Anyone catch Bill Gates on the BBC this morning? Quite an interesting interview here. I note that he was asked to choose “between Mitt Romney and Obama” – not that the BBC have an agenda in play when it comes to who will contest the White House, perish the thought! He was also used to help convey the idea that British Overseas Aid is unreservedly “a good thing” and that capitalism had lost track in recent years. He gave quite a good defence of capitalism – understandably. It’s interesting to see that even a high profile figure like Bill Gates is actually used by the BBC to advance its own narrative on so many issues.
GATES OPEN, HORSE BOLTED
Bookmark the permalink.
I note that he was asked to choose “between Mitt Romney and Obama”
Not presumably, on relative charitable contributions, a subject Mr. Gates might have some experience in and opinion upon?
http://nation.foxnews.com/mitt-romney/2012/01/24/whos-greedy-obama-gave-1-charity-romney-gave-15
Time for the BBC to call the Samaritans?
Bacon is on the attack again, this time with a woman who has written a book about the Obama’s.
Bacon is doing the same thing he did when interviewing Lance Price, if you remember Price made allegations about Brown losing his temper (which Price double sourced) but Bacon called him a liar and said he made these claims up.
Bacon just made the same accusations to female journalist even though she says she has information from close source.
Bacon as usual making up his attack, now Bacon arse licking Obama right now.
I’m always amazed that Bacon never has a problems with rumours involving right wing politicians but he always gets ANGRY when similar allegations are made against his favoured left wing politicians like Brown or Obama.
As an example Bacon allows and repeats all sort of lies about Sarah Palin, he doesn’t care if there is no substance to Sarah Palin allegations.
and I assume the author is the New York Times journalist !
She has been taking some heat in the US as well – but the bits I have seen of her shows her hitting back, she is a bona fide writer who did a lot of research. She has been pointing out that if anything, her book is favourable to the Obama family. But the media just rally round The One – and that’s the way it will be all through the election.
Any chance of a new general thread, the old one is way down the page now.
Typical BBC to ask who Bill Gates might vote for.
It really is none of their business-and to assume that Romney will be the candidate says plenty about what the Beeb are rooting for.
None of us need ever ask who Evan etal vote for…these turkeys vote for Christmas everyday in the form of Big State spending under those practiced safe custodians of finance that are the Labour Party.
I`m hoping that the one track record of the BBC has alienated anybody who might once have trusted in their “objectivity”.
We all know they`re as bent and corkscrew a witness to things as Marx could dared have hoped for…but the mass of this country know the Beebs game…it`s so obvious.
We can`t afford to keep them anymore-the Third World needs the licence fee!
This is the perfect example of why the BBC suck so bad. It’s not just the bias, it’s the demented news judgement. Say what you like about BIll Gates, but he’s a guy who’s uniquely qualified to speak about business and technology, but instead the BBC uses the interview as an excuse for some tedious political point scoring.
Really? Who cares who Gates will vote for? Wouldn’t real journalists want to ask him something a little more substansial? Why do government IT projects so commonly screw up? What advice would he give to a start-up? Is Facebook really worth the money?
Any of those questions would be better, but no, this is the BBC where a Martian could land in the car park and they’d ask him for his views on the welfare cap.
Why do government IT projects so commonly screw up?
You see, that’s the problem with agenda based news interviews, the interesting and relevant questions simply don’t get asked. DJ’s excellent question might prompt some genuinely interesting answers from a man with a proven track record in this area. But all we get is ‘who ya gonna vote for’.
Just as BBC-NUJ is politically biased in favour of US Democrats, so too, it is politically biased in favour of FOREIGN AID, as a compulsory transfer of funds from e.g. British people to people in India, Brazil or in African countries.
BBC-NUJ ignores/censors the evidence.
E.g, here is a view of economist Professor Lal:-
[Extract, scroll down] –
Michael Duffy: Professor Lal, can we move to Africa now and in part look at the vexed issue of foreign aid. Can you tell us what aid has achieved and what this tells us about Africa?
Deepak Lal: It has achieved nothing. It’s not just aid…the thing about Africa is it’s an incredibly rich country in terms of natural resources. The trouble with natural resources and aid, this is like manna from heaven, you don’t earn it, it just comes and falls into your lap, it normally goes to government. The governments then spend their time…firstly, people trying to get into government spend their time trying to kill each other to get hold of the profits from all these things which in some sense is unearned, and that then leads to political corruption, it leads to nothing being done for the general masses of people because you don’t need them, all you have to make sure is someone comes and digs up the stuff, ships it abroad, takes a profit and deposits it in your Swiss bank account. So that is a fundamental problem, and aid is just another form of this natural resource rent, it just comes in a slightly different form when it comes in there. So I would have thought that aid has been a complete disaster for Africa and I would say that they should just stop it if they can.
Michael Duffy: Would that apply to disaster aid too, the short term aid that goes in where there’s a famine or something like that?
Deepak Lal: No, the humanitarian aid, if it is a famine…the trouble with that of course is that famines in Africa are really state engineered to continue the political battle. If you think of the great Ethiopian famine, that was to try and starve the Eritreans out, and of course that means if you try and send food in, the government will steal the food and not let it get to the people who are actually starving because that’s what they really want, they want them to starve.
Michael Duffy: That seems to be part of the problem, there always appears to be a pressing short-term need for aid, but when you add all that up over the last 50 years you see that it’s actually sustained the situation of continual disaster.
Deepak Lal: Absolutely.
http://www.abc.net.au/radionational/programs/counterpoint/deepak-lal-on-foreign-aid/3381056
Does BBC-NUJ regard the following as another form of what it regards as politically desirable ‘FOREIGN AID’ to be continued to be paid for by British citizens and taxpayers?
Isn’t this part of the reason why BBC-NUJ wants unlimited, continuing mass immigration into Britain: so that British people can let them take British jobs, housing benefits, social security, education places, health benefits – so that Britain will be thereby colonised?
“London hospitals write off ‘over 90%’ owed by foreign patients”
By Jane Bradley, BBC.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-london-16711783
The whole ‘interview’ would’ve been more at home on the pages of Smash Hits.