My thanks to all those who voted for Biased BBC on Total Politics, now up to 14th, my sincere appreciation and congratulations to all who contribute here, and a hat-tip to to the blog at Number 36. Next year, time for Top 10? My apologies to those offended by the “right-wing” nomenclature. I didn’t seek it nor did I lobby for either of my blogs. I just try to provide regular output, that’s all.
ON THE UP!
Bookmark the permalink.
Don’t know what’s happened to the rest of the blog but Dame Nikki is almost in tears this morning. On the phone in about the EU Dame Nikki was ‘pleading for pro EU callers’ to ring in.
So funnily enough after the news at 09:30 they’ve ‘found some’. Now who wants to bet they are BBC or Guardian employees being asked to ring in. In fact one of the callers ‘Tony’ I’m sure is the commie cab driver who rings in a fair bit. He drives around London in a cab all done up in support of Cuba and Castro.
Funny how the BBC golt hold of him.
And then when a fair few eu-enthusiats were calling in he called for the balanced to be redressed the other way again.
I think our ears are tuned in on an entirely different frequency where Nicky Campbell is concerned!
Unfortunately this post is so long it’s pushed all the other ones into purgatory. Can it be shrunk?
Right wing? I don’t think so. Sensible – certainly, perceptive – definitely, liberal (in the original meaning of the word) – without doubt but right wing? Only if you accept the BBC characterisation which describes anything which hasn’t been approved by Islington chatterati and CINOs as “right wing”.
I’m not right wing. I’d rather be associated with top 35 Media Blogs.
Luckily, B-BBC is also No 14 in that category.
Above the HuffPo, no less. 😀 And which one is a source for the BBC?
I think the point is is that the bias of the BBC is against the right so this site is inevitably going to attract the right. Not to say that there aren’t people on the left and centre with enough confidence in their opinions and who put democracy first who dont want to see the BBC skew political debate, although sadly, they’re none too vocal (like ‘moderate’ Muslims I guess!).
Great spot Sue that it’s got the same placing on the general media category. Credit must go above all to DV, who does such a great job running this site, showing a light, tolerant touch and great, concise, engaging posts.
Oh, and way to go to DV for pulling the Obamas post! 🙂
And shrinking this one.
I am surprised Harry’s Place hasn’t made it into the top 50.
(coughs)
I hope the beeboids are celebrating with us. Dancing in their studios, Highland reels with Red Andy Marr, looting Sunni Jim Naughtie’s cavernous wine cellar, their joy unconfined as they toast the triumph of the ‘plurality’, the true ‘diversity’ of opinions other than their own constricted, robotic response systems. I shall now walk into the sunshine, a Chakrabarti on each arm, I might even kick some Red Balls in the park.
Right wing or not, these are refreshing alternatives to the corrupt, lying, waste of space that is the BBC.
Help me keep my sanity, just.
Right-Wing these days means anybody to the political Right of Ed Balls.
This includes (for example) Frank Field, Giselle Stuart, and Kate Hoey in the Labour Party, Orange Book Liberals, and any Conservative voter who does not stick pins into a wax effigy of Margaret Thatcher.
It also includes all those who despise politicians (especially those that get fat off the taxpayer) but do not see the creation of another political Party as the answer, only a reduction in the power of the State.
In other words “Right-Wing” is anything or anybody disliked by Guardian readers this week. It is a pretty broad category. Anybody further to the Left of themselves (e.g. Stalin) is also deemed to be Right-Wing.
The Right also has a monopoly on violence.
People on the Left never hurt anybody.
…and the right are all self-interested, they look after their own.
The left look out for the interests of all – no special favours to any group at all 🙂
Ah! That explains the Kinnocks’ and Peter Mandelson’s abject poverty.
Mighty-Right.
Time was the Left were the rebels, anti-establishment, fighting Fatcher. The “Left” are now The Establishment, the Ruling Class. The slime that climbed the greasy pole for 13 years. Blair and Brown’s placemen: The Judiciary, The Chief Constables, the Media and the BBC, the Charities and NGOs, the Quango-queens, Civil Self-Servants, the EUroSocialists, and all their fellow-travellers.
Time to reclaim the debate. Right is the new Left.
Hey, someone’s robbed the blog…
Meanwhile, you’ll all be glad to know Jeremy Whine is scheduled to welcome convicted thug Johnny Marbles onto his show for a round of felony-related fun. So I guess if we want more right-wing voices at the BBC, all we need to do is start beating on pensioners.
‘Jeremy Whine is scheduled to welcome convicted thug Johnny Marbles onto his show’... thereby confirming this, Newsnight and all other BBC guest-inviting shows as pretty much the safe place to be when alumini who are or do go bad need a bit of luv and promo from their empathetic fellow travellers.
Seem to recall only a few hours ago it was some lady who was on the button (as it were) was up for a blow-by-blow (as it were) account tha the nation’s treasure was sure its audience wanted sharing over much else.
If it was just fluff they only gazed at in each other’s navels it would not be so bad, but the national broadcaster seesm to delight in promoting violence.
Jeremy, Chris, dave… how is this possible in the caring society being promoted as the UK’s future?
He’s on now, he’s repeated the phrase ‘as an anarchist…’ three times now, the only reason he’s on is not to question the rights and wrongs, but to rub shoulders with his bbc chums on a journey of self-publicity. He calls himself a comedian. He’ll fit in well with Jeremy Hardy and Sandy Toksvig!
“He’ll fit in well with Jeremy Hardy and Sandy Toksvig!”
In a box.
Sorry, that was nasty – but then so are Hardy and Trotsvig.
I note elsewhere that the Murdochs should sue the pants off Vine, for allowing a caller to say that the two of them were “lying through their teeth”.
It was put out on Vines Rag Week show…so they should…just this once “do a Maxwell” and put Vine into the recycling bin of history.
I would happily give Murdoch and Son my licence fee if they seek a fighting fund…to get Vine offf the airwaves would be a bargain at any price!
The whole show reeked of lavender…to have callers worrying about the possible allergic reaction to foam on Ruperts face rather missed the point…but , after Brand and Ross: hounding old blokes is “just a laff innit”.
Besides mirthmeisterMarbles had factored in the fact that Rupert wore glasses…so end of debate!
What a fiasco of a show…he`s probably nicking Brian Matthews records too!
Classic Peter Allen on Radio 5. After hearing Cameron in Libya Allen sneers on radio that “He and Sarkozy are more popular in Libya than back home”.
Well perhaps in the BBC canteen but I think it’s actually Red Ed who is as popular as a turd in a bath with even Labour supporters.
But sneer away Mr Allen.
Perhaps if Cameron and Sarkozy returned to Europe and introduced democracy, the magic would work here as well.
Doesn’t excuse the BBC’s sneer though.
Well if they both ordered the bombing of the EU Parliament that might be very popular.
I notice the BBC had to gt in their ‘Bush moment’ when a beeboid on the news said “it wasn’t quite mission acomplished”
David, you write: “My apologies to those offended by the “right-wing” nomenclature.” No problem. I wear the badge with pride like “Tea Party”. “Conservative”. “Thatcherite”. Sticks and stones!
The fact is that in the last year I have learned more by following the links on this blog than in any BBC news bulletin. Natalie, DB, Robin, yourself, Preiser (and some I haven’t mentioned) all terrific. Reactions from Martin, my site, Matthew, CJ etc – all very useful. Even Scott – the little tinker – is the sand in the shell that produces the pearl. (He’s going to hate that).
The “gatekeepers” are redundant, self-regulating blogs rule and the cream rises. Onward and upward.
Trust me, so do I, and I wear the scars with pride. But I am happy for anyone to contribute here who shares our profound concerns at the BBC bias
I agree with you Louis. People need to start rejecting the supposed ‘shame’ that comes with being labelled ‘right-wing’. As you say – we should all wear it like a badge of pride. It’s this general reluctance within the population to be upfront about their right-of-centre leanings that creates the impression that we are in the minority, as people of the left are more than willing to shout loudly and self-righteously about their political outlook. This is probably part of the reason why the BBC also believes that their general lefty agenda is actually the centre ground – ‘where most people are coming from’ politically. They’d be in for a shock, if they were to ever step out of the bubble, to see just how few people see the world the way they do. Notice the shock and disgust by so many of the Guardian/BBC brigade at the resounding rejection of the AV reform in the referendum. What happened to their so-called progressive majority? Perhaps it never existed.
I always keep an eye on the number of members, which seems to show a steady drift upwards.
The more eyes and ears there are picking up on BBC output the more examples that can be recorded.
Is there a “hits” log somewhere which is in yearly segments. It would be interesting to see if there is a trend upwards.
It would be interesting to see the traffic history of this blog, Gerald. I’ve been a viewer for a year or two now, but have only started to comment regularly for the past couple of months.
I don’t think members shows the full story, but you are right much more statistics should be shown like Guido does every month.
I wish I knew the vote was proceeding, I would have supported you!
I deeply resent being called right-wing.
I’m a screaming, swivel-eyed, socialist, anti-Zionist left-leaning, right-wing, classical liberal. I voted for Blair in 1997, Barroso in 2004 and UKIP in 2010 but my favourite politician is Nick Clegg, who is dead scrummy.
Marcus Brigstocke is my favourite comedian and I really like U2.
It just puzzles me that people can be lumped in with that other group the “far right”. Ah yes the far right,they are the people who want to nationalise the railways and the banks and the electric companies and the gas companies and the oil industry. They also want everyone to work for the state for the common good. But they are Marxists I hear you cry, well no they are in fact the BNP.
No, people are mixing up “right wing” for libertarain. Freedom to chose for oneself, small government, only enough to safeguard the country. A civlian police force, not a political one. No state owned TV or radio.
Why don’t the left wing spell out what they want? You never hear them actually saying that they want more state control.
The left always tell you what they are against but never what they are for. The left will not debate honestly, they will hide behind words like racist, sexist, xenophobe, because they have not got the intelectual capacity to see another side of an argument. If there is the slightest chance of them losing control they will bring out their labels.
The BBC have mastered this technique. You can tell at a glance who they approve of and who they don’t, just look for the labels.
So I do not fit into any label and I suspect if everyone is honest, nor does any individual.
Sorry forgot to mention – well done David and the team at BBBC, regardless of the label you have done a really good job reserecting this blog a few years ago and you deserve the praise.
Seconded, John. As some have said, this blog is like a support group for many of us. 🙂
John
The biggest asset this site here is the great people who come here and light it up. All I can do is provide a few matches.
I’ve got no objection to being labelled “right-wing” but I would observe that the right/left dichotomy is not an accurate description of the current political/philosophical divide. Rather the divide is between authoritarian and (for the want of a wickedly traduced word) liberal/individualist. The BBC demonises everything it objects to as “right-wing” or – the ultimate anathema – “extreme right wing”. What it means is that any opposition to its view of the world (particularly its views on CAGW, immigration, Israel, the “cuts”, taxation, government expenditure, the “equality” agenda and so) must be damned using a short-hand phrase which encompasses all the wickedness which the BBC can imagine.
Since the BBC is, essentially, a warehouse of the metropolitan bien pensant and represents the political class which has swallowed wholesale all the tenets of 1960s leftism, “right-wing” is the insult of choice. The old trick of yelling “racist” whenever the concerns of the white indigenous inhabitants of England is voiced concerning, for instance, immigration, the creation of Moslem/Asian and black no-go areas in our great cities and the preference given to third-world immigrants in the chase for a council house, is beginning to look a bit threadbare.
Moreover, labelling people as “right wing” neans that those opposing the line of the BBC and its Guardianista fellow-travellers can be smeared with the reputational garbage attaching to, for instance, the BNP. The BBC is big on ad hominem abuse: not so good at debate outside its (highly restricted) comfort zone. Evidence? The Steve Jones report on scientific reportage will do for starters
The terms have their problems and limitations. The way they are cast is that the left has the moral high ground and the right is reactionary. That’s understandable to a point but historically it is not accurate in terms of human and social advancement. Both are doctrinaire in different directions. They are polarising in the same way that terms like black and white are. I wouldn’t subscribe to some of the positions held by either. I don’t want a pre-fabricated identikit set of values and positions. Every human or social problem has many shades and dimensions in between.
Not against greenness per se but am against green fanatacism and imposition of undemocratic measures based on doctrine and various interests and political and public money scams, rather than on proportionate policies based on evidence, honesty and the will of a free and informed public.
Greenness has to make its case in a free and open public arena, not by seizing the moral high ground for its own shady purposes and scaring people with propaganda and cooked science emanating from some murky corners of an ever-encroaching establishment of politics, quangocracy and academia. So I am pro-greenness if there is a genuine case for it but am anti-greenness in so far as it is dishonest, totalitarian and uninformed. Does that make me left or right? Probably neither, though I expect it would be enough for some to label me as right and reactionary rather than left and therefore, of course, virtuous and worthy of my place among the right-thinking guardians of our world.