Oh dear, oh dear, oh dear.
What did Paxman say in 2007 about the standard of journalism these days?….
“In this press of events there often isn’t time to get out and find things out: you rely upon second-hand information-quotes from powerful vested interests, assessments from organisations which do the work we don’t have time for, even, god help us, press releases from public relations agencies. The consequence is that what follows isn’t analysis. It’s simply comment, because analysis takes time, and comment is free.”
It seems the easily lead BBC has been bounced by Labour into making a rash claim about Boris Johnson having an undeclared meal with Rupert Murdoch.
The BBC’s report is hilarious and beyond parody…presumably it was a cadet journalist at the BBC’s school of journalism who published it inadvertently in a fat fingered frenzy of anti- Tory/Murdoch animus…surely?
Boris Johnson’s failure to declare he had dinner with Rupert Murdoch has sparked a call for an inquiry by the London Assembly Labour group.
There have been no declarations in the mayor’s register of interest and hospitality or the mayor’s reports to the London Assembly.
On 25 May, the mayor said all his meetings with News International had been declared.
Labour group leader, Len Duvall said: “This is extremely serious….truly scandalous….jaw-droppingly arrogant, especially at the height of the phone-hacking inquiry.”
Details of the dinner emerged after a Freedom of Information request by the Political Scrapbook website.
Except apparently all the details were on Boris’ mayoral website over a year ago……
As Guido says:
‘The Beeb are covering this, but seem to have missed this quote from a Boris spokesman: “Details of the meetings have been published on Mayor’s website for the best part of a year.”’
Careless, very careless…but then any old tripe will do as ‘news’ if it paints both Tories and a Murdoch in a bad light…they can always apologise later in very, very small print.
The author of this masterpiece at least had the presence of mind to withold their name.
Will he/she declare the cost of postage asking the BBC to overlook their slight glitch in journalistic integrity ?
Or will the BBC, so impressed with this up and coming talent, offer a K2 bonus ?
Quite a remarkable instance of shoddy BBC reporting.
They appear to have have pounced on a Labour Party stunt (a stunt with help from the party’s friends at the left-wing website ‘Political Scrapbook’ – note how the BBC chose NOT to describe the site as ‘left-wing’) and then opted not to update the story when Boris spokesman pointed to seemingly incontrovertible evidence that the Labour/BBC story is rubbish.
Boris’s spokesman has been saying a lot more too, according to Guido’s latest post.
None of this, including the reason why “there have been no declarations in the mayor’s register of interest and hospitality” (according to the spokesman the BBC can’t be bothered to quote, it’s because the cost of the coffee Boris bought was under £25 – which doesn’t need to be declared), has been given yet by the BBC.
They have chosen not to update the article. 15:32pm is still the time/date stamp on the article.
However, I think they realise that it has gone pear-shaped. The story has disappeared from the England page where it was prominent an hour or so ago.
It looks as if the BBC has quietly shredded the story – without undoing any of the damage to Boris that would have been done by any BBC website reader who saw and read the story when it was first published.
It still remains on their London page though.
Both the BBC News and BBC London twitter feeds plugged the story a couple of hours ago, when it was going their way.
The language the BBC begins that article with is deeply loaded:
“Boris Johnson’s failure to declare he had dinner with Rupert Murdoch has sparked a call for an inquiry by the London Assembly Labour group.”
The phrase “failure to declare” implies that Boris has failed to do something he should have done. If Guido and the mayoral spokesman is correct, Boris has failed to do no such thing. The BBC’s languages pre-supposes Boris’s wrong-doing and backs the Labour line from the very start of the article.
Sometimes this feeling that a concerted attack is going on by Labour and the BBC just seems inescapable. The article goes on…
“In April, BBC London learned that Mr Johnson had looked at securing commercial deals with News International at the same time the Metropolitan Police was investigating the company over phone hacking.”
A weasel worded amended article is now on the BBC Londonpage.
Boris Johnson’s failure to officially declare he had dinner with Rupert Murdoch has sparked an inquiry call by the London Assembly Labour group.
Amazingly, they are still sticking with “Boris Johnson’s office has not commented on the Labour group’s claim” under the photo of Boris – despite the fact that one of Boris’s spokesman has said plenty about it quite some time ago.
‘they are still sticking with “Boris Johnson’s office has not commented on the Labour group’s claim” under the photo of Boris’
That would appear to have ‘evolved’ too.
How many stealth edits are they allowed once the smear has taken place before being held to account?
Is there a page grab of these changes?
Does “securing commercial deals” mean that he was discussing writing a column for The Times?
“Sometimes this feeling that a concerted attack is going on by Labour and the BBC just seems inescapable.”
Well it seems to escape the Tories.
‘sparked a call for an inquiry’
By whom, for what reason, a process that another inquiry could possibly extend their remit to look at. What with the stealth edits, misrepresentations, lying and all… for a most trusted national treasure.
Otherwise…it has to be: ‘Unleash The Prescott!!!!