Had to laugh at BBC Today this morning. They were crowing how Lord Patten had written to Maria Miller warning her not to question the impartiality of the BBC! Of COURSE this should be questioned and the fact that Patten, that wettest of “Conservatives” felt obliged to “warn” Miller shows just how sensitive the BBC must feel towards the charge of bias. I see that Bland was wheeled on for a “debate”..did you catch this?
CHRIS PATTEN – KNIGHT ON A WHITE HORSE…
Bookmark the permalink.
“Chris Patten personifies everything that is wrong with the BBC elite.
“Lord Patten, the chairman of the BBC Trust, is no longer fit to carry out his role and should stand down now.”
By Peter Oborne.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/culture/tvandradio/bbc/9630811/Chris-Patten-personifies-everything-that-is-wrong-with-the-BBC-elite.html
Numptie on a knackered nag more like.
I have in the past had reason to differ with Mr. Oborne’s views… not here.
With all that has happened, and is still happening, that the man in theory tasked with representing the licence fee payers (and BBC abusees) has re-defined his role as kneejerk defender of the corporation and baldly stated that the BBC holds others to account, but will not tolerate having questions asked of it under any circumstances, places him at the bottom of the Marinas Trench with a pickaxe.
Don Quixote on a hobby horse is another image that springs to mind.
Chris Patten – Knight on a white elephant.
If Patten has 13 jobs and does them all craply, but for lots of money-then surely were we to sack all the fat padded “talent” up at the top of the BBC, we could create a few thousand jobs, spread the economic blessings about(instead of their nonce/drug chums)-and even let a few foreigners in…
Just saying…
” is no longer fit to carry out his role”
fact is he never was.
It was just another sinecure which this elite bunch award each other.
Well they are certainly circling the wagons around their BBC comrades over at the Guardian.
“To keep children safe, we must look beyond the BBC”
“While we continue to play the blame game with the BBC top brass, the people who really matter are being ignored”
How very typical.
Funny how during the height of the NI phone-hacking brou-ha-ha they did not have any headlines saying things like…
“To keep phone-hacking victims safe, we must look beyond News International”
or even
“While we continue to play the blame game with the Murdochs, the people who really matter are being ignored”
Funny old world, the BBC/Guardian axis.
Considering the left wing media was just as deeply involved in phone hacking, as allegations against the Mirror show, the above post is entirely correct.
Of course the NHS and other agencies which gave Savile carte blanche to abuse patients, prisoners and corpses, should be examined, but that does not mean that the BBC should be overlooked either.
The BBC should be shut down and replaced with voluntary subscription only services, each with a remit to provide genuinely independently audited impartial and unbiased public service broadcasting, and NOT compete in the popular media markets which are served well by private competitive broadcasters.
Call me a conspiracy theorist, but the sudden grasping for Saville’s 4 milllion unclaimed estate looks a bit dodgy to me.
The Guardian are quite right to keep this in proportion, the problem is they’re very selective in doing it.
The BBC deserve every smear, every cruel caricature and every skewering possible.
These stinking hypocrites have trashed the Church, any alternative news media like News International, every possible source of authority like the police or the law(and not the parody we`re now lumbered with)
Their cloying sentiment and perpetual grievance farming has reaped their due reward-and I hope we`ll not call off the hounds to these BBC nonces, like we did with the MPs.
Who gives a stuff what Fatty Pang and the likes of Bland, Dyke and other nomarks say.
Burn the leeches off our backs!
Yes, indeed: the BBC is caught in one of the biggest media scandals for decades and that proves the dangers of accountability.
Huh?
Has Fat Pang been dipping into Richard Bacon’s stash?
I feel vindicated at last. The Beeb done up like a kipper by their own bloody arrogance. Management by “drinks party” it seems. Similar to Labour’s “dinner party strategies”. And the Graun bust and laying off their namby pamby wets until they are down to their last Polly. And the Mirror and smug Piers, and hacking. And Mark Thomson stood up at the altar by NYT probably.
Christmas has indeed arrived early in the Wisp household. I am a happy bunny this week.
Nicholas Kroll is Director of Governance on the BBC Trust.
He’s been a civil servant for all his life. He’s never had a working job.
He joined the Civil Service in 1997. 2002 – 2004 he was Chief Operating Officer and deputy to the Permanent Secretary at the Department for Culture, Media and Sport. Director of Creative Industries, Media and Broadcasting Group (1996 to 2000), Head of Broadcasting Policy Division (1995 to 1996), and Head of the Arts Division (1993 to 1995). Head of the European Community Budget Division (1990 to 1993) and the Head of Banking Policy Branch (1986 to 1990).
And he has nothing to say about Savile. Or the BBC’s governance, which he’s meant to direct. As per his job description.
again, the BBC Trust is not fit for purpose
‘The Governors announced in June that in future they will act – and be seen to act – fully independently of the BBC’s management and will be resourced properly in order to make informed and independent judgements.
The new Governance Unit will include a greater range of expert and independent professionals to advise Governors on the conduct of their duties and to scrutinise proposals coming from management.
Nicholas Kroll said: “I am delighted that the Governors have appointed me.’
Are they going to consider Andrew Montford, Christopher Booker, James Delingpole, Lord Lawson, Benny Peiser, Graham Stringer, David Davis, Peter Sissons, Christopher Monckton or Piers Corbyn.
Well, that didn’t take long, Patten has obvioulsy gone native. I thought the BBC Trust was meant to be operationally independent of the BBC and was meant to ensure it operated within it’s Charter and that the interests of the Licence Fee Payers were kept.
That being the case, by what right does Patten think he has the authority to write to anybody outside the BBC to lecture them about what they should or should not say about the organisation?
All his behaviour does is prove, beyond a shadow of doubt, that he has no idea of what his duties as chairman of the Trust entails and that he is not a fit and proper person to hold that position. That very letter displays openly that his actions are neither independent of the BBC or impartial in his attitude towards it when it comes to the opinions of those outside the organisation.
Patten should either offer his resignation forthwith or be instantly dismissed from the position for which he is obviously totally unsuited.
He always was native. That’s why he got the job.
Chris Pattern’s behaviour is far worse that arguing with a policeman for 7 seconds about which exit from no 10 he should use. Its not his job to defend the indefensible. My worry is that in a few months this will all die down and the BBC will continue as normal. Cameron should ensure that things will change. Sack Pattern!
out of touch arrogant establishment = former public school boys who live off the taxpayer by getting elected to parliament?
or
out of touch arrogant establishment =
BBC Leftists who live off the taxpayer and have never stood in an election for anything in their life?
No one knew, no one said anything, no one complained..
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/crime/jimmy-savile/9631900/BBC-at-war-over-fate-of-editor-in-Jimmy-Savile-scandal.html
‘a BBC foreign correspondent has said she told the then-director-general about the “broad context” of the axed Savile exposé at a Christmas drinks party at BBC Television Centre last December. Caroline Hawley said she raised the issue after speaking to Newsnight journalists’
Oh dear. Now we have Mark Thompson, informed, knew the context, established more facts, did nothing BUT allowed programs celebrating what a fine fellow Jimmy was.
Who’s next to break cover to try to ensure that they are employable in the industry at some future time?
Just loving this.
I remember one day The World at One ended with Martha Kearney saying “And we’ll leave you with some clips of some of the most memorable bits of the phone-hacking scandal so far.” They made it into an an absolute circus at every opportunity. Another one of my always unclaimed £10 notes goes to anyone who finds a BBC programme signing off with a montage of some clips of the most memorable bits of the Jimmy Savile scandal so far.
Prime Ministers questions the other day, one Labour MP brought up Levenson. While TWatson (of previous Levenson witch-hunt infamy) brought in some allegation made against a person connected to a former PM (no doubt a Conservative as the slug is intransically partizan).
While both of these things are important, the timing immediately struck me as being attempts to deflect away from the BBC.
Another thought, if the BBC is impartial, why are its stoutest (in TWatson’s case literally) defenders always from the left-wing?
“Fatty Pang Patten’s Savile shambles and the question: why did Dave every let him run the BBC?”
By STEPHEN GLOVER
[Excerpt]:
“His greatest mistake — I suspect — was to appoint Mr Entwistle as director-general. Lord Patten evidently decided that here was a man who would do whatever he told him, though to maintain the illusion of a genuine contest, consultants were employed at a cost of hundreds of thousands of pounds before Mr Entwistle, one of three internal candidates, was appointed.
“And yet, of course, Fatty Pang could not control his new DG, or keep a proper eye on the BBC, because so much of his time is spent on other activities. As chancellor of one of our great universities, he is responsible for enhancing its reputation — which means raising money — in this country and the U.S.
“He is also a paid non-executive director or adviser to five companies, including BP, the private equity group Bridgepoint, and a multi-national called Hutchison Whampoa, which is based in Hong Kong. All these concerns take up much of his time.
“It is ludicrous to suppose that a man who is head of Oxford University, and does work for five companies, can also have the time to be an assiduous chairman of the BBC. I am amazed that he was not required to give up most of these other responsibilities when he took up his new job at the Corporation in May 2011.”
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/debate/article-2222681/Fatty-Pang-Pattens-Savile-shambles-question-did-Dave-let-run-BBC.html
-See ‘PhilO’TheWisp’ entry on Patten’s financial interests here:
10:53 am entry, today-
http://biasedbbc.tv/2012/10/the-pre-emptive-strike.html#comments
“Patten and Entwistle may have to go over Savile,
says Tory MP”
http://www.theweek.co.uk/politics/savile-abuse-claims/49719/patten-and-entwistle-may-have-go-over-savile-says-tory-mp?
“Isn’t it time Lord Patten showed a little humility over the Savile scandal?”
By David Hughes
http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/news/davidhughes/100186340/?
‘Daily Express’ article re-Mark Thompson –
“JIMMY SAVILE SCANDAL: NEW JOB OF FORMER BBC BOSS IS NOW
ON THE LINE”
By Giles Sheldrick.
[Excerpt]:
“FORMER BBC director general Mark Thompson’s claim he ‘never heard any allegations’ against Jimmy Savile until he resigned last month has been challenged by a highly respected journalist at the corporation.
“Mr Thompson has been dragged into the sex abuse scandal after it was said he was told of the ‘broad context’of
Newsnight’s axed investigation into the paedophile presenter at a Christmas drinks party.*
“The claim by BBC foreign correspondent Caroline Hawley has called into question Mr Thompson’s version of events
as he prepares to take on one of the media world’s biggest jobs.
“Times public editor Margaret Sullivan questioned whether he is fit to lead the organisation.”
http://www.express.co.uk/posts/view/354236/Jimmy-Savile-scandal-New-job-of-former-BBC-boss-is-now-on-the-line
* Do Beeboids have ‘drinks parties’? Who would have thought it?
Imagine the fuss the BBC would be making if the explanations offered up by any other organisation ( with the exception of their liberal left mates of course) were constantly being shown to be, either part truths ,evasions or down right lies. They would be howling for blood and it would top of the news day after day , week after week. Yet Paxman was moaning that the Savile scandal was going on and on. Well he might think that hacking a few phones is more news worthy than the state funded broadcaster allowing , perhaps colluding , with foul crimes against children being committed on their premises by their employees, but the rest of us don’t. We want heads on spikes over this and the something done by the government to curb the power of the BBC.
Meanwhile, as if to demonstrate how detached they are from the real world, and how much they are wedded to the entitlement/welfarist culture so beloved of their political chums on the opposition benches, here is a belter from today’s Telegraph:
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/culture/tvandradio/bbc/9631164/BBC-men-wake-up-and-smell-no-coffee.html
Another BBC editor discovers that although the BBC hired him, paid him, lauded him, facilitated him, boosted him, supplied him and covered up for him even in death, actually it was everyone but the BBC ‘we’ should really joining with the BBC in hunting down.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-20069379
No Mark, while others do need to be held to account, the spotlight still is pretty much squarely on you lot and the spawning ground you inhabit.
Any hope of an I`m backing Rupert Day?
1/365 of my licence fee to be given to Sky for a down payment on subscribing.
A day when multiculti family values of loving grandad who`s a world citizen are celebrated….and contrasted with the likes of Savile and Brand who may well have grown up to be just like Rupert, had they not been corrupted by the CDBBC.
Possibly we could pray over a Collins bible(Ruperts company isn`t it?)…and gently try to get him to bin the dreadful Times Ed…the teachers grievance rag, but bought religiously due to its slew of state stuffed jobs that may spring them out of the classroom!
I`m backing Rupert Day-now when should it be?
On the legal front:-
“Reed Smith’s BBC ties face scrutiny as firm appointed to Savile probe”
Author: Alex Newman
http://www.legalweek.com/legal-week/news/2219908/reed-smiths-bbc-ties-face-scrutiny-as-firm-takes-lead-role-on-savile-probe?WT.rss_f=Home&WT.rss_a=Reed+Smith%27s+BBC+ties+face+scrutiny+as+firm+appointed+to+Savile+probe
http://order-order.com/2012/10/25/full-bbc-savile-cover-up-email-to-grant-shapps/
The BBC loves twitter RT’d allegations that become ‘news’, right?:
martinbrunt @skymartinbrunt
#Savile Update on Savile investigation coming soon. One charity has had allegations against three BBC producers.
Karma, you minx.
I sense some more blockings in the Force.
Just what we want to see; infighting in this barrel of decadence.
http://www.standard.co.uk/news/crime/jimmy-savile-bbc-tempers-flare-as-scandal-deepens-8226551.html
It seems Jimmy was not limited to his guests he fancied his relatives too.
http://www.digitalspy.co.uk/showbiz/news/a433338/jimmy-savile-great-niece-on-abuse-who-would-believe-me-listen.html?rss
According to the Dailymail, Patten said “He said it was important to remember that ‘the BBC is independent, it is answerable to licence fee-payers, it is not an agent of the Government’.
How is the BBC answerable to the fee-payers. So according to the logic of that fool Patten I have a choice as to whether I pay the licence fee. Otherwise I have to pay and the BBC is not answerable to us fee payers.
I’m a licence fee payer. Patten, you’re fired!
I think the media might have missed the start of where Patten went wrong.
The ‘not fit for purpose’ label regarding Patten’s performance over this scandal, began right at the beginning of this affair. When the accusations disputing the reasons for the Newsnight report over Savile to be dropped began, first Entwistle then Patten both affirmed that it was due to editorial reasons, followed by asserting that any inquiry was not necessary. Shortly afterwards, when this looked more and more suspect, and Cameron began questioning this claim, both he and Entwistle did an about turn.
So what business did he have chorusing the desired BBC line without investigating it further himself? He showed himself to be nothing but a lackey, and his aggressive response to MP’s was nothing but going on the offense to deflect his guilt.
He, along with numerous others at the BBC should be made to start looking for new jobs, more befitting their real status, and at a salary that reflects their true worth.