BBC’s doom mongering over the Olympics is gathering pace.
Plenty of people contacting the Today programme to complain….such complaints have been flooding in for over a week as noted in a previous post.
The BBC’s response? It was to wind up the rhetoric even more…immediately after Montague read out a complaint (and one praising the coverage) she linked to a story in Der Spiegel which said that the London Olympics were going to be a disasterous and chaotic nightmare.
There was absolutely no reason for the link because this was a purely speculative piece based on one foreign journalist’s own ideas. No reason at all to discuss it…it seemed there just to deliberately annoy the people complaining about the BBC’s miserable coverage.
Are the BBC just padding out the news with ‘bad’ news? It certainly seems so when you listen to Peter White investigating the ‘scandal’ of trading standards officers being ‘press ganged’ into working at the Olympics in order to protect ‘Big Business’ brandnames.
But all was not as White presented it…for several minutes White insisted that the officers were there to serve Big Business…the Olympic’s representative gave a good explanation…they were there to stop the public being fleeced by people flogging fake or dangerous goods not to protect brand names…..but White wouldn’t accept that….only after several minutes did he actually ask ‘Well what are they going to be doing?’
And remember this is just 50 TSOs from 30 councils.
If he’d asked that at the beginning of the interview I suppose there wouldn’t have been a story, or a controversy…which it seems the BBC were intent on stirring up.
White also had on the usual union rep. who of course blamed ‘The Cuts’…and this was the clip the BBC used in its news bulletins thereafter.
However a different story emerged eventually when we had a council representative on who said the trading standard officers were not forced to go and were volunteered by the councils involved….not only that but it is standard practise to send one council’s TSOs to help out another council when large events are going on…and he noted that there is no BBC interest in the story in those cases.
So to sum up if White had asked immediately what the TSOs were going to be doing, had they been volunteered and were they just carrying on a normal practise there wouldn’t really have been much of a story.
It seems the BBC are intent on whipping up as much controversy as possible over the Olympics now that the Tories are essentially in charge regardless of whether you are interested or even extremely fed up with the BBC’s politicking….this was just a juvenile attack on Big Business, much hated it seems by the BBC, and a chance to have another pot shot at government ‘cuts’…and to lay it on thick about another ‘disaster’ at the Olympics.
A radio prog last night featuring a couple of Olympicers and talking about the Village and subject moved onto the catering..
‘McDonalds is the most popular – there’s always loads of people round it’.
Very disappointing for the droid. Not what she wanted to hear, no sir.
Its all rather tedious and obvious what their game is. The Olympics are an easy target because its a one off event so there are bound to be difficulties and problems. The BBC are trying their hardest to find them and exaggerate them, typically traitorous of them. Of course, if labour had been running the game they would have been gushing with their praise of a wonderful multicultural, diverse celebration of a gay british event, but hey is not winning that counts its the taking part zzzzz
The BBC has to go it’s a nightmare.
The bBC’s aim is pure and simple.
To discredit the current government and return to power the Islamic-cock sucking Labour party.
Simples.
Peter White is just David Blunkett without any votes.
A professional grievance monger waving his white stick around to denote his eternal victimhood…and so every programme he does(especially that serial whine called “In Touch”-why no audible pregnancy testing sticks then, Big Pharma?)…and therefore immune to any criticism.
For that would be disablist wouldn`t it?
Like Blunkett-unable to see the damage that his postures and hospital radio gripes actually cause all of us…just not him and his shroud waving like.
There sure is a funny schizophrenia at the BBC over these Olympics. On the one hand they have to hype it up because they’ve got a massive investment in broadcasting, while on the other hand they’re finding every possible way to run it down.
The 2012 sitcom makes the whole thing out to be an omnishambles run by incompetent, brain-dead bureaucrats (which it probably is to some degree). It’s pretty funny, I have to admit. They appear to be making fun of various shibboleths along the way, such as appeasing Islam, diversity, inclusion, sustainability, and legacy, but the writers are really poking fun at the people doing it, and not the shibboleths themselves.
I suppose all this is to provide “balance” to the constant upbeat advertizing. They have a vested interest in promoting the Olympics because of their broadcasting investment, and so have to denigrate it at every opportunity to remove any appearance of a conflict of interest.
Still, one wonders if the negatives would be so, well, negative, if Livingstone or some other BBC darling was mayor instead of Boris.
‘hype it up because they’ve got a massive investment in broadcasting, while on the other hand they’re finding every possible way to run it down.’
Or, in other words, classic ‘news’ coverage for the 24/7 ratings and agenda Olympics that is is today’s media.
I could care less about the whole sorry, venal, swamp that they all infest… except the BBC demands I pay for it and the hypocrisy that it is impartial is downright dangerous.
They are responsible for shaping views, and in shaping them to suit their narrow interests folk do get harmed. At best financially, but too often I see the BBC ‘inspiring’ darker actions.
How long before Newsnight’s Anger and Protest Editor is passing on.. in guise of a ‘report’… where to congregate to kick off, having been texted coordinates by his rather limited source pool?
The negative coverage of the Olympics is so much so that it is getting absolutely boring, ad nauseum. They are still going on even today when the BBC is supposed to be covering the Olympics. The BBC are so big and powerful they know there is no competition as they sell their news to Sky, and if you do complain they do ‘up the anti’ as if they are thumbing their noses at the people who pay their wages.
The license fee should go NOW
Let’s hope that the Leftists don’t try a Jubilee River Pageant job on the Olympics – and undermine while broadcasting …
As pounce_uk correctly points out the Labour Party supporting BBC does not want the Olympics to be seen as a success in case that impacts on the popularity of the coalition government, but at the same time they want to use any achievement by black athletes as proof that all races are equal, even though what it proves is that in some sports blacks are on average superior to whites.
The success of British black athletes will be used as evidence of the success of multiculturalism – justifying unlimited immigration.
In short the script can be predicted in advance and has no connection with any reality other than what is ideologically approved and serves the interest of the Party.
Headline on BBC Website – “More Olympic Jobs taken by Police”. Oh those naughty policeman, “taking” jobs which could have gone to…who?
…foreigners, many of whom will be housed in luxury liners moored in the Thames, unlike the crap accommodation given to our Olympic troops, some of whom are having to use local sports centre showers.
The important thing for the BBC regarding its non-story of the trading standards officers was to get its ‘cuts’ soundbite which it could then broadcast however often it liked.
Did anyone hear them give equivalent coverage to the unions’ attempted sabotage of the games?
As an aside, the BBC seems to be giving the unions more and more of a say in its news programmes and bulletins – to portray them in a positive light of course, and to keep the ‘savage cuts’ narrative to the fore.