Let me get this straight. The Unite trade union which has been behind the threat of the great petrol strike has had a great week. The BBC has wilfully ignored the fact that it was Unite, not the Coalition Government, which has fanned the flames of panic , by implying that it MIGHT strike over the Easter holiday. Yes, the Government could have handled it better, and I think Frances Maude is generally woeful, but it was Unite that initiated the possible crisis. They got off largely scot-free on this central issue, using the “Health and Safety” excuse without any real detailed query from the State Broadcaster. Having milked the publicity and seen the inept Government twist on the media generated wind, Unite now calls the strike off, at least for the moment. The Government then changes its advice to motorists and the BBC screams this latest change as major news. Also note that it also seeks to once again link the woeful Maude to the woman in York who suffered severe burns while decanting petrol in her kitchen. It’s as if the BBC is the broadcasting arm for Unite. Surely not.
WHEN THE OBVIOUS IS NEWS
Bookmark the permalink.
I noticed…and am sure many others did, that the queues at petrol stations started BEFORE any government advice; at the time I thought it was because there was an offer on the petrol price. These queues were because the possibility of a strike was reported beforehand. therefore teh MEDIA are to blame.
Also, I would like to say to ‘John Mann, Labour MP for Bassetlaw and Karl Turner, MP for Hull East, and Labour Lord Toby Harris’, please shut up you complete c*”ts!
When Diana Holland is introduced for interview she is titled assisant general secretary of Unite. They do not mention her other title ‘ Treasurer of the labour Party’.
I know I have posted this before but both our state broadcaster and 2 Eds seem to be blaming Maude personally for a York woman’s stupidity. As I understand from the Telegraph her gas hob was lit as she played with petrol in the kitchen, she has to be responsible for her actions and not as the State Broadcaster implies everything bad from since May 2010 has been the fault of the government . (Funny how pre May 2010 the government was never to blame).
yes, it is akin to someone blaming the cutting of their own finger on a TV chef’s advice about slicing/dicing finely.
off topic, but herself inflicts Masterchef on me. Hate it of course, but would take a heart of stone not to laugh when contestant A., eager to demonstrate his knife skills, does this rapid-fire slicing thing, removes the top of his finger, bursts into tears, and has to go off to casualty two minutes into the ‘challenge’.
Also chucklesome when someone serves up a burnt, deflated souffle and whimpers, ‘boohoo, I hope Greg and John can see my potential boohoo’.
What potential would that be, luv? Ah yes, the potential to burn and deflate another souffle.
£3.2 billion a year. A bargain, eh, what.
Here is some simple guidance from the fire service. I am sorry for the woman but she was clearly behaving stupidly. Hardly Maud’s fault.
At home, fuel containers must not be stored in living accommodation such as kitchens, living rooms and bedrooms or under staircases. Any storage place should be well away from living areas in case of fire and it should be secured, to protect against the possibility of vandalism or arson.
Health and Safety Precautions
No smoking and no naked lights in the vicinity
Decant in the open air – not inside the garage
Use a pouring spout or funnel; and
If clothing is splashed with fuel, change it immediately.
I came home from work yesterday after half a day listening to Radio 5 believing that Francis Maude had been in the kitchen himself, wearing a top hat and monocle, with a diamond tipped walking cane in one hand and a zippo lighter in the other !
After igniting his victim, he was seen chomping on a pasty and giggling like The Joker.
Yes, the faux outrage was bloody embarrassing. The left can do it and say nothing. The Daily Mail would not be let off the hook by them.
The BBC story linked has comments enabled.
Not for long if the most liked is anything to go on*.
‘among those who have called for Mr Maude to resign if it turns out his comments contributed to the burns accident ‘
Others being the BBC news desk, at the behest of the Labour PR machine, one presumes.
That po-faced piece of sick reportage is why I detest what the BBC has become.
*Liked the one about how when the government tells us not to smoke in cars everyone ignores it, but by not telling folk that pouring fuel next to an open flame is not recommended, the hounds of faux affront are unleashed and given full access to all airwaves.
Maybe next, a TV campaign to caution against firing up a Rothmans with 5 gals of 2* sloshing about in a plastic bag from Tescos on the passenger seat?
Any pol trying to go this route with Maude needs vilifying.
‘screams’?
BBC headline
‘fuel strike: advice to drivers changed after panic buying’
Sky headline:
‘Bid to end fuel panic as government changes advice’
Daily Mail:
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2123151/Petrol-strike-Government-says-need-panic-buy-Easter-holiday.html
Bit more screaming in the latter two I’d say.
‘Jim Dandy says:
March 31, 2012 at 11:04 am
Bit more screaming in the latter two I’d say.’
Which, in the context of the story, is irrelevant, beyond the latter two not requiring compelled funding and enjoying monopolistic pervasive broadcast across all media of what they call ‘news’.
The national broadcaster decided from the outset to weigh in on what was already a febrile situation and, for its own purposes (ratings plus agenda), whipped things up even more.
Not the actions of an objective national medium whose guiding principles should be the best interests of the nation.
They’d be there via twitter to film a suttee attempt if it served a tribal political point that damaged those they don’t support, and the hell with whoever got hurt in the process.
Like the others, the BBC prefers to drive the news rather than report it now. Unlike them, a site exists to hold them to account thanks to the unique way they have to now been immune.
If the aim is to be an apologist, seeking rather more substantive excuses might be in order.
I’d say.
Just about the same I’d say and a good point to raise. Still, I think it could also be fairly argued that the media as a whole takes its lead from the BBC and what the BBC often chooses to lead with, and how they lead with it, is often in lockstep with a left wing agenda. Quite how much all this applies in this case will of course be open to a variety of interpretations usually prompted by pre-conceived views on all sides.
Just to remind ourselves. This was the DT Website headline on Monday, ‘Petrol pumps could run dry as tanker drivers vote for industrial action’. The story went on to quote a Unite as saying, ‘a strike could close up to 7,900 petrol stations.’ MONDAY – not wednesday when Maude mispoke – and has continually and dangerously been misquoted since. Anxiety and panic were inevitable from then on.
‘And the BBC screams this latest change’? Almost literally. The news jockey on 5 Live at 9.00 this morning (immediately before Danny Baker) told us the the Governement had ‘changed it’s advice AGAIN’. Listen if you can to the theatrical intonation and the suggestion of feined exasperation. Of course she goes on to say Unite have called off the threat of an Easter strike.
Now what would be wrong with a much more neutral, ‘Following Unite’s decision not to call a strike over the Easter period, the Government has changed its advice to motorists…’ ?
That is exactly my point, well said. When situations change, advice changes. The BBC have tried to suggest that this is some sort of “u-turn” when it simply an acknowledgement of the changes scene
This is how the Mail has led in its headline, but then the Mail has commercial pressures for such sensationalism and tackiness – and doesn’t have a Statutory Duty to be impartial. The only ‘pressure’ the BBC has for such bias is that whopping Gramscian cuckoo in the nest covering everything with its crap.
All broadcasters are required to be impartial in news coverage, so using sky and ITN to benchmark BBC coverage is useful.
Jim, do you work for the bbc? Or have any relationship with the organisation?
No.
…and if the BBC don’t feel like being “impartial”, they just don’t cover it.
Great point. One doesn’t even have to listen to the intonation to spot the bias if you’ve quoted verbatim. A government – or anyone – can only change their advice AGAIN if they do it three times or more.
I find R5L very impartial on the whole, but I have noticed that it’s news bulletins are often a major exception.
Erm, I unreservedly withdraw my criticism of this 5Live news bulletin in. #88 misheard.
The report is at the start:-
http://www.bbc.co.uk/iplayer/episode/b01f51ly/The_Danny_Baker_Show_31_03_2012/
I found it perfectly fair reporting.
Apologies HH and to 5L. that wasn’t the bulletin I heard. I had been listeing to R4 and turned over to Danny Baker. It was the R4 bulletin I should have referred to.
The big difference between Radio 4 (and world service for that matter) is it doesn’t carry its news reports between programmes on iplayer. 9am should mean 9:00am, not 9:01!!
Still catch how smarmy chops Humphrys and snippy bint M/s newsreader begin TODAY @ 7am.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/iplayer/episode/b01f1k42/Today_31_03_2012/
Any thoughts you’d like to share Jim Dandy?
Anyone who would like to know why I’m such a fan of R5L and a political refugee from R4 just has to contrast these two bulletins (R5L above). One’s reporting, one’s propaganda that would send a shiver down George Orwell’s spine.
I listened, but couldn’t quite get your point?
Well, you’ve already demonstrated that your listening skills leave a lot to be desired after hearing a pro-smoking interviewed today on TODAY when no such interview occurred.
You need to do a better job in obscuring BBC bias. You’re going to end up harming your career instead.
I’m doing pretty well.
‘I’m doing pretty well.’
Is that according a BBC poll?
(had to add to Hippie’s posts as the replies ran out)
Surely the result of Francis Maude’s advice for motorists to fill up is the reason Unite have decided not to strike over Easter. Their action has been thwarted as due to the so called ‘panic’ buying a huge amount of fuel is now in the petrol tanks of thousands of vehicles rather than in the storage tanks at the depots and does not need to be transported. Consequently the desired effect of any strike action would be greatly diminished.
That Diane Hill from Acomb is now in Pinderfield Hospital, the regional Burns centre, is of course a matter of great sadness.
What I will say however is I am disappointing that I heard the elder statesman Frances Maude opioning outside No.10 when he really should have been inside it and calming Cameron down from the influence of 12 year old marketing wankers.
Off topic I’m afraid but who cares. During the London riots the police had the whole kitchen sink (and the rest of the house!) chucked at them including bottles of urine, bricks, verbal abuse, Molotov Cocktails and racist chants etc etc and what happens? A rioter makes a complaint against a police officer for being racist who is subsequently removed from duty. Now I am not condoning any type of offensive language aimed at someone because of their race, but isn’t it a little unfair to focus on this particular incident when half of Londond was under attack from feral youths openly looking for violence with the police?.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-london-17569400
I dont see anything biased in the reporting. If your compare it to the way the Guardian reported it the BBC report is a model of probity. The Guardian is clearly gagging to see this bobbie put inside.
Personally, I think you make an excellent point. Depending upon the history of this particular PC, under such extremely stressful circumstances, and to my ears dealing with an arrestee clearly looking to goad him, the officer let himself be provoked.
In saner times it would have just been an internal disciplinary matter (well, nearly was – and still may be this time even) but in this day and age, with the megaphone of the left wing lynch mob the Guardian on it, and the BBC ever likely to follow, I fear this officer might not be dealt with as he’d have a right to expect.
A classic case of turning the wrong-doer into the victim.
The truth is, they are both wrong-doers, but one is white and one is black.
It was only ever going to go one way…..ask Diane Abbot.
“How embarrassing,” and “It’s all daft, isn’t it?” were Humphrys’ comments about the Government “changing its mind” on storing extra petrol. Wasn’t it actually the unions who changed their mind, and the Government now doesn’t need to warn people about it? The union bosses changed their minds because they won this time, thanks to the media. So much for the “Tory Press” and Murdoch pushing for the Conservatives.
If there had been a strike, and the Government said nothing, would the BBC be blaming them for shortages and not warning people to stock up? This highlights, Today says, that the Government is “out of touch” with ordinary people. Amazing.
And I did notice the reporter Humphrys handed over to struggling to maintain neutral reporting while Humphrys was egging her on to be as bent as him. Throughout her report he was chiming in like an open Labour supporter.
I felt sorry for the young female reporter trying to maintain her journalistic integrity in the teeth of one of the most bent broadcasters on the BBC trying to drag her down into the gutter with him.
Has anyone noticed how the BBC have recently started using the Labour ‘out of touch’ mantra, coined by Miliband, Balls and co. circa – um, early 2011 I’d guess – and used relentlessly by Labour ever since? Overt bias, displayed shamelessly.
Strewth, a TODAY reporter ‘interviewing’ an ex-Labour member from Bradford on why he joined ‘Respect’. It was a pure propaganda double act.
Naughtie was pushing the myth after that it was disaffection with Labour that saw it lose it’s seat, but the fact is
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bradford_West_(UK_Parliament_constituency)
Labour lost under half its vote from the previous 2010 election, the Tories lost just under 3/4 of its vote and the Lib Dems lost just over half its vote.
Turnout was 15% down on the general election (although unusually high for a by) of nearly 65%, nearly half of the constituency is Muslim, so it gives every appearance the Muslim population of Bradford rallied to the flag of Jihad being hoisted aloft on their behalf by a far left ally.
TODAY covering up for the enemy as per usual.
I’m going to have to switch off TODAY now. This little listen on iplayer reminds me of the political pornography it is.
“Turnout was 15% down on the general election (although unusually high for a by) of nearly 65%, ”
Nothing to do with sack loads of postal votes then?
But I thought the BBC were meant to do anything to promote Labour. Doesn’t sound like Naughtie was on message, promoting an opposing party. I heard the same piece this morning. Sounded inciteful and balanced to me. The chap from political betting made tge same point about labour disaffection. No lefty he.
The Gramscian axis of the BBC, of which TODAY is a pivotal cog, is their to promote the left.
I loved the expert selection on the EDL piece, saying Christian fundamentalists were funding the EDL.
Maybe its that they’ve got a very real grievance to exploit and the BBC’s dhimmi coverage of the jihadist enemy within fuels that grievance?
‘inciteful’ eh.
We all know a freudian slip when we see one.
you beat me to it. He either means inciting or he means insightful. I don’t think the bbc does insightful, so it must be the former.
Yes, insightful! Although ‘inciteful’ does mean (I see) liable to rouse to passion or provocative. So I could have pretended that’s what I meant. But it wasn’t.
Give us a break – far Left/Islam axis trumps Labour anytime, just as Islam trumps gay/women’s rights.
Well, as the main aim of the segment was to find out if Labour needs to improve and how, I’m not sure it can be construed as Naughtie was promoting an opposing party.
“But I thought the BBC were meant to do anything to promote Labour ”
They want to promote an anti west , anti capitalist ,pro globalist , pro EU , anti Zionist , anti American , anti Republican (in USA ; pro in Ulster or Britain ) , pro Democrat (but not democracy esp in British politics ) , pro penal “reform ” , anti capital punishment , pro Islamist , anti christian , pro gay rights , pro femimism , pro unlimited immigration , pro multiculturism (now called diversity ) , pro high tax , pro lax welfare benefits , statist , elitist , think population are stupid .
So they support Labour unless someone is even more of the above than Labour .
Crikey. I’m with them on some of these, but by no means all.
They seem to like the royal family though, which is nice.
Which ones aren`t you with them on ?
Until the Met Police disbands the Black Police Officers Association, or whatever it is called, then it cannot say that it has removed racism from within its ranks.
Definition of Black
The term black does not relate to skin colour but is used to describe all people of African, African Caribbean or Asian origin.
From the MetBPA website – political correctness disaporating up its own arse.
So, the Met is institutionally racist, after all. It’s just that it’s the non-white police who are the racists.
Maybe it is somewhere in the huge number of replies, but al-beeb has not mentioned that the Unite union voted last Sept. to boycott Israel. Is this really in the best interests of its members and of our country? Why in hell doesn’t the state propagandist-in-chief call attention to this bit of nastiness?
hmm? reply above was at 10.10am. Are we all fully awake to BST?
Well it was always about pay, see how long it takes for the bBC to tell the truth.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2123411/Union-demands-27-cent-hike-driver-pay–54k.html
If, as Unite Officials stress, this strike call is not about pay but all about Health and Safety and working practices when are Unite going to tell us what the Tanker Drivers are doing which breaches Health and Safety? Siminarly, what are the working practices that Tanker Drivers are expected to comply with? Unite have been very loath to shout this from the rooftops?