Newsnight gave the pie-thrower the briefest of mentions last night:
“There was an attack by a member of the public… A man was led away in handcuffs.”
A bit coy about identifying him there.
In January Newsnight commissioned a film – UK Uncut in their own words. Look who had the starring role:
I wonder why they didn’t mention that.
(h/t George R)
UPDATE 18:00. Newsnight’s Paul Mason tweets from America: “US networks are rolling with Wendi Deng. Endless slo-mos of pie attack. NOTW story sidelined.“
Ha ha ha ha ha!
When did the BBC employ him? What checks did they make on his background? Were they advised not to employ him?
I think a Parliamentary enquiry is required. *DONT_KNOW*
This whole ‘anyone who knew, talked to or was in the room with a person who may or may not have been dodgy needs to consider their position… plus the guys at the top’ meme may be hard to sustain with much credibility, but one is sure the BBC will carry it off.
Maybe a guest with two degrees of separation to say it, and not likely to ask anything awkward back?
Though beyond Kevin & Polly, their address book seems thin.
My thought precisely Roland.
How was he paid-how much-who commissioned this sedition in the BBC?
Were the editors AWARE of what was going on during their watch…after all, they have form what with Russell Brand don`t they?
Have lessons been learned?…or are the BBC commissioning the next assault on a pensioner as we speak?
Is this double-barrelled unfunny tosser categorised as a BBC journalist for tax and benefit purposes?…did he declare his income and did it go through the books officially?
If we open up the Cash for Honours enquiry…Yates did that one and it would now be unsatisfactory surely!…then -along with the BBC-we could prove that they have all lost their Marbles up there! And we`re refusing to stump up for the ones they expect by way of replacement!
Brilliant work DB/George R…BBC inciting attacks on pensioner, by paying the likes of this thug to spout off. I think that they are aiding and abetting terrorism now-as well as insider dealings-plenty criminal activity for the Right if it would only wake up!
“Wendi strikes back: Pie incident could mark turning point for Rupert Murdoch ”
(by Tony Harnden)
[Extract]:-
“One last thought: in recent days there has at times been the sense of a mob mentality in Britain as everyone rushed to vilify the Murdochs. The pie assault may come to be seen as something of a metaphor – the loutish, mindless attack and the Murdochs defending themselves and striking back.”
http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/news/tobyharnden/100097869/wendi-strikes-back-pie-incident-could-mark-turning-point-for-rupert-murdoch/
Didn’t get very far did he? All he got was a slap and pie in his face.
A perfect metophor for the leftist attacks? But still they keep trying and the BBC still keeps helping.
He certainly ended up with more foam on his face than his intended victims. I’m glad they are not broadcasting his name too much, these scum thrive on the oxygen of publicity.
His own type have turned against him – his girlfriend broke off their relationship, the other fascists blamed him for taking the main headlines away from their own attacks on the Murdochs. All in all it worked out quite well. 😉
There is no question that BBC-NUJ, and especially ‘NEWSNIGHT’, is politically sympathetic with ‘UK UNCUT’.
In addition to making a programme for ‘UK Uncut’ in January (see YouTube above), ‘Newsnight’s Marxist and Father of the Chapel at ‘Newsnight’ branch, Paul Mason was on a demo with ‘UK Uncut’ in March, with his politically sympathetic comments; this was followed by a fluffy interview by Emily Maitlis with devious ‘UK Uncut’ rep in studio:
Maitlis, interview with ‘UK Uncut’ rep, which immediately followed Mason’s embedded demo report on ‘Newsnight’, March 2011:
‘UK Uncut’s occupation of BBC Radio Merseyside (4 months ago):
Newsnight were happy to give him publicity when it suited them, but now he’s become an embarrassment to the anti-Murdoch agenda they’re pretending they don’t know him.
“You had endowed me with perceptions and passions and then cast me abroad an object for the scorn and horror of mankind.” (Frankenstein, Mary Wollstonecraft Shelley)
As for Mason – I get the impression he sees himself as some sort of father figure to left-wing protest movements, using Twitter to advise on the best books to read and so forth.
My comment above was meant to be in response to the one by George R (9:32) below
Agreed.
‘he sees himself as some sort of father figure’
Wonder if they shared mobile numbers too?
http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/newsnight/paulmason/2011/03/a_snapshot_of_the_26_march_dem.html
‘At Fortnum and Mason the demonstrators who took it over are trying to get out, texting me to point out the difference between themselves and the “black block”.’
Meanwhile, the way things get ‘reported’ is revealing here:
BBCLauraK Bryant adamant Palace warning on Coulson took place, but doesn’t have direct evidence. Waiting for response from Palace
Maybe the caution first, or even wait until anything is known for sure?
ps: Interesting to note here – http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-13503119 – it’s claimed you will get to all his old writings, here – http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/newsnight/paulmason/2011/05/post_2.html
But what you get to is a last blog with one comment… still on referral after 3 months.
Unique.
Hopeless bunch of losers only possible in a still, just about, affluent society.
They just don’t have the foggiest notion as to what creates the wealth that makes their lifestyles possible…tax is expenditure government consumption. What is not removed by tax to be spent by bureaucrats, is applied elsewhere and is not destroyed or hoarded but emerges as investment to create jobs elsewhere. The money is not removed from the economy but applied to increase wealth by the community that actually knows what it is doing ie business..
The munchkins just haven’t a clue.
You can bet, 100%, that these sanctimonious brats would have no problem parasiting off the Welfare State with no intention of working and supporting the same ‘to bring down the system, man’. I know in my anarchist days this was a common refrain. Even then, my response was always: ‘No, its because you’re a parasite who can’t be bothered working’.
It was outrageous that Paxman followed up this propaganda film questioning police conduct. Attentive viewers would have noted the surreptitious attempt to prise the arrestee from the Police.
interesting that the ludicrously self-important Brigstocke and this Carla Bond person vilify Jonnie Marbles, not for assaulting an ailing 80-year-old but for hampering the ‘get Murdoch’ campaign. It is almost as if Murdoch has been stripped of all his human qualities and is seen simply as a monster. There is a whiff of Walter Wolfgang about this.
Murdoch has never been a nice man but he ain’t a serial killer or a genocidal dictator – he is a not-very-nice businessman in the same way that Bernie Ecclestone, Alan Sugar and Lord Hollick are not-very-nice businessmen. He just happens to be sitting on the wrong side of the political divide.
Murdoch is clearly fading and losing his mental faculties but the mob doesn’t care: they want blood and the media – not just the BBC and Guardian but the Telegraph, Associated Newspapers et al – are their enablers.
I agree with the analysis that the cowardly physical attack on Rupert Murdoch is seen by many as a step too far, just as hacking Milly Dowler’s phone was seen as a step too far. It’s also no surprise that the BBC try to gloss over any contact they had with May-Bowles.
But what appalls me, is that an 81 year old witness can be attacked in a parliamentary committee. The shaving cream pie could just have easily been a knife in Murdoch’s neck. What kind of security or intelligence allowed this to happen?
Had this been a congressional hearing (a) I doubt he would have got through security with the wherewithal to carry out the attack and (b) if he had been able to attack a witness, he would have probably ended up with a bullet in his head or behind bars for a very long time. Here? He’ll probably end-up being commissioned by the BBC to make another film.
Agree, Hugh. Indeed, it would be tragic if committee hearings were closed off to the public as a consequence of this retard’s actions.
I dare say this Marbles chappie is now a folk-hero in certain circles. Sadly, I can visualise him sitting on the couch and reviewing the Sundays on the Marr show 12 months from now.
It demeans the whole nation . An attack in our parliament is an affront to us all as it is our building where we, the people, send our representatives to run our affairs.
He must face criminal charges and if convicted pay the price.
And what is farcical is that it was all done and dusted – by Mrs Murdoch – before PC Plod appeared belatedly running across the screen from the far right heading for the pie man. Mind you, it all happened in a matter of seconds and she was as quick as lightning, acting faster than and striking out across people who were closer to the pie man.
Crouching Tiger, Hidden Dragon ?
I make a comment on the BBC blogs, and within minutes…
Dear BBC Visitor,
Thank you for contributing to the BBC web site. Unfortunately we’ve had to remove the content below because it contravened one of our House Rules.
Your comment was considered to have broken the following House Rule:
“We reserve the right to fail comments which…
Break the law or condone or encourage unlawful activity. This includes breach of copyright, defamation and contempt of court.”
http://www.bbc.co.uk/dna/newscommentsmodule/F21678197?thread=8255310&post=109729811#p109729811
Subject:
Murdochs: bruised but not broken
Posting:
‘100. P0lar
NewsCorp shares seem to have soared after the televised PR stunt orchestrated by the Murdochs.’
Maybe get Newsnight to investigate the conspiracy?
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/programmes/newsnight/9383598.stm
A familiar face crops up.
Reporting the news, being the news… creating the news?
Now, which bit was it they didn’t like? Their own URL?
That would be worth putting up as a main post. BBC exercising their Stasi prerogatives in monitoring. Oh come the day, the knock on the door at midnight …
I have appealed to… well that quaint system which takes you in circles and then says ‘we may read it, but probably not’.
This member of the public is rather feeling spoken at, as opposed to for, by this media monopoly.
Er.. Ed… Helen… views?
I had an automated “reply” from the Beeboid State telling me they cannot reply to comments but they take note blah blah blah.
In the interests of sharing the full story in a timely fashion as it evolves (just like Aunty. Not), i have had a reply in lightning fast time…
Your post was removed as the comment you quoted was considered
potentially libellous.
You should find that it has now also been removed.
Thank you for bringing it to our attention.
So… the ‘problem’ was the post they had been fine with for several hours (and I quoted to avoid being modded for being O/T), but they hadn’t noticed until I ‘brought it to their attention’, when mine was ‘noticed’ in a heart beat and removed ‘just in case’. Potentially.
Yeah, right.
I have forwarded this to my MP.
I think the broader scope of media plurality needs kicking in sooner rather than later.
The precedent being set here beggars belief.
They seem only to exist on rumour and allusion.
Yet the minute things look iffy with some feedback, they lawyer up?
Taking out a legitimate critique in the guise of erasing the actual thing they’d posted that was being critiqued?
A few other media might fancy that logic.
‘Nah mate, never happened. And even if it did, we ‘addressed it’, so though it er… potentially went out… it’s now no longer there. No harm, no foul.’
Unique? Freaking deranged!
This UK uncu*t moron is lucky he’s not up on at least a man slaughter charge,the man is 80 for gods sake! and the slap he got would have been the least I would have done to the freakish man child Believe me ‘hacking’ would have taken on a new meaning !.
Also I have noticed a strange inversion of lefty thinking now they want an old man to be taken to trial for things that happened years ago so very unlike the ex German military types they think we should leave alone !
I’ve taken a full screenshot just in case it disappears
Wise move.
It may ‘disappear’ as part of the ‘evolving narrative’ to the story as it unfolds, and viewers need not be troubled by any irrelevant context.
Oh and can some one tell me if Mr Pirgstoat actually learned his “f*ck you a*shole “comment off the telly or was it something shouted at him in the street ?
Great spot DB.
>>For Newsnight, a team of independent film-makers has been following some of the members of UK Uncut<<
How coy. Translation: ‘We asked some left wing people we like to do a promo’
Newsnight did the same sort of thing for Al Qa’eda ‘sympathisers’ in the wake of 7/7. Newsnight – an obscenity on legs.
Or should I say great spot of what George R spotted!
Today is BBC-NUJ-Guardian’s ‘Get Cameron’ day.
Maybe they’ve written much of the script already.
“Which British politician has Rupert Murdoch met most?”
By Tim Montgomerie
http://conservativehome.blogs.com/leftwatch/2011/07/which-british-politician-has-rupert-murdoch-met-most.html
“REAL scandal MPs ignore: As Murdoch grilling turns into farce, bankers get £14bn bonuses and IMF warns of euro meltdown”
Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2016645/Debt-crisis-As-Rupert-Murdoch-grilling-turns-farce-bankers-14bn-bonuses.html#ixzz1Sdfb9q72
Wendi sticking it to Marbles seemed to reinvigorate old Rupert a bit. I wonder if the Daily Politics will do a segment showing other examples of ageing newspapermen getting help from Asian beauties.
Mmm. Just let me check that ‘girl’s’ larynx.
David Vance / DB
This really is a beaut ! Would it not be sensible to circulate this post more widely. The entire Newsnight team would have had several hours last night for one of them to recognise the attacker as someone they had dealt with before ? So – WHY THE COVER-UP ?
Who knew ? When ? Why didn’t the top people know ?
People who might be interested include, for example, Mel, Janet Daley, Delingpole, Harnden, various blogsites ? How about Private Eye ?
I see that should have commended George R for finding the link with Newsnight – well done !
It figures:
S.CHAKRABARTI, BBC-NUJ chum, defender of Islamic LSE’s Gaddafi, and of Al Qaeda trainee, Binyam Mohamad, gets top job from Cameron today.
There seems to be an emerging agreement between the political parties that there should be much greater separation between politicians and the media.
Does that mean the revolving door between the BBC and Labour will stop ?
Good point!
How come Prescott gets a union card to do walk on bits for radio4 plays?
How does his wife merit a place on The One Show?
The shamelss plugging of Campbells fictions, of Blunkett and Cheries self-serving vanity press-how much of our money is the BBC paying their likes to “serialise” their ravings?
Maybe now we can lose Patten,Chris Smith etc…don`t want politics and media beanos to become entangled now do we?
What I was referring to was the way BBC types get employed by the Labour Party, and the way the BBC recruits news staff from Labour circles.
A couple of years ago this site documented quite a few such moves. Someone produced a list – and others added to the list. There were quite a few names.
(Within the civil service there used to be a rule that prevented people moving to a job directly linked to their previous work in Whitehall – there had to be a gap of at least 6 months.)
Yesterday, The Daily Politics voluntarily returned from its summer holiday and had Alastair Campbell on.
Today on its second day out of its holiday, who do you think turned up? Yes, Ubiquitous Maguire! He was on Sky News yesterday. He seems to alternate between them but I expect he pops up on other programmes too.
Several questions to the PM have raised the position of the BBC, including its degree of dominance – and Cameron is clear that the judicial review should include the BBC.
The Labour (and BBC) target is the break-up of NI. How about the break-up of the BBC ?
perhaps some beeboid might like to tell us just which SENIOR beeboids have resigned since the fake Panorama programme came out?
Also, on Radio 5 the dozy female just blurted (in reply to some Tory MP saying the nation is fed up with hacking stuff) out that “are you fed up with hearing about Coulson, Cameron and BSkyb?”
Really I thought this was all about Milly Dowler then BBC? Or sit that YOUR agenda?
The Beeboid rebuttal will be that the BBC 1 boss resigned after that documentary which edited footage about the Queen walking out, and a BBC darling lost her job because of Ross/Brand. Not that it excuses anything, as nobody at the News has lost their job over lies.
How’s this for balance…
1230: Gary O’Donoghue Political correspondent, BBC News
Interesting appeal for non-partisanship from Tory MP Louise Mensch – then proceeding to [become partisan] by raising the issue of Tom Baldwin, Ed Miliband’s aide who used to work for News International.
1238: Gary O’Donoghue Political correspondent, BBC News
Labour scent a chink in the PM’s defence – repeated questions now over whether the BSkyB bid was discussed by the PM at all in his 26 meetings with News International people. He insists he had no “inappropriate” conversations but he seems to stop short of simply saying “no”.
There is no balance at all. O’Donoghue merely amplifyies a Labour debating position.
It’s all so obvious.
Incredible isn’t it
“1303: Matthew Dorrance
tweets: Very poor performance from #Cameron. His back is against the wall and he’s hitting out rather than coming out fighting.”
Is Matthew Dorrance blind and deaf (apologies to those are so disabled). Cameron is slaughtering a monosyllablic and very poor Labour
And hitting out is not coming out fighting, eh?
Is he thick as well?
Cameron mopped the floor with Miliband, and beeboids are sounding quite subdued and frustrated. One guest said Miliband’s endless calls for Cameron to “apologise” for employing Coulson runs the risk of him sounding like a “one horse pony”.
1336: Andy H Welsh
writes on our BBC News Facebook wall: I don’t get how he is still PM, he wasn’t actually voted to be put there, and he has shown without a doubt ill judgement at the very least. He should not be running the country, end of!
Have they put up ANY of the really relevant points that many Con and Lib MPs are making? Seems not. As always, read the BBC and get NO IDEA of what is happening. thank God for the internet!
The only weak point so far has been the not giving the name of the company that vetted Coulson, he should have just said he didn’t know or that “it will be given when I have it” or something to shut the idiots up. What a complete waste of about 20 or 30 questions by Labour being partisan instead of getting on with sorting out!
Sorry from spamming but WTF do they get these things?
“1410: Julia from Edinburgh, Scotland
I find Cameron’s “I’m enjoying this” deeply offensive – the guts of this whole issue are after all concerning a murdered child and relatives of terrorist victims.”
:-E
1414: Jonny
texts: Cameron seems to have been very naive in his acceptance of Andy Coulson’s assurances. Is this what he meant by leading the greenest government ever?
FFS!
Last reply, honest! Milliband has been good so far…oops, until just now mentioning News Int stats. (That said I even agreed with keith Vaz’s intervention!)
There’s certainly very little – extremely little – exploration of Cameron’s very serious charge that Miliband is exploiting the issue for petty party political point scoring and has failed to rise the the event for the good of the country. Resounding stuff very downplayed on the BBC.
“His membership of the Labour Party was suspended after the incident.”
http://uk.news.yahoo.com/rupert-james-murdoch-appear-mps-133937218.html
Oh, how did he get reported as an anarchist?
This is just pure bitch……seems Wendi Deng upset the narrative big time (in terms of incident) and needs taking down a few notches.
How’s this for BBC bile. Pure, puerile disrespect. BBC. Offensiveness from the tax-payer funded quasi-monopoly.
”
1336:
Rupert Murdoch may have won the heart of wife Wendi Deng – seen leaping to the mogul’s defence when he was splattered with shaving cream yesterday – having met when buying a share in Star TV China. But he never managed to conquer the Chinese market, according to this report by business reporter, Juliana Liu.
Seems that ‘conquest’ (emotive word) was stymied not by any free market criterion but by the Chinese firewall which shut all foreign media ownership out.
”
In 2005, China’s broadcast regulator, the State Administration of Radio, Film and Television, published new regulations forbidding foreign stations from buying domestic channels and other media outlets.
The move was seen as Beijing’s effort to maintain control over what its people can see and read.”
So the reerence to Wendi Deng and ‘failure to win China’s heart’ was nothing intrinsic to News Corp (or its corporate vehicles) but China’s intact media control policy.
Would you have guessed from the ‘tease’ presented above.
Shoddy.
In that report the BBC seem to be applauding the way the communist Chinese have kept the free marketeer Murdoch out of their media.
Extrapolate this to see their message to the UK Government – shut him out of our media, leaving the field clear for our state propagandist – the BBC.
How the BBC must envy China.
That BBC story is also rubbish. Yes, the Chinese have decided to block foreign ownership of DOMESTIC channels.
But anyone who has travelled in China will know that there are millions of satellite dishes pointing to the Star TV satellite.
That’s the Star TV operation run out of Hong Kong.
Which Murdoch took a huge risk on establishing back in the 1980s, yet another example of his buccaneering to break up former media monopolies. Murdoch will hang on to Star TV, it has been a huge success right across Asia.
In the PM’s statement and now in the debate – several times the subject of BBC media dominance has been raised. If the judicial inquiry is really to look inter alia at media plurality, the dominance of the BBC is far more important than NI’s place.
So in a cack-handed way, as an unintended consequence, Cameron may have raised this issue to the national agenda.
Hmm, I wonder if this is why Bacon on R5L was not his usual combative self when criticisms of the BBC or ‘the narrative’ were made by Daniel Hannan and Finklestein. I’m getting a sense that the BBC fears it may have shot itself in the foot the way they’ve bigged up the NI story for political motives, on top of Cameron rallying so superbly.
First words out of Red Ed’s gob, “Milly Dowler”.
Jesus can’t this tool think of anything better than continually bringing up a dead girls name for his own political purpose.
I thought he was OK but yes, the Dowlers got mentioned 3 times in the first few paragraphs but after that (until right now) he was OK.
I will not be voting Conservative at the next election if Cameron is still leader. This debate isnt about News International, thats old news (if news at all). This debate is about the future of British media as we know it. The left wing, Islington based, Guardian-BBC axis is trying to destroy ‘free press’ as we know it. Cameron has to be strong and completely condemn the under hand gutter politics led by the supposed indepedant tax payer funded broadcaster. The BBC are slaughtering or at least attempting to bring down the Murdoch empire so that their complete dominence of the market with their left wing ideologies are the only views exposed to the masses. Murdoch has created billions of pounds of revenues, paid all his taxes and created thousands upon thousands of jobs. The BBC are calling not for a reduction in his empire but the complete obliteration of it. This man has done more for British and worldwide media than arguabally anyother person. He should be knighted if anything. The BBC continually flouts the real issue here which is the corruption of the institutional elite. Murdoch did nothing wrong, he was let in by PM after PM. He just used his intuition in order to expose the weakness of the PM’s. The left are up to their old tricks of regulation and anti-freedom of speec-if-it-doesnt-comply-with-their-own-views, Cameron has to step in now and step in hard. THe BBC has to be stopped before its too late. Murdoch’s power is natural, the BBC’s is unnatural. The BBC’s attack dogs have Cameron firmly in their sights and he cannot flounder, if he flounders he will be lost. He has to fight.
Wendi for Prime Minister! She comes out fighting, while Cameron does the usual PR-man nothing.
I’ve never particularly like Murdoch but I’m warming to him. Anyone the Left hates so much has to be made of the right stuff.
From this LA Times article it sounds like US investors are glad Rupert Murdoch remains in charge. So stuff you, BBC !
http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/world/la-fgw-murdoch-staying-20110720,0,2949280.story?track=rss&utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+latimes%2Fnews%2Fnationworld%2Fworld+%28L.A.+Times+-+World+News%29&utm_content=Google+Feedfetcher
Prob been mentioned but haven’t had time to read all the posts, but he was a Labour Party member:
http://www.anorak.co.uk/287706/news/jonnie-marbless-labour-party-presents-a-short-history-of-pieing.html/
Another reason for corporate BBC to attempt to shut out News Corp by any means and play using the left stereotype of the ‘Murdoch’ comes from the ever reliable loyal leftist ranks of Gillard and her supporters of the Australian Greens.
True to form and taking the cue, Gillard has opined on message.
“The Australian branch of Rupert Murdoch’s media empire will face “hard questions” in the wake of the phone hacking scandal in Britain, Prime Minister Julia Gillard has said.
She said she was “disturbed” by revelations about his UK business.
The Greens, which hold the balance of power in the upper house, have called for a parliamentary inquiry into News Limited, Mr Murdoch’s Australian firm.”
Tucked into the closing short paragraphs is a little clue as to why News Corp poses a threat to the tax-funded broadcaster.
Apparently Gillard has done some premptive blocking.
“The government has reportedly stalled a ruling by an independent panel in favour of Mr Murdoch’s part-owned Sky News to run Australia’s taxpayer-funded overseas TV service.
The panel had unanimously backed the Sky bid to run the Australia Network but the government imposed a “national interest” bar on the process.”
What is Australia Network?
“Established in 2001, Australia Network is Australia’s international television service, beaming 24/7 to more than 44 countries across Asia, the Pacific and Indian subcontinent. We are part of ABC International, a group that facilitates cross-cultural communication, encouraging awareness of Australia and building regional partnerships. Alongside Radio Australia, International Projects and International Relations, Australia Network keeps our audience connected with the world around them.”
Sounds a bit like the BBC World (plus the Radio).
The panel suggested this might go to News Corp ie private. Leftists and Beeboids are, naturally, horrified that the ‘Murdoch’ could possibly be active in this way.
Perhaps BBC World could also be provided as a Britain Network? By a private company. After all it could happen in Australia (soon)
Beeboid panic and sense of the apocalypse.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-asia-pacific-14212954
A spectre is haunting Beeboidia…..the spectre of MURDOCH.
pace some 19th century unreadable writer.
KEY POINTS.
David Cameron says that, “with hindsight”, he would not have employed ex-News of the World editor Andy Coulson as his press spokesman. Labour leader Ed Miliband accuses the PM of a “catastrophic error of judgement” in hiring Mr Coulson.The Met Police is accused of a “catalogue of failures” over its hacking inquiry in a damning report by the home affairs committee
BBC disgrace.
Also, BBC News stated last night that UKuncut had asked them to announce that Jonnie Marbles was nothing to do with them. Now it seems like he was a founder member.
I guess the far-left cowards are on the look out for some nice soft targets, (such as an 80 year old man who’s facing the other way) when you consider that at most of their poorly attended ‘demonstrations’ these days they’re faced with hundreds of hard-as-f**k EDL members.
One comment that Cameron made struck me as important. He said the left are complaining about the bias of the right wing press, and the right about the bias of the BBC. He went on to say that BOTH issues will be addressed by the enquiries.
Now is this me just wishfully thinking, or has he finally grown a pair, and aims to have the BBC’s monopoly smashed up, like the BBC wants with Murdoch. If so, the remit given to the enquiries should be worded accordingly.
I’m waiting to see the fine print in the hope this is the intention.
All you Beeboids who follow this blog – Be careful what you wish for, this might be Cameron’s payback time!
Didn’t catch that part – music to my ears!
Yes – Cameron specifically said that many on the left criticised the Murdoch empire – but many on the right criticied the BBC.
Knowing Cameron, that was a sop to his backbenchers and he intends to do precisely f*** all.
Could also be a deep game he’s playing and he’s been giving the BBC enough rope to hang themselves. He’s pretending that he doesn’t think it too bad but agrees that they need investigating as part of the remit of the enquiry. BBC must have been mentioned 6 or 7 times by Cameron or others on the Conservative benches today.
Maybe I’m being uncharacteristically optimistic, but it’s nice to hope that Cameron has just been waiting for the right time to get them when they’ve shown themselves up so blatantly. If he does succeed in emasculating the BBC I can see myself possibly voting for the Conservatives at the next election.
The Beeboid Corporation is specifically protected by its Charter from political interference which means it is difficult for a government to do anything about it without being accused of interfering with the independence of Beeboids for political reasons. David Cameron knows very well what would happen if a Conservative PM went after it.
A judicial inquiry, though, is a whole different kettle of fish and can cast a cold eye on Beeboid antics without being accused of politics and being labelled the nasty party of evil Tories. The PM knows very well how to take advantage of the opportunity this other scandal has thrown his way.
That’s basically what I was trying to say too. I’m just hoping I’m not over-estimating him.
Ne’er fear, the Graun is all over it, the BBC, well, er… him…
http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2011/jul/20/why-i-foam-pied-rupert-murdoch?CMP=twt_gu
Got to say, their readers seem pretty independent minded when served a plate of tripe as filet.
Once? Was?
MichaelLCrick Michael Crick by BBCNewsnightPM: because of TV licence income there was once a danger of BBC News becoming “rather dominant”.
R5L news bulletin leading with Cameron saying with hindsight he wouldn’t have employed Coulson, a beeboid saying this is a dramatic change in his position, and Miliband has said his decision to employ Coulson was catastrophic.
Agenda, what agenda? I’m sure its a perfect coincidence that the BBC likes to lead this story according to the Labour narrative. I guess the inquiry might shed some light on how these ‘coincidences’ occur.
“Catastrophic”? Bad, undoubtedly. Ill-advised, yes. Stupid, I’ll grant. But catastrophic?
Catastrophic is a famine where your children are dying of starvation. Catastrophic is an implosion of a currency leading to a meltdown in the financial system.
What an unmitigated prick.
Also online: the lead on the news page, the UK news page and the UK politics page is the following:
PM’s ‘regret’ over hiring Coulson<img src=”http://news.bbcimg.co.uk/media/images/54166000/jpg/_54166600_cameroncommons464in_afp.jpg” alt=”David Cameron in the Commons”/>
“David Cameron says that “with hindsight” he would not have hired Andy Coulson as he comes under attack from Labour MPs in the Commons.”
about 3 hours of talk and this is what they publish.
Precisely what they did during the headlines of the 4pm news on News 24.
Out of all that debate there was a carefully edited segment of Cameron saying he shouldn’t have hired Coulson and his comments about living and working in the here and now. What they had done was remove his hindsight comments immediately preceeding it so that it fitted the meme of “I was wrong” that has become their central narrative in subsequent bulletins.
The only problem was that Milliband was so poor that the comment of his they stuck in jarred badly with that narrative.
They also seem to be totally avoiding the piece where Cameron let Balls have it both barrels over Damian McBride.
How was it catastrophic? What did Coulson do in Downing Street? Invent some fictional reason for launching a catastrophic war, perhaps? Destroy someone’s family while at an airport en route to a holiday abroad? Plant allegations about the mental health of the PM’s own party rivals?
Compare and contrast these tweets reporting the same part of Cameron’s speech. First Poltics Home editor Paul Waugh:
Cameron dig at BBC. Says left overdo Murdoch influence, right over do leftwing bias of BBC.”Both have got a point”
Now Newsnight’s political editor Michael Crick:
PM: “The right overdoes the left leanings of the BBC.” Some Tory MPs won’t be happy with that.
Crick seems to be demob happy ahead of his move to Channel 4 News – it’s non-stop Tory-bashing from him now.
BBC:“Flan flingers
Why are custard pies used as a protest?”
First the BBC went into orgasm over shoe throwing (as long as it’s at George Bush. Try throwing a shoe at Obama and check your life expectancy). Then came fire extinguisher throwing by a “student protestor”. Now its pie throwing (snicker) at a pensioner. Since when is assaulting a defenceless pensioner an act of protest?
What should bBC readers throw at Mark Thompson, to protest against the abuse of the BBC’s charter requirements on impartiality?
Jonathon May-Bowles, Windsor Popular Front.
Maybe I’m missing something, but it seems odd to me that there’s no BBC outcry (i.e., having a stream of guests on across the spectrum of broadcasting channels and programmes expressing their outrage) over how much Murdoch has controlled Labour that they immediately suspended the guy who nearly threw shaving cream on Uncle Rupert.
‘Newsnight’s Paul Mason tweets from America: “US networks are rolling with Wendi Deng. Endless slo-mos of pie attack. NOTW story sidelined.“‘
One looks forward to Newnight not sidelining Mr. Mason’s very close links with the organisation the attacker now appears to have founded.
But maybe some sidelines are more lucrative, journalistically, than others.
What’s he doing in the US anyway? Got sent out the country (offset) to let stuff blow over? Doing things the US correspondents are not qualified to handle?
paulmasonnews Paul Mason RT @millarm: 579 people tweeting #Newsnight currently the 4th most popular show on http://tellybhttp://tellybug.com
Blimey, I knew Newnight’s audience was down just to folk on contract being told to watch, but really…
Also might help if he proofed his tweets (links) a bit better too. Professionally-speaking.
What’s he doing in the US anyway?
He seems to be abroad more often than not recently. I imagine he’s quite bolshie in editorial meetings – I wonder if they send him away as often as possible just for a bit of peace and quiet.
Speaking of editorial meetings…
mediaguardian Media Guardian Search for Michael Crick replacement causes rumblings at Newsnight | Media Monkey http://gu.com/p/3vyn4/tf
Quaint the ‘rumblings’ seem more on who gets to ‘report’ what they made up as ‘sources saying’ in the pub, rather than being held to account for suppressing rather newsworthy aspects of topical stories (even if they didn’t suit).
Doing things the US correspondents are not qualified to handle?
That’s a very long list of reporting tasks. Other than rehashing White House talking points, doing a dishonest series of reports on immigration, or sneering at and smearing non-Democrats, there isn’t much they can do.
guardiantech Guardian Tech ‘News has to be subsidised, cheap and free’ – Clay Shirkyhttp://bit.ly/odsKUD
As opposed to cheap, free and expensive?
And subsidised, too.