It seems that the BBC’s Jeremy Vine can’t accept the fact that Obama got his butt kicked fair and square by Romney in the first debate. In a desperate attempt to rationalise the beloved Obama’s defeat he is peddling a ridiculous conspiracy theory from lefty website Democratic Underground:
WATCH. Eleven seconds in, did Mitt Romney use a magician’s sleight of hand to produce notes, which are banned? democraticunderground.com/1251119479
— Jeremy Vine (@theJeremyVine) October 6, 2012
I won’t bother posting the video or waste time detailing why the claim is so idiotic. Suffice to say the “sleight of hand” Vine has told his 140,000 Twitter followers to look out for is in reality Romney openly taking a handkerchief out of his pocket. Go to Buzzfeed to see Romney using it to mop his upper lip during the debate.
If Obama-loving BBC types like Vine are so upset by a debate defeat that they’ll grasp at nonsense like this, imagine what they’ll be like if Romney actually wins the election.
UPDATE. This piss-take highlights the stupidity of desperate idiots such as Vine:
Don`t know…didn`t see it…don`t really care.
That Jon Snow was able to slip this canard into his preposterous LibLap “news” -once his weird woman had left us with the notion that Academy schools are crooked and incompetent(as opposed to those State ones, who never fiddled figures)-well, that was all that Channel 4 wanted me to be left with…Romney`s just an Academy Head in exile.
And lest Dez,Scott(remember him?) or prole leap up and down- lads, I KNOW Channel 4 is not the BBC…but their funding and mindsets are the same in more ways than not…taxpayer bankrolled and all Hobsbawms mushrooms in one way or another.
Did I need to see the Romney bit as described on the BBC?…course not, Snows slime is the Liberal meme, so the Beeb will have absorbed it…as they do!
i think it could be amusing, if barry slips back on his
yesum … deep south accent “hey ya ll whaars he s at” etc … he s from erm … hawaii?, isn t he?.
in the next debate 😀
http://youtu.be/HQE2NPUuv2g
It was a handkerchief…
http://www.dailykos.com/story/2012/10/05/1140435/-Did-Mitt-use-crib-notes-for-the-debate
Uh, yes. It says so in my post.
So it does. Age does things to one’s eyesight…
It certainly does Old Toga.
Sir, Sir, Vile minor is a sneak!
‘using it to mop his upper lip during the debate’
Ah…. yes…. but… you see…. .at such an altitude, sufficient to starve Obama’s brain of oxygen on account of him being tall ‘n all… it could surely not have been warm enough to warrant the need for anyone to mop a lip.
Gotcha, Mitt! Nailed. That and the vid has been pulled by Big Oil. Or an FoI exclusion. Or something.
I am now off to tweet this on any BBC feeds I am not yet blocked on to get this proof positive inserted across the entire BBC ‘news’ estate asap, 24/7.
And, trust me, I am the kind of source with the kind of information whose views the BBC really, really wants to hear.
Apparently.
And they claim to be an objective, professional news broadcaster staffed by genetically impartial market rate talents.
I know this, because one of the few senior wimmin still employed not now recanting on all that they claimed during their tenure, wrote an Editor’s Blog post to tell us so.
‘Unique’ seems inadequate to describe this use of the old one degree of separation, ‘is this?’ question in such a manner.
surely the one is so inspired and has such a nuanced brain which is way above us mere mortals,that he wouldn’t even need notes anyway?
or maybe not 😉
I’ve just realised – he must have been thinking of Heinz 57 varieties…..
Whoops, it’s 50 i’m sure, big error, unless he visited seven twice? He’s American for christ sake. I think he’s a goner.
Interesting to note Jezza’s policy on retweeting questions being asked in other media on claims being made about issues closer to the nest.
Not on accusations of cheating, but something maybe a wee bit more serious, especially at a time of heightened sensitivity to children’s issues (to use the Hillsborough technique when the MSM suddenly were the police’s BFF’s to bash errant foul-mouthed Ministers they’d didn’t like).
A more nuanced application of watertight oversight appears only to apply when it’s ‘family’
When the evidence seems pretty clear cut, I am unsure if ‘Ugh’ quite compares in holding power to account responsibly when using the whole ‘sources say guilty is more fun than innocent’ trick…
Jeremy Vine @theJeremyVine
Jimmy Savile taped with young fan. Ugh. http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/crime/9590659/Jimmy-Savile-BBC-director-general-appalled-at-abuse-allegations-but-rules-out-inquiry.html …
Maybe those who know better how these things work with professional, high-integrity newsrooms can explain the differences?
I’m blocked by Vine. He doesn’t like to be challenged – a bit like Obama in that respect.
my earlier reply to him (my first tweet) has disappeared too…it wasn’t rude or anything.
Span Ows @originalOwsblog
@theJeremyVine By the time this was posted the story had been debunked most of the replies to your tweet are rude and seriously ill informed
“The new Director General of the BBC has written to staff to say he is ‘appalled’ by allegations made against Jimmy Savile and has promised to work closely with the police, but ruled out an inquiry.”
What?…I thought the BBC loved an inquiry, judging by their wall to wall coverage of Leverson.
Tis alright to snarl and hiss at Murdoch, but not at themselves it would appear.
Just part of the BBC’s war on young white girls.
I notice Vine didn’t tweet any comments about the outcome of the debate. Must’ve been too painful for him.
It’ll be Mormon spells, then. Abracadabra. Turn Obama into a bumbler, stupefied by the Colorado altitude. Or could it be that in Barry’s eyes, getting elected was job done? After that it was a case of soaking up the sycophantic adoration 24/7; doing, & remembering his homework wasn’t required for a president wrapped in a warm media cocoon. Until ‘Magic Mitt’ came along to show that the emperor may be fully clothed, but he’s naked.
Can’t put it better than Steyn:
“I mean, this guy…you know what it’s like? It was like, somebody said this last night, it’s like when a boxer who’s come up with so many fixed fights actually finds himself in the ring with somebody who is real.”
He got the response he was hoping for:
And yet and he still beat Obama like a rented mule.
There’s lots more like that. Job done. Move on.
Yes, using sleight of hand in such a way when the cameras of the world are trained on you from every angle…. who wouldn’t risk it to be able to read a crib?
Not like a gotcha from the side has ever caused a problem before for him or anything.
At least Mr. Vine’s ‘followers’ (especially the female ones, and those from inside the building trained by Stuart Hughes to maximise dissemination of any ‘campaign’ no matter what its validity) show what it takes to be accorded such a description.
Not sure if Matt Greenwood wasn’t having a tease, tho’…. unless he was actually serious.
I’m guessing that now, as learning lines and speaking off the cuff for yourself and not reading out a speechwriter’s pearls is the defining trait that decides the next President, Jezza, Jane, Jo etc will obviously be clamouring for the use of teleprompters to now be ceased?
If not… what unique reason may there be this time?
“Not sure if Matt Greenwood wasn’t having a tease, tho’…. unless he was actually serious.”
He was serious. Here’s an earlier tweet:
That would be the cretin who schooled Obama on Wednesday.
That’s a very pretty avatar he’s got, isn’t it? Do you suppose it’s the snarling countenance of Greenwood himself?
Correct, the cretin is Mr Greenwood, Mr Murdoch, if you read this, go all out to destroy the BBC and Guardian, you must have something on them, use it, no mercy.
The same “Matt Greenwood” who posted on Vines lies.
Professional lefty troll.
Wonder who’s paying for him?
Out of sheer foolish curiosity, I had a quick look at this Greenwood’s twitter feed. Not the sharpest knife in the drawer, is he?
…or if the previous government hadn’t taxed the hell out of pension funds.
What an idiot.
Jeremy Vine & his bunch of unfeasibly sour grapes.
What fun ! Now the true believers have decided that their tinpot god was in no way made to look an incompetent boob without his friend Mr Terry Prompter, Esq., but was rather despicably “cheated” out of his assured victory by two-brain cells Mitt “Magic Circle” Romney, it’ll make it even more delicious should the performance be repeated next time. Your tears are delicious, comrades.
And Scez claims to find conspiracy nuts here. Mote and beam, old chum: mote and beam.
Why is it, that Ashley Cole, John Terry, Rio Ferdinand….ect, can be pulled up on their own, twitter accounts for having opinions, yet Vine, can leave this TRIPE, lingering, without being told, in no uncertain terms that he is wrong, purposefully rebel rousing, and an arsehole to boot?
He MUST have seen the moth wipe with the same “folded document”, otherwise, he can hold zero credibility as a news journalist.
Blinkered, and a LIAR, yet he “represents” our views through the lefts state sponsored mouthpiece…it makes me wanna retch.
Mouth….not Moth….mind you, moth wiping is very popular amongst the left…so I have heard it said, perhaps they find it deplorable that someone else is wiping moths better than they are.
Why do those guys get called out while Vine can tweet whatever venal garbage he likes? It’s called “integrity”. Some people have it, the BBC doesn’t when it comes to their Twitter policy. Even after that Social Media away day, a series of lectures at the BBC College of Journalism, and individual Social Media training courses costing £100 a throw. Your license fee hard at work, clearly.
Vine probably didn’t watch the debate, seeing as it was on in the wee hours UK time, and most likely has seen little more than a few highlights. He didn’t like what he saw, and jumped on the first ridiculous thing he found which would help him feel better about the whole thing.
Shows you Vines preferences, and his lack of integrity.
What will the BBC do if the Marxist Obama loses to cheer themselves up?
Extra portions of coke and rentboys.
There’ll be exploding progressives all over Salford. Not pretty, but at least no collateral damage to innocent parties.
Vine is an ill-informed, speculative, sensationalist bBC journo who’s lunchtime show is something to be avoided at all costs. Ditto his tritter feed.
Ooops, make that twitter…..then again…
I am actually quite appalled by the Left-wing fawning that has saturated our screens since this debate took place. Grown journalists are behaving like 14-year-olds with a crush. Whether it be the BBC, Sky News or the Guardian, it really just confirms my belief that the Left are pathetically infantile and wholly absorbed within their own little London dinner-club ivory tower. What is it about Obama that compels grown men and women to write on Twitter statements like, “Obama rocks” and “Obama is just, like, sooo cool”? Is it because Mitt Romney is of white anglo-saxon ethnicity, that they despise him so? Or is it the fact that he is has a Christian ethos? Quite frankly, it is an affront to the adults of this country who i) are independent of mind, and ii) who have the courage to back up their convictions.
The Left really are disgusting and are increasingly becoming more and more dangerous through their intolerance of any other belief systems different to their own.
Rochester dost speaketh true in his foul scorn of cant and the craven:
“Wisdom and goodness to the vile, seem vile. Filths saviour but themselves.”
“saturated our screens” – odd, when I have been in front of a TV in the past few days all I have seen of world events is coverage of the sad affair in Wales. Really, rolling news channels are becoming unwatchable with their narrow coverage.
And the actual point of your post, Will, is… ?
I think he was pointing out how quiet the MSM has gone on the US election since Obama was pwned, and the coverage of this sad case in Wales seems a little like they are revelling in other people’s misery. It is like they are using it to ignore the negatives on Obama.
Alex, Sorry I am not worthy to add my ramblings to your pearls of wisdom.
Apology accepted, lol. 🙂
The BBC should sack Jeremy vine and bring back the other vine, David vine. He would do a much better job than the self-loathing Socialist freak Jeremy Vine.
David Vine has been dead for almost four years.
(Not that that invalidates what you’re suggesting, mark you).
Does the following BBC article reveal why the BBC (and the whole Left-wing movement) is so in love with Obama? Are they putting ethnicity before political reasoning? Now, that wouldn’t be like the BBC, now, would it?
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-radio-and-tv-19827316
It’s more like the BBC sees any opposition to Him as racist. There can be no legitimate opposition to His policies, according to BBC correspondents. It’s all driven by crypto-racism. Except when we elected Him, of course. The US wasn’t mostly racist for 24 hours.
This is just one of the coming deluge of BBC special reports on the US regarding the election. Andrew Marr has done one, the US Beeboids are running all over the place, they’ve even hired Tim Stanley to do a special documentary for it. Lord knows how many other high profile on-air talent will be creating enormous carbon footprints to do special broadcasts for their respective channels and shows. If it’s anything like 2008, there will be hundreds of them.
Hey… Jezza.
Here’s a claim from an actual named, on record, BBC source.
Whaddyarckon? Is that an ‘Ugh’, or a… ‘a BBC spokesperson said: “We are shocked… shocked I tell you [I may have enhanced the narrative a bit there] by allegations that anything of this sort could have been carried out by anyone working for the BBC.’
Oh, and this ‘no one complained and we were not aware thing’…
‘his behaviour was an “open secret” at the station.’
Wouldn’t give you much for the calibre of a Newsnight, or indeed any BBC ‘investigation’ of itself now. Would you?
Anyhoo… as they say, you can always try to see the funny side, eh?
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/matt/
Oops, forgot the URL:
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/culture/tvandradio/bbc/9591246/DJ-Liz-Kershaw-says-she-was-routinely-groped-on-air-at-BBC.html
This is a spoof, right? Jeremy Vine can’t really be that stupid and unprofessional that he pushes such an idiotic conspiracy, can he?
That’s what I thought…and the dumb ass replies? All on 6th Oct the day AFTER handkerchief revealed.
Just made my 1st tweet! In reply to Vine.
Ask Vine why he thinks memory training by the magic circle would be less effective than writing on a hanky that looks like notes being revealed by slight of hand.
To paraphrase Obama: ‘Yes he can’.
Just another day in the media meltdown because we accidentally got a peek at the empty chair behind the curtain. What makes me most angry is that not a single one of these awful people will suffer professionally for their vile behavior.
It’s pretty clear the BBC has decided to give a long rein to its staff where US politics is concerned. They allow Obama avatars on Twitter ffs! Even MSNBC hacks wouldn’t go that far.
So much for waiting until the facts are out before rushing to judgment, eh, BBC?
The Obama story is resembling the plot of Othello day by day. First a noble moor now a magic handkerchief.
I’m not going to bother even looking. Pure BBC. My favourite, though, was fatso multi-millionaire marxist Michael Moore, claiming the lighting on Romney’s shirt gave him an advantage over Obama. Unbelievable…
Richard Dawkins – who really really really hates Mitt Romney – leapt on this conspiracy too. He later sort of conceded Romney may not have cheated, but sulkily brought up the Bush 2004 radio transmitter conspiracy – as if that would somehow prove his point regardless:
I’ve asked him twice to provide actual proof Bush used a radio to cheat. Still waiting. As I said to him on Twitter, “do we just have to take it on faith?”
Ah, Dawkins: another giant ego very happy to lecture to the already converted, but who can’t debate his position face-to-face to save his life.
Hadn’t really paid him much attention before. I’m quite shocked to see how poor some of his arguments are. I mean, this sort of thing is just pathetic:
Dawkins chooses to believe Obama is not religious? Irony overload.
Does Dawkins realize what he’s saying? If the President is only vaguely, “spiritual”, then He’s actually a liar and a fraud when He talks about faith and God and all that.
That’s the left all over. It’s OK if you’re lying for the greater cause (Dawkins), it’s OK if you’re killing millions for the greater cause (Hobsbawm) etc.
Somebody needs to tweet that Dawkins says the President is a phony.
Dawkins is a complete and utter arse, his books are pure fantasy.
Obama really IS Muslim in the full loony sense
Do you think that would pass Mr Dawkins?
No?
Double standards at work, as ever.
The BBC would condemn him for that, but Mardell says that a Mormon politician in Britain “would indeed be questioned” over his religious beliefs.
“Urg” indeed….I just followed the link, and saw his revolting, jowly face.
I feel quite ill now.
MARDELL would oppose the investigation of Ms CLINTON’s Deputy Chief of Staff, Muslim Ms ABEDIN, who is very close to the political power centre at the White House.
Ms Abedin has been a Muslim Brotherhood operative all her life:-
“David Horowitz: Huma Abedin ‘worse than Alger Hiss’, John McCain is ‘bonkers’”
http://www.shoebat.com/2012/10/01/david-horowitz-huma-abedin-worse-than-alger-hiss-john-mccain-is-bonkers/
Guess its not only the little kid at the back of the crowd who is able to shout “the emperor has no clothes”. It can also be a well-prepared rich Mormon guy with brains, a strong work ethic and tons of business experience who can do the same thing.
This debate was only a surprise to those who have stuck their heads up Obama’s arse for four years. Didn’t they listen to his rambling press conferences? Didn’t they see the dart of anger in his eyes when talking to Bibi? Don’t they deduce anything from his courting of celebrities? And haven’t they heard Romney’s speeches in the last few weeks?
Look, Mardell and Vine, and you will see.
Exactly. The conventional wisdom of the smug media echo chamber has been blown apart. And the media luvvies haven’t taken it well. Like Linus losing his security blanket.
Obama is still going to win the election though.
McCain is correct in saying that the next debate will be very different.
Obama won’t be so complacent and uber well prepared.
And on top of that Obama has something approaching the media firepower that Pravda used to provide the Kremlin.
Romney is about as good a candidate as the Republicans could put up against Obama, but at the end of the day, the 16 inch propaganda guns of the US media will tell in Obama’s favour.
The MSM will be primed to do Obama’s bidding after the next debate. Win or lose, the MSM will be ready to spin the narrative for him and enough Americans will be gulled by propaganda masquerading as reporting.
Hippiepooter, you assume that the Romney team, who planned the last debate, are not anticipating a more aggressive Obama?
Give them some credit.
http://www.nationalreview.com/articles/329465/romney-s-playbook-robert-costa
AND – the next debate is on foreign affairs. Once again O has a disastrous record to try and defend.
I hope Romney asks Obama what exactly he meant when he was overheard telling Dmitry Medvedev to wait after the election when he (Obama) would have more ‘flexibility’. What was he going to agree to that the American voter wasn’t going to asked to decide upon. To paraphrase Nancy Pelosi it’s a case of voting for a second term in order to find out what’s in it. (PS Forget the debate – I’d like to know anyway what he meant anyway.)
Let’s wait and see what happens in Round Two. I think Obama, in an attempt to prove his International machismo, will overplay his tough guy image.
Also lets not forget the damage Paul Ryan may do to Biden on Thursday. I bet Biden plays the condescending “if you’ve been in politics as long as I have, young man” line. Ryan-Biden was not an important debate a few weeks ago. Now it is.
I agree with hippie’s point about the media. I’m sure Romney’s people will prepare him for a more aggressive President because obviously they didn’t prepare for the wet noodle we saw last week. They prepared him for a strong opponent, and will again.
They just need to make sure Romney once again pounces on the lies and corrects them. Will he get a chance to nail the President on what Louis brought up? We’ll see. He should spend significant effort slamming Him on the lies they put out about the Benghazi disaster.
The pundits keep saying that the President will do better this time because foreign policy is His strong suit. I just laugh.
Further on Biden: taking SIX DAYS off to prepare for the Ryan debate. What has he been doing for four years that he needs THAT much prep?
http://www.weeklystandard.com/blogs/biden-takes-6-days-campaign-trail_653879.html
I hope, I really hope, that Romney nails the media lie that ‘Obama ended the war in Iraq’.
He didn’t. He ordered a phased withdrawal to hand security over to the Iraqi authorities. The conditions for doing so were created by Bush’s ‘surge’.
To say that ‘Obama ended the war in Iraq’ is frankly an obscenity.
The heroism of the US military and her allies have given Iraq a some form of stability to have the chance of establishing an enduring democracy.
One could argue that Obama’s precipitous withdrawal has hugely damaged that prospect and the Free world’s security interests which America as an exceptional nation is there to defend.
One could argue that Obama’s foreign policy is a clear and present danger to the defence of the free world.
Obama had astounding gall in his DNC speech to attack Romney’s lack of foreign policy experience.
Obama has four years of it now and he still acts as if he’s had none.
One hopes Romney praises Obama for retracting his very first executive order to close Guantanamo. If only he would also recognise that Major Hassan’s murder of 13 army colleagues wasn’t ‘workplace violence’, it was jihad.
Only someone completely unfit to be C-in-C would designate it ‘workplace violence’.
Let’s hope Romney gets the same level playing field he did the last time to hit Obama out of the park. To my mind his foreign policy is far more clearly untenable than his economic policy.
Is Jeremy Vine trying to outdo his brother? I thought Tim Vine was the comedian.
Obama’s cheat notes
Writing on Romney’s hanky revealed.
Fixed the link for you. Very funny
If they both where allowed to have notes, then they both could have an advantage over each other. But then I think the idea over banning notes was to make the debate more natural not to give both debaters an advantage over each other. Another case of the moronic mindset of the left.
Rasmussen has Romney up 49%-47% among likely voters.
They also have Romney ahead by 2 points in Florida and barely up by 1 in Virginia, while the President is barely up by 1 in all-important Ohio. The President still has a 3 point lead overall in swing states, but things are looking much better for Romney since the debate.
Gallup has the President up by 3 nationwide among registered voters, which is also an improvement for Romney. This is inching towards being within the margin of error. Curiously, there are no Beeboids fretting about the Bradley Effect this time.
The President has lost 2 points in job approval ratings, while gaining 2 points in disapproval ratings. Not good.
ABC has the President with a decent lead – 45 points – on the Electoral College map, with plenty of votes still in play. If Romney wins four of the States currently listed as toss-up or only leaning (no votes assigned yet) – Ohio, Virginia, Florida and North Carolina (Romney was leading there before the debate) – it will pretty much be all over. Romney would win without a single vote from the liberal Northeast or the Left Coast. The election will have been won mainly in fly-over country and the South. I guess we’ll be racists again.
Oddly, some of the big media outlets seem to have forgotten how to update their poll tracking since Oct 3. I wonder why?
Still, Mark Mardell told us before the debate on Wednesday that we’d have to take notice if things improved from Romney, so how has the BBC responded?
BBC: What are these polls you speak of? Romney cheated! The President planned to lose! Nothing to see here, move along. Racist!
As a general rule BBC journalists only tweet the polls when Obama is extending his lead. That in itself says just about everything you need to know about their hopes and fears for the US election.
Vine is a total creep and coward if he believes this then he should prove it of face action ! and as for the Dork well as an atheist I find him the most intolerant nasty bigot who is utterly obsessed with the god he claims not to believe in !
Perhaps it was his birth certificate,just in case Obama asked to see it
Don’t think all the Obama lovers are going to like this.
http://townhall.com/tipsheet/katiepavlich/2012/10/05/foreign_donor_scandal_to_hit_obama_campaign
DB, have you seen the latest from Kate Dailey? It’s a real eye-opener. But not in a good way.
Is Twitter good for democracy?
Apparently her editor assigned her to wonder if they’ve spent too much time reading Twitter and not paying attention to what’s actually happening. Gee, ya think?
I especially enjoyed the part about worries over a “Twitter-induced hive mind” and the inset bit about Twitter being overrun with journalists retweeting each other and groupthinking while believing they represent the true voice of the people.
There are no mirrors in the Dailey house.
The irony of the “hive mind” comment jumped out at me too.
Most of the people I follow on Twitter are American conservatives/right-wingers/libertarians. Thus I get to hear the other side, not just the conventional wisdom provided by the BBC, Sky, ITN, Channel 4 and our broadsheet press. And unlike the hive mind of the UK media, I wasn’t surprised by Romney’s debate performance.
These two tweets on the morning after the Denver debate by Sunday Times columnist India Knight summed it all up for me:
I reckon that’s about 95% of UK journalists right there. Clueless.
I was told that the Times is a Murdoch rag and so part of the Tory Press. Was I misinformed?
I was actually a little surprised that Romney kept interrupting to correct the President’s lies. I thought he’d be more polite. Glad I was wrong there. I’m not at all surprised at how the President turned out to be useless without being able to rely on class warfare or Community Organizer rhetoric, and instead having to stand on His record. I’m not sure any amount of preparation can make up for that in the next debates.
“I was told that the Times is a Murdoch rag and so part of the Tory Press. Was I misinformed?”
Where the “Tory” press is concerned Gramsci is winning the war.
I see NotaSheep has a managed to extract an answer from Vine:
Yeah right, Mr Passive Aggressive. Just “asking questions” of his idiot followers but still hasn’t told them it was all bullshit. Lying arsehole.
We know it was a question. It was the shouting – WATCH – that told his followers he thought it was important for people to see.
That’s way more than simply asking a question. Kind of how “Loose Change” is just asking a question.
‘still hasn’t told them it was all bullshit’
Another interesting precedent being set in the world of our ‘most trusted’ media monopoly: no matter what, no matter how skewed, no matter how dubious the context, if it suits those who control the edit suite and broadcast system, so long as partisan stirring is framed as a question… anything goes. Unique.
All things considered, it is rather brave of Mr. Vine to again highlight when questions get asked, as opposed to when they do not. A bit like when power gets held to account, and when not.
He ‘asked a question’ clearly designed to serve a propagandistic purpose, based on no more than a silly bit of tribal gossip. Meanwhile elsewhere the BBC continues to react with defensive denial on what is clear fact, making every excuse in the book for first saying there was nothing there, then saying it wasn’t worth bothering with and now pretending they are appalled.
Of course, now all this is blown apart they are casting around for new ways to spin it, and sadly some tribally supportive media who have briefly shown a commitment to journalistic integrity appear to be getting the new ducks in a row as they coordinate putting this all behind them as soon as possible.
http://www.guardian.co.uk/media/2012/oct/07/peter-preston-newsnight-bbc-jimmy-savile
I am afraid this attempt at making all of ‘us’ complicit won’t wash.
It was covered up. If so-called investigative media don’t bring it to our attention, they can only look at themselves.
Here at least is one still a bit more introspective:
http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2012/oct/07/nick-cohen-jimmy-savile-child-abuse
And when it comes to the BBC’s predictable response to any complaint, I’d be interested in how they rationalise an external complaints system whose default is to say they are comfortable in the belief that they always get it about right, based on no more than their say-so and a now rather misplaced confidence in the professionalism of BBC staff to be ethical or accurate because, well, ‘they just are’.
All this has of course been noted in the BBBC audience log over several years, and far from being consigned to a locked cabinet and ignored, all adds up to a vast collection of institutional abuse.
And no rigged poll will get around that clear fact.
I am shocked, I tell you… shocked to discover that Mr. Vine seems to have retreated into lashing out telling folk he is genetically impartial so there, or resorting to not answering the point but playing the person..
Jeremy Vine @theJeremyVine
@notasheepagoat What is your real name? Why do you troll under a silly name?
Rattled much Jezza?
For a personal account why did you choose ‘TheJeremyVine’ and consider this to be more sensible?
Oh, and as we are challenging such silly things, care to comment on what lies behind ‘All views are my brother Tim’s’
Not sure that falling back on the BBC’s unique commitment to rampant hypocrisy between what it says and does will serve here.
Jeremy Vine is Dez and I claim my &c.
Certainly showing a comparable, if hardly market rate, talent in debate. Without his BBC pulpit and the power of the edit suite to shape the narrative, backed by abuse of censorship, he appears to lack any ability of value.
@notasheepagoat asks Vine (whose wages and expenses are provided from our compulsory tv tax) a question on why he has tweeted this partisan nonsense and Vine classes this as ‘trolling’?
I too asked a question, via a thread that until a few hours ago I had access to. Now, surprise, surprise, I am greeted with:
@theJeremyVine’s tweets are protected.
Only confirmed followers have access to @theJeremyVine’s Tweets and complete profile. Click the “Follow” button to send a follow request.
Am I to presume that for asking a question I have been relegated to the norty step, along with a growing band of others?
Not sure such a reaction is really going to work in favour of the likes of Mr. Vine and those who facilitate his partial and censorious actions via funding obtained by compulsion from those excluded from having access without any recourse to explanation or appeal.
At least it highlights what any the BBC claims should have spoken up or complained must have been confronted by when it was even more an absolute power (with all that corrupts) than it is now.
Pity there’s an internet, eh, Aunty?
It would appear cooler heads have prevailed with some in the exchanges on his twitter feed, and a more conciliatory tone is being adopted. Which is welcome.
Jeremy Vine @theJeremyVine
@JunkkMale @notasheepagoat Twitter tends to create misunderstandings. Probably my fault. Please email jeremy.vine@bbc.co.uk …
Of course it would appear that, to get there, some guns needed sticking to in the face of a fair old assault.
A metaphor there too.
Also, given the undoubted ability of twitter to lead to ‘misunderstandings’ (which though experience with CECUTT is what we usually arrive at once they have run out of ways to blow off any facts and concerns on the tonality of staff… evidently a corporation-wide trait), one has to wonder at the enthusiasm of the BBC and its staff for using a broadcast mechanism that is so prone to them.
A question that could be asked of the powerful, but given the reticence in answering (at least, answering the questions) or enthusiasm for expedited bannings, one many may not get a reply to or even be able to pose.
A situation that remains a tad too unique given the evident consequences unravelling across the BBC media estate still.
Vine still doesn’t want to admit what he did. It’s not Twitter that created this misunderstanding: it was Vine typing the word “WATCH” in all caps. He must think anyone who disagrees with him can’t be very bright.
I have responded further to Jeremy Vine and have posted about it here.
I was intrigued to find that I have mentioned Jeremy Vine once before on my blog:
‘If you’d like to hear Ed Miliband making the same points on the Jeremy Vine show and being taken apart by Jeremy Vine then you can here for the next 7 days. It is nice to hear a BBC presenter actually tackle a Labour politician about their economic policy past, present and future.’
I dont know why Jeremy Paxman didn’t take to Jeremy Vine. He’s just as bent as him.
If, as seems likely given precedent, Mr. Vine lashes out at any others now asking questions by blocking them too, on top of failing to RT those that may not suit (and sharing those that do), the metaphor for the BBC as a whole is too clear to ignore. The attempt to smear a legitimate questioner as a troll, and querying a name…. on twitter… suggests a total loss of plot.
The BBC have thrown their lot in with gaining content and re-disseminating it, selectively, at a cost of £145.50 via twitter, a free US-based commercial system of information sharing with near zero check or balance on accuracy.
And in support of such an easily abused mechanism, they are quick to engage any means of censorship in complement.
And they have given staff carte blanche to publish the personal blurred with ‘professional’.
These are not the actions of an impartial information and education provider who should be trusted.
Much less funded via public compulsion.
No Mr Vine, it was a smear.
Perhaps MARDELL (ex BBC-EU propagandist in Brussels) is trying to engineer this on religion:
“The European Union Creed – the emerging One World Religion”
http://archbishop-cranmer.blogspot.co.uk/2012/10/the-european-union-creed-emerging-one.html
I posted DB’s discovery of the edited BBC website reports which omitted Romney speaking before “large cheering crowds”. I had this response from an ex-BBC facebook friend. It’s interesting to see how the other 75% think:.
“On the other hand, it (BBC) is a foreign broadcaster: people in the UK care as little about US elections as US citizens care about UK ones, and the BBC has absolutely no reason to take sides. Political bias is unlikely within the BBC news reporting, which usually annoys ALL parties: as indeed it should.
My impression of domestic BBC reporting is that it is unbiased. It was clearly reported that Romney had done well at the Denver debate while Obama was wordy and lacklustre. Yesterday, it moved to the unemployment news, reporting first Obama’s announcement then Romney’s appraisal, about which Mark Mardell observed, “he has a point”.
It’s always interesting to see an overseas perspective. Even so, it’s a good observation: please report anything else.
From where I am, I see merits in both men. As a conservative I find Romney rather unimpressive, but I’m open minded.”
Willful blindness?
Your friend sounds very much a BBC ‘house conservative’, just like Sue Lawley was.
Louis, just show him that video of Mardell at the BBC CoJ.