Here’s Conservative MP Graham Stuart responding to a cheap shot from Nicky Campbell on Radio Five Live’s Breakfast show this morning.
Nicky Campbell: For the first time MPs on the Education Select Committee want you to provide the questions when they go head-to head with Michael Gove next Tuesday. They’re asking for suggestions via Twitter. LOL. And it’s going to be with the hashtag “AskGove”. The Conservative MP Graham Stuart is the chair of the Education Committee. Good morning.
Graham Stuart: Good morning, Nicky.
Nicky Campbell: Tell us a little bit more about this, getting other people to do your hard work for you. Great idea – you can go and have lunch in your subsidised canteen. [Smug chortle]
Graham Stuart: Thanks for that low remark. You of course struggle by on a fraction of what MPs are paid Nicky so it’s nice to have someone like you standing up for low earners…
Nicky Campbell: Absolutely, well said!
Graham Stuart: … and the unsubsidised while working for the BBC, but never mind – we won’t worry about your hypocrisy.
After that put-down Campbell steered clear of the wisecracks and concentrated on the topic at hand.
About time !
Campbell NEVER does that with his favoured Labour politicians as I’ve pointed out before the Dame calls them by their first name all very polite. Keith Vaz who is always on Radio 5is treated like a god.
Campbell just can’t hide his hatred of Tories or right wingers, remember how he called Guido Fawkes a ‘fascist’ live on air.
It comes naturally to Campbell, but not when it comes to attacking left wing politicians or supporters.
If the Scottish vote for independence, is there any chance that we can have him deported back home? Hypocrisy doesn’t even start to describe him!
No thanks, we don’t want him back 🙂
Problem is the BBC is full of smarmy left wing jocks, you have to take him.
you can keep our Liebour fungus down saaarf
This provides a very good model of how to deal with the BBC. People are too damned polite imho.
They shouldn’t be. The slimey, propagandist BBC always has a dog in the ideological fight (despite its pathetic claim to “objectivity”) and the best way of exposing this hypcrisy is tackling it head on.
Anyone remember Ann Coulter demolishing the smug tit Paxman? A delight.
And Paxo being reduced to flaccid, neo-liberal incomprehension, by Tommy Robinson’s dogged refusal to swoon before the joys of Muslim ‘enrichment’. Jeremy’s eyes said it all, ‘How can such appalling white people exist?’
Luvaduck!
Tory MP hits barn door with banjo!
Still-might yet set a trend, so let`s hope so!
Best thing to do with a banjo.
Graham Stuart for PM. That was awesome.
Why don’t more people do this? Everyone knows the BBC’s MO by now: girly-girly passive agressive whining and sob-sister drivel about homeless baby seals. Why sit there and take it like a chump? Why let a bullying fop like Dame Niki flounce around when everyone knows that he can’t deal with people firing back? WHat are they afraid of? The BBC will try and slime them? That’s boat’s sailed already so why even give these tools credability.
The best example of a BBC TV take down was Sir James Goldsmith tearing Dimbleby apart on a live studio edition of the money program some years ago. When faced with an accusation of having a “labyrinthine” business organisation with “tentacles” everywhere, Goldsmith reached down, took a file out of the briefcase beside his chair and contrasted the turnover of Dimbleby’s companies with his own (revealing the Dimbleby’s turnover and profits. He contrasted the various offshoots of Dimbleby’s empire with his own, showing that Dimbleby’s business had 100 times more “tentacles” that his own. It was a classic! Dimbleby was embarrassed beyond words – and being live no one could edit it.
I don’t think this is the same edition of the Money Prgramme in 1977 in which Sir “Jams” stormed off the set…but I could be wrong. Sadly, no record of the show appears to survive outside the vaults. Shame.
David or Jonathon? I’m guessing David if it was ’77.
Still, LR, do you see David Dimbleby as having a left wing bias?
Yes. sorry Hippiepooter, it was indeed David not Jonathan – I should have made it clear. The man who blighted his commentating career by describing Richard Nixon visiting No10 Downing Street as “The man of a Thousand Faces”. Polite for a visiting dignitary. I’m sure Leonid I. Brezhnev would have had a better welcome.
(Hmm…David and Jonathan? Wasn’t that a pop band?)
Louis, have a look at the video on this blog post(scroll down) – I think it may be what you are referring to. It is the BBC’s Money Program, but it doesn’t involve either Dimbleby. Mr. Goldsmith was certainly fearless – it’s a shame that currently there aren’t more people prepared to stand their ground and hit back like this!
http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/adamcurtis/2010/07/predator_vs_aliens_ii.html
I’d love to see the Israeli’s doing this to the BBC. I can never understand why those who are continually on the end of BBC bias don’t take it publicly to them
Ive seen Regev dish it back a few times, but (ahaaaa!) there always seems to be an … ahem!…microphone volume problem?
never been able to get to the bottom of that 😀 eh!
The perfect riposte to one of the BBC’s biggest hypocrites, this is what the Conservative MP’s should do more often, in fact I think they should start adapting some of the responses comedians use to deal with hecklers.
In this case the behaviour of Dame Nicky was a clear example of someone trying and failing to show how witty they are to resolve some inner egotistical need to be loved.
“Everybody hates you. Surely you remember that from school? is the sort of response to give to the sort of people the BBC employs when they try and be oh so clever.
In the same way Gavin Essler & other beeboids can’t spot the hypocrisy in claiming that Stephen Hester is a public servant & therefore should not be in receipt of a high income. How would he then differ from Paxman, Ross etc? That said, in the hypocristy stakes I just can’t understand how Labour spokespersons are not being shouted down when they complain about Hester when it was a Labour Government (& not just “the government” per the BBC) who awared him his contract.
BBC never point out the large bonuses paid by the BBC.
The Beeboids approach this from the perspective of the Marxist Labor theory of value. According to them, the work of Thompson and Paxman (the nomenklatura) is valued more than Hester’s.
Quite – Helen Boeden believes that journalism = “Holding power to account”
http://www.bbc.co.uk/pressoffice/speeches/stories/boaden_lse.shtml
Yet I cannot find this definition anywhere except at the BBC.
“…a direct presentation of facts or description of events without an attempt at interpretation ”
http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/journalism
“..writing that reflects superficial thought and research, a popular slant, and hurried composition, conceived of as exemplifying topical newspaper or popular magazine writing as distinguished from scholarly writing: He calls himself a historian, but his books are mere journalism.”
http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/journalism
The BBC represents the antonym of journalism ie. pedia “propagandist media”
It is democracies role to hold power to account by hearing the arguments from all sides of the political divide. It is not up to the BBC to tell me how to interpret politicians policies.
Thanks for that.
Again, there seems a slight disconnect in the BBC’s output between the relative holding of whom to account, and for what…depending.
As to holidng the power of an unaccountable £4Bpa media monopoly to account… not so much.
In fact, as Jeff & Lunchtime’s experiences suggest, when ‘questions are being asked’ this apparently meant only to exist in unique directions about carefully selected topics.
The “explining the news” policy began with John Birt at LWT. The program he produced (Weekend World) with Peter jay and later former MP Brian Waldren proceded in this fashion:
1. Conduct research to prove your point
2. Write script based on research
3. Find interviees to back up the “research”.
I once asked a researcher, “What happens if you can’t find an interviewee to say what you wnat them to say:. She replied, “Find another interviewee who will”.
No one ever questioned the legitimacy of the origina; “research”.
Birt later became Director General fo the BBC and later an advisor to Tony Blair.
I heard a Labour guest brought up quite sharply on this by 5Live Breakfast’s economics Correspondent.
Dame Nicky is probably one of the worst at Radio 5, he’s not No1, that goes to Bacon who really is a shit followed by Vikki Pollard.
The problem with Campbell is he’s full of himself, he once said he was the new Paxman, he’s proud of his links to the IRA and he also fancies himself as a sort of camp Frank Sinatra (you really don’t want to hear him sing)
Also, he has this annoying habit (one of many) of cracking some unfunny joke on radio and when no one laughs or ignores it, he interrupts the conversation to repeat the same unfunny joke and will do it over AGAIN if people still don’ t laugh.
He never asks simple straight questions, if you listen to him he spend 70% of the time asking these convoluted questions and only giving 30% of the time back for the answer.
Taken in isolation this does seem a Nicky Campbell off moment, and it got the treatment from Graham Stuart that it deserved and hats off to him for it.
Still, as a regular listener to NC, just an off moment. He is one of the BBC’s all time greats, normally impeccably impartial.
“The British Broadcasting Corporation (BBC) has been advised to go upmarket and guard against “acceptance of the shoddy or the vulgar”.
Speaking at the Oxford Media Convention, BBC Trust chairman Lord Patten warned against a “lowering of cultural standards” or an “acceptance of the shoddy or the vulgar”.
He also said the broadcaster should not be wary of being tagged “intellectual”, the Daily Mail reported on Thursday.”
http://zeenews.india.com/news/world/bbc-must-promote-excellence-not-vulgarity_755032.html
With badly educated people like Cambell at the BBC Patten has no chance of bringing about his vision.
The BBC does not “inform” it ridicules with its childish interlectually challenged presenters who have all the manners of Russel Brand!! It will never change it will only get worse.
Mr Campbell is an exceptionally unpleasant individual. What is is with Jocks who leave the gorbals and come south to spread their hate-filled socialist poison with Sassenachs?
Mr Salmond, if you read this, please take dame Nicky back. Place him anywhere the other side of Hadrian’s Wall. Many thanks.
“…the other side of Hadrian’s Wall” Further than that surely. The border has changed since Hadrian built his wall. Allthough I expect that Campbell would not be all that welcome by his fellow Scots.
Oh I don’t know, Gordon Brown likes him.
Michael Gove seems to attract particular ire from the left – so I’m not surprized that Campbell tries to lend his (light)weight to the onslaught. What I find amusing is the Beeboid Dame laughing at Twitter. A case of a Twitter obsessed Beeboid calling the kettle black, I think.
For these reasons I long for the day that the Scottish Broadcasting Company is set up and I would be more than happy for Campbell to repatriate himself a little further north and out of my earshot and off my tax dollar.
Oh and one more thing – I’m pleased that Anglophobe Andy Murray got stuffed at tennis again.
What a sad attitude. I always supported Tim Henman, but sadly there were a number of my fellow Scots who showed their ignorance by not supporting him simply because he is English. I had hoped for better here.
As an Englishman and a Brit I always used to lend my support to Scots/Irish/Welsh sporting efforts. This was despite a growing unease that the compliment was returned. Murray was the individual who opened my eyes on this issue.
http://www.murraysworld.com/quotes/
I’ll be supporting anyone but England.
And I used to be a Unionist. Gordon Brown and Alex Salmond share the honours for having changed my mind on that one.
Sorry Scots. Time to go now.
It was banter with a journalist. If you’re going to get all upset over that you’ve been watching too much BBC.
In general I’m a little uneasy about supporting sportsmen in the individual sports such as tennis or golf simply for reasons of their nationality.
At the extreme end of this tendency are the BBC who expect us to root for the Brit luvvies at the Oscars. A phenomenon I have always found to be odd.
I’m afraid it’s not just Murray’s ‘banter’. His personality doesn’t seem to invite my support. His conversation about supporting or not supporting England did highlight the way that the Celtic fringe thinks differently about the Union.
Wonder where he pays his taxes. Switzerland? Don’t think Alex Salmond should bank on them going to Edinburgh.
I can’t Murray, not just because he’s a jock (I used to support Coulthard when he was racing) but he’s the sort of chippy jock I really can’t stand.
Andy Murray lives in England and has an English girlfriend I believe. He’s not my favourite but he is a formidably talented player who has made huge impact in an era of exceptionally gifted players, all of whom he has beaten at one time or another. He must surely win one or more of the majors in the not-too-distant future. I wouldn’t be in the least surprised if he won the Olympic gold either, this year. Good for him if he does.
Oh and as for any ghost of a hint of a slighting of the English pound (well, British, if anyone insists), I pay my taxes in pounds and if anyone says otherwise I shall set the phobia hounds on them!
I think we must not get into the divide and conquer trap the BBC uses. We must not tar all our Scottish friends with the same brush. Campbell is not a typical Scot, he is a BBC socialist Scot, there is a great difference
The Scots have fallen for the leftist strand of thinking which is to use difference as an advantage and bargaining chip. ‘We’re better than you and deserve more because of some perceived or past injustice.’ That’s why the leftist BBC is so full of grievance cases. The only way to call their bluff on these tactics is to wave them goodbye.
JHT
Agreed. The Pakistani cricket team have just provided Scotland with all the ammunition it needs (should they choose) to throw a brickbat at the English and Welsh.
http://www.scottishlabour.org.uk/mp The list goes on for three pages.
General Election 2010:
Labour – 41 (no change from 2005)Lib Dems – 11 (no change from 2005)Scottish National Party– 6 (no change from 2005)Conservatives – 1 (no change from 2005)
It seems not all Scots are Labour, just almost all. The problem is that any Scot with ambition moves South, bringing their politics with them.
Whilst Nicky Campbell was trying to impress the linen suits that rob us blind…he might have been better employed in asking just how it is that a school that employs a paedophile for fifteen years or so is described as caring and well led by TWO OFSTED reports whilst he violated maybe 40 young girls aged 6-8?
This was meant to be an “education” piece wasn`t it?…so how come governors, head teachers, senior staff, unions, councillors and the usual safeguarding industry neither noted it…or covered up for it?
How come I`ve neard nothing from the Childrens Advocate Lobby like Barnardos and the Childrens Commissioner then…it happened between 2006 and 2010( and probably since 1996)?
Might it be because these “Lammings and Lemmings” rather like their salaries and don`t want us to rake over their systemic cynical malice and grooming compliance?…after all these ARE the great and good who work for, write for and bleat on about such issues for the Guardian, BBC and quango-newsletters.
Had this been a Catholic school or a private school we`d not have heard the end of it…but strangely enough, the BBC and Guardian have gone all Shoesmith on us…and I`ll expect no future programmes about this scandal in NE Somerset.
Still-I saw the heads post advertised in the Times Ed yesterday…so lessons have obviously been learned!
Indeed the total lack of investigation that has gone into this story is absolutely amazing. I somehow doubt that this teacher suddenly became a paedophile while in his mid 40’s it appears. A real journalist would be tracing this guys career backwards looking at the schools he worked at , why he left and who provided references because I bet he has been into this since he started work. My Mother a retired teacher saw several cases of teachers who had fallen under suspicion of this sort of thing being “persuaded” to move on to another school so they became someone elses problem.
I live relatively nearby, so the local press said that he had only worked at this school since qualifying as a “mature” teacher in 1995.
If this had been a faith school ,or private-can you imagine what the BBC and Guardian/Times Ed would be saying?
That OFSTED, Childrens Services and all who get their grants from them via Bristol Universty etc…Barnardos and the other possible recipients maybe?…have made no issue about it only goes to show that the little girls assaulted are the wrong kind of victims.There is a Safeguarding Industry to uphold, and most of its client base are those who get jobs and publicity via the broadsheets and the BBC etc.
Utterly cynical and despicable….let`s hope they don`t hear the end of it!
The simple truth is the lefty liberal elites don’t see kiddie fiddling as a ‘serious crime’ they really don’t.
You’ve got a significant element of the homosexual community who are continually pushing for the age of consent to be dropped to 14 or even lower, you’ve got liberals pushing sex and sexuality at 5 and 6 year old kids and you’ve got the lefty media ignoring Muslim gangs grooming white girls for sex.
As usual the BBC are on the wrong side of public opinion, but then what’s new about that?
Perhaps one of the reasons they love Mohammad so much was he was shagging an 8 year old girl. Oh hang on she was his wife, so that’s OK then. A man to be looked up to by 1 billion people.
“Oh hang on she was his wife, so that’s OK then.” Would have been better if she had just been his “partner”.
Evidence that confirms my suspicion that the BBC has employed an unusually large number of left wing gay paedophiles.
And while this was going on for years in a school where his behaviour around children was common knowledge among the teachers, our schools have been diligently compiling records of children as young as four who utter anything that could be construed as raaaacist. Nice set of priorities there operating in our schools.
And that reminds me of another thing: I saw an item yesterday that a convicted paedophile pervert actor had been invited to a school! Only the protests of parents who got wind of this, prevented it happening. Words fail me.
Indeed its amazing the lack of investigation from the media on the rare occasions a “connected” paedophile comes to the surface. I always remember in the aftermath of the Dunblane school shootings the way the politicians and media couldn’t wait to talk about gun control while the prior activities and connections of Thomas Hamilton were never investigated.
“If this had been a faith school ,or private-can you imagine what the BBC and Guardian/Times Ed would be saying?”
Already happened, same month: monk at Downside:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-somerset-16397016
Need to dig:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-somerset-16765433
probably nothing done as Gordon Brown and others were probably clients for the videos this monster took.
Gameshow was on a theme – subsidised MP food – which he got from the Guido Fawkes site, which has been running with it for a week or so.
Guido has more scoops in a week than the BBC has in a year.
Guido, who in his own words only eats what he kills, has to be a proper journalist.
The droids, knowing the money flows in by the billions a year irrespective, have taught themselves to be lazy, vacuous, useless, and expensive.
And now they (BBC) will be available for selection to play in the 3rd Test.
yeah, I’ve had this smart-arsed prat’s face on my punch bag for a while. He’s always more interested in the sound of his own voice and questions than actually listening to the answer. Also, has anyone else noticed the return of that fat lump of excrement Dianne Fatty Abbott to BBC Newsnight? Will they be inviting David Starkey back I wonder? I think we all know the answer!
Here’s another response I’m quite sure Nicky Campbell wasn’t expecting. Heh.
Good old Twitter eh?
Wonder if he`ll be doing anything on sexual harrassment and why women feel vulnerable in the presence of such macho men as himself?
Might account for why women dare not apply for jobs in current affairs at the BBC..especially at the Toaday end of things, like wee Nicky likes to think himself to be!
Maybe Panorame or Womans Hour will do something on it to “raise awareness” of this crucial issue!
Well at the very least, questions are now being asked which, as I recall, means anything subsequent goes, nomatter how innocent the person fingered may be. Unleash the twitterstorm!!!
That is the precedent set by the BBC ‘news’ these days, so it it must be valid elsewhere.
“Mr. Campbell, there is outrage at suggestions being made that you have abused your position as a role model to make a young woman feel less than secure in media environments. How do you respond to accusations that you may in fact, have crossed a line? Is this a resigning issue? Are the news rooms of the nation’s broadcasters now hotbeds of institutional macho lewdness and outright sexism? Yes or no, are you a predator?’
Of course, that may not be what happens from the home team, but I am hard pressed to see much difference in how they gird the hoo-haa loins when it’s a target from the wrong side of the fence as far as they are concerned.
I wrote the above as a joke.
OT, but just watched the Irish buffon on SKY do exactly that with a RyanAir MD dumb enough to agree to an interview during the Hester feeding frenzy.
The Irish buffoon asks a silly bonus conflation question, which is deflected as irrelevant as the frame of reference is different.
Irish buffoon says ‘he’ll take that as a no’. So.. even when you can’t wangle what you want, you rig the last word to get it anyway. I am sure the BBC would not sink to this. Not.
I loathe all the UK media.