‘swivel-eyed’, so it’s nice to conjure some counter prejudices to keep the stew spicy) prevail, and have the media landscape dominated by a single force. More monopoly and even less what is laughingly already called ‘balance’.
Let NI fade or vanish under the weight of its own venality and ineptitude, plus the political machinations of those with any eye only to next weeks’ poll ratings.
And then see what we end up with.
If lucky, the void fills with something that does see a balance of views represented, and disseminated with some degree of coverage to the voting public. In forms that are factual more than views-driven and then honed in the edit suite, so the public can weigh issues and make their own minds up.
Or… stick with the BBC media monopoly, and its headlong dominance, with no choice, restriction or public check in the form of right to opt out of paying, or vote.
Too much of that… and the public may come to regret what was wished on them.
And by then, it may also be a bit too late.