Leveson avoided the task of examining the culture, practices and ethics of the BBC as it was outside his remit….If Cameron had any sense he would have changed that remit….and should now set up another ‘Leveson’ to look at the publicly funded BBC in particular.
‘This Inquiry has covered the “culture, practices and ethics of the press” which obviously includes newspapers whether printed or online: it does not include broadcasters (ultimately regulated by Ofcom). Thus, although the Director General of the BBC, then Mark Thompson, gave evidence, he did so only to provide a comparison between the approach adopted internally by the BBC Trust along with the oversight from Ofcom. In those circumstances, although there have been many calls during the Inquiry for me to expand the terms of reference to investigate other organisations (most recently the BBC in the wake of the allegations against Sir Jimmy Savile), it is simply outside the Terms of Reference within which I am working.’
The BBC are outraged by the report…a ‘damning report’….. and know who to blame:
‘For editors, publishers and – not least – newspaper proprietors, this is a damning report.’
Never mind the politicians who ‘bought’ favourable coverage by whatever sordid little backroom deals they arranged…never mind the police officers or others who sold sensitive information…….there’s only one main target for the BBC…the man at the head of News International.
Some interesting points from Leveson:
Report rejects wrongdoing by the government around the BSKyB bid, with “no credible evidence of bias”. Must learn lessons around quasi-judicial processes. “We were right to stand by him.” [Says Cameron]
No evidence of a “deal” between David Cameron and News International to trade policy favours for positive news coverage
So two major BBC news stories….one generated from the dark recesses of the inventive mind of Labour’s Peter Mandelson and which was accepted as ‘true’ by the BBC, the other a story that the BBC itself played a part in concocting about BSkyB….both stories wrong and unfounded.
Impartiality in its DNA? I don’t think so.
The funny thing about Leveson was that New Labour and its extraordinary, incestuous, closeness to the Murdochs and their media empire goes almost unmentioned…Gordon Brown managing to evade any serious questions at all during the inquiry….it is Cameron who gets rapped over the knuckles for his closeness to ‘Murdoch’…though in fact to Rebekah Brooks…who happens to be the wife of his old school friend Charlie Brooks.
It was the very same Labour Party which had Murdoch Journalist and now Labour’s communications spinner (Senior Advisor (Communications and Strategy)), Tom Baldwin, plant stories in the Times on behalf of the Labour government:
Beware of The Times’ Tom Baldwin
Tom Baldwin is back in London, writing political stories for The Times. Before a stint as a reporter for the same newspaper in America he became notorious for writing stories that bore Downing Street’s imprint. His close connections to Alastair Campbell are still evident in the number of stories he has helped write in recent weeks about Blair’s chances of becoming EU President.
This is what the BBC has to say about that…..
New Labour is also criticised for introducing a culture of ‘spin’ in Government
Dynamite.
Guido Fawkes is less enamoured by Leveson and his plans for Press regulation:
‘The Leveson Report suggests Ofcom could soon wield considerable power over the press. It is recommended that the new regulatory body will be ‘validated’ by Ofcom, the government is to consider allowing Ofcom to regulate newspapers that refuse to join or even becoming the regulatory body itself if the new system fails. So who is the man in charge of Ofcom?
Ed Richards is a former adviser Gordon Brown, who worked in a small office with just the former PM and his PA. He was also a senior policy adviser to Tony Blair. The Guardian describe him as having a background “rooted in New Labour”. Now he could well be the guardian of the guardians. Do we really want Gordon Brown’s henchman in charge of regulating the press?’
Legislation of the Press !!! Can just imagine what a future Labour Government would do with that.
East Germany here we come !
Only Cameron could be so utterly incompetent as to set up an inquiry into the closeness and corruption of what was then a labour government, and the labour supporting press and the biased labour Metropolitan police at the time when the hacking was going on, and have it report criticism of Cameron and leave the incestuous and corrupt relationship of the labour supporting Murdoch press and labour supporting Met police and the labour government which was in power when all three were involved in the phone hacking at the time. completely unscathed.
IF Cameron had got any sense whatsoever, he would have set the terms of reference for the report to look into labour’s relationship with the labour supporting media at the time the hacking happened.
There was a HUGE pile of crap ready to throw at labour, and Cameron, somehow, managed to get it all to fall on his own head somehow.
Also why are Brown and Piers Morgan not being charged for perjury? We all saw them lie their arses off under oath.
Because Leveson and that revolting cross examiner ( whose name I cant remember) turned the Inquiry into ” An Inquiry into the Murdoc Press changing their allegiance from Labour to Conservative” . The fact that Peirs Morgan was finding it a big joke that he had accessed a hacked telephone conversation of Paul McCartney was deemed to be irrelevant compared to the meaning of ‘ lol ‘.
Exactly Misterned.
Already the BBC / Liebour current ar churning out the line that Cameron / Murdoch empire are in the crosshairs; not a dicky bird of Liebour failures under their watch and hacking abuses by non Murdoch titles like the Mirror.
So predictable, the report has been used by the Liberal elite, using the enquiry for their political ends!
‘Hard cases make bad law’.
Miliband repetitively quoted the examples of the two cases
(quite different) of Dowler and McCann, in support of legislation on the press.
And BBC’s Radio 5 Bacon repetitively told us that he was outside the offices of ‘The Times’ and ‘The Sun’ in Wapping in his partial pro-legislation presentation of Leveson.
The Labour Party political axis:
-from denial of freedom of foster parents in Rotherham and beyond, to denial of freedom of the press in London and beyond.
Isn’t Tony Blair the godfather of Rupert Murdoch’s daughter, Grace, born in 2001? Is that ever mentioned by the BBC to show how close Labour were to News International?
Didn’t Gordon Brown’s wife, Sarah Brown, host a ‘pyjama party’ for her News International girly chums at Chequers? Attendees apparently included Rebecca Brooks and Rupert Murdoch’s wife, Wendi Deng? Does that ever get mentioned by the BBC? I wonder why not?
The hypocrisy of the BBC stinks to high heaven.
hypocrisy
it’s in their genes
‘it’s in their genes’
Surprised Mr. Marr doesn’t claim that is what he seems to be always looking for.
Leveson wants Betamax regulation in a digital age whether it is statutory underpinned or not it will be ineffective as more people gather news digitally.
To me, the tabloids are like toilets – unpleasant and in need of cleaning regularly, but absolutely necessary in a civilised country.
The BBC, on the other hand, is just a bottomless pit.
Ed Richards? Two questions:
1. Is he another PPE (Oxford)?
2. Has Steph Flanders slept with him?
Has Steph Flanders slept with him?
It seems not but she gives him a hand every now and then.
some guy called Ed was balls deep once
allegedly 😉
If he had a daughter, would he call her Ophelia?
I was going to surf the sites on this tonight.
But life’s too short.
On matters of reports, it seems clear if the MSM get in it what they like, it’s a good ‘un. If not, it isn’t.
Choose your default channel now.
BBC not high on the list.
Just heard that Alastair Campbell is going to be discussing Leveson on The One Show tonight. Quelle-bleeding-surprise.
And will that mendacious piece of effluent be taken to task by those grinning inanities hosting the ‘show’? Not holding my breath, but definitely holding my nose to avoid the massive stink of hypocrisy.
Oops, a day late. Was he? Can’t stand the show or him
I’ve only just recovered from that Izzard creatures last appearance.
Alistair Campbell once did one good thing: staunch internationalist, Izzard, always brags how he did a stand up show in Paris in French. For some reason he was interviewing Campbell on the radio and said ” I have un question for you,” to which Campbell replied: “Une question.”
Almost makes up for ordering my murder 😉
“Leveson goes too far”
By Kirsty Hughes.
http://www.indexoncensorship.org/2012/11/index-leveson-inquiry-press-freedom/?
…that very good
Mick Hume:-
“For a free press, with no buts.
“In the war of words around the Leveson report, too many on all sides have accepted the myth that the UK press is too free and must be tamed.”
http://www.spiked-online.com/site/article/13126/
http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/news/danhodges/100192113/this-is-not-about-milly-dowler-its-a-battle-for-power-and-leveson-has-picked-his-side/
Top rated comment:
‘Its about silencing the press on the abuses of the EU
its about silencing the press on the abuses of mass immigration
its about silencing the press on how MPs fiddle their expenses
its about silencing all center right publications
its about getting labour elected
Broadcast, on the other hand…
BBC-NUJ, Clegg and Miliband.
We can expect an even softer BBC-NUJ political line on Clegg, now that he has aligned himself more closely with Labour.
From ‘Conservative Home’:-
…we know how the three main party leaders line up against each other. Basically, we have Mr Clegg and Ed Miliband fighting from the same corner: they back the idea of an independent system of self-regulation, backed up by statute. And in the opposite corner is David Cameron: he has ‘misgivings’ about the statutory elements of the Leveson report.
“Such unity between the Lib Dem and Labour leaderships, contra the Tory leadership, has been rare in the past few years..”
http://conservativehome.blogs.com/thetorydiary/2012/11/rolling-blog-on-the-release-of-the-leveson-report.html
Anyone know how many pages this report ran to? I have managed to avoid all news of it today but I did wonder how much it weighed. It sort of seems important.
The heavier the report the less we need to take it seriously.
” The heavier the report the less we need to take it seriously .”
Much ado about nothing. Jesus had the 10 Commandments, Leveson had 250,000 pages.
…rather like the EU directive on cucumbers. Brussels is pushing for press censorship, which is why the establishment is more or less happy with Leveson. The establishment includes the mainstream parties and the partly EU-funded beeb.
http://cmpf.eui.eu/working-papers/EUcompetences.aspx
Where does BBC-NUJ stand on the freedom to criticise Islam?
As BBC-NUJ favours legislation to limit freedom of speech in U.K, does it favour U.N legislation initiated by Islamic bloc of countries to prevent all criticism of Islam?
“At U.N., Muslim world questions Western freedom of speech”
http://uk.reuters.com/article/2012/09/28/uk-un-assembly-islam-idUKBRE88R1JB20120928
Of course, Reuters (and Beeboids) were wrong in blaming Islamic jihad massacres of U.S Ambassdor in Libya as due to a video.
Reuters is getting as biased towards the left as the beeb. Shame to see it sinking so low.
PUBLICLY FUNDED not by me, if everybody stopped paying the license fee/tax just for a few weeks (delayed payment) it would bring the crap organization down (simple)
Has anyone seen the BBC News 24? If it repeats every hour listen at 8 pm, I managed to last until 7:15 before turning off (after a FULL 5 minutes of Prescott!!). They had several people slagging off Cameron saying how he has broken his word, gone back on what he promised, God knows what else. It was awash with blatant bias.
Sorry it’s off topic, sort of, but I found this quite interesting…
http://www.thesun.co.uk/sol/homepage/news/4672650/Banksy-artwork-offers-sly-dig-at-BBC-over-Jimmy-Saville-scandal.html
“Removed by BBC staff”, apparently…guilty conscience?
Not really that far off topic, it displays admirably the attitude of the bBBC towards any kind of criticism and, in the light of Levison, exactly how it would love to have anybody who disagrees with them subjected to censorship and silenced.
Funny, isn’t it. The BBC is eager to see stringent regulations slapped on all other media outlets but reluctant to have any measures set up to scrutinize its own murky operations; I ‘wonder’ why? If one were to write a report on the BBC’s escapades over the years, the final word count would make War and Peace seem like a nursery rhyme in comparison!
The presence of the evil (a word I very rarely use) Alistair Campbell piously discussing the report on R5 earlier today was a;most beyond belief.
Here was Tony Blair’s Liar In Chief (and there’s a job!) in full blustering, shout-you-down mode, without anyone having the courage to say out loud what they all must know. In terms of attempts to bully and manipulate the media, he and his New Labour masters wrote the book.
Despite my earlier post that we should not take the Leveson report too seriously I am convinced that to give the state any power over free speech is to end free speech . It is to accept that the state has the right to grant liberties instead of us possessing freedoms as a birthright as free born Englishmen. The difference between Anglo Saxon and Roman concepts of law if you like. The difference between the EU approach to us and to our own English way of doing things.
The state is the coldest of all cold monsters. And the BBC and the Guardianistas and the politicians all really love it. The state is what nurtures them .The state feeds them and allows them to pursue their unreal dreams. The people of England? They don’t count any more than they have ever really counted.
‘The Spectator’:-
“The Spectator won’t be part of a state licensed media”
http://blogs.spectator.co.uk/the-spectator/2012/11/leader-why-the-spectator-wont-join-any-statuatory-backed-press-regulation-body/
MATT:
“Post Leveson Cartoon”
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/matt/
On Leveson, SKY NEWS perhaps missing the irony of its own paper review in (Ann Diamond, who also cited a Mac cartoon compelementing Matt’s) picking up a piece pointing out it was talk of Westminster & MSM (esp. BBC, to a near obsessive degree) only, with the public being spoken at…. endlessly… caring not a whit.
I actually do care on Leveson, but also find the conceit of still taking ‘speaking for the nation’ to ‘demanding the nation follows’ the BBC’s narrow ambitions breath-taking.
The BBc has never doorstepped innocent people, tapped their phones nor bribed people.
Murdoch’s press is guilty as charged, hence the forthcoming trials.
the icing on the cake is Murdoch backing Cameron. Classic own goal.
No, it’s worse.
The BBC `doorsteps` plenty of innocent people every year by sending out TV licence inspectors who upon the opening of doors instantly set out to accuse whoever answers that they are guilty and must prove to them that they are innocent by letting them inside the house to prove whether they need a licence or not….. They also attempt to assert legal authority to enter the house without any actual legal powers to do so by making legal threats…. It`s the worst type of doorstepping there is….. Knock knock!! You don`t have a licence… You have to prove you don`t need one by letting a complete stranger into your house and prove your innocence…
http://tv-licensing.blogspot.co.uk/2012/03/bbc-hit-back-at-freedom-of-information.html
http://tv-licensing.blogspot.co.uk/2012/01/bbc-confirms-responsibility-for-heinous.html
Oh, and on a doorstep near you…
http://tv-licensing.blogspot.co.uk/2012/02/tv-licensing-job-ad-reading-between.html
No, the BBC doesn’t doorstep innocent people… it hires others to do it for them.
Isn’t that roughly what got NoTW shut down?
What it does do is deploys £4Bpa of compelled unique funding to suit political ends, and when caught with its frillies around its ankles have a unique internal inquiry at our expense that it then sticks behind a FoI firewall protected by lawyers.. at our expense.
As goals go… not looking too great either.
On matters doorstepping, and laws of poorly thought-through consequences, beyond the now ever on-call and at-threshold Jihad, Google throws up this that I was unaware of too:
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2153718/BBC-bodyguard-set-dead-tsunami-baby-thought-posed-risk-reporting-team.html
‘The revelation comes four months after the BBC’s Head of Newsgathering, Fran Unsworth, and Head of Safety, ex-Army officer Paul Greeves, tried to persuade Summers not to publish the biography.’
That always works well.
Interesting that the comments, in the DM, seem supportive of his actions.
I’d be interested how, if another employee of another corporation has opted on carpet-sweeping, the BBC would have reacted?
LOl Prolapse
BBC has lied/ faked/breached FOI’s / used private investigators just like the rest and yes it does door step people don’t you watch witchdog ?
The BBC doorstepped (or sidewalk-stepped, as the case may be) a few Tory MPs back during the
moats and duckhousesexpenses scandal.The BBC has never faked footage to support bogus claims in its programmes, never pulled an investigation into sex abuse on its own premises to avoid damaging its reputation because it had allowed the nation’s worst child abuser free reign for decades, never slandered an innocent individual with unfounded claims of paedophilia because it was so eager to believe in a story with no foundation whatsoever…
Oh wait…
Their print arm, the Guardian has. The BBC’s House Paper also told lies about Millie Dowler’s phone hacking accusing the NotW of something it didn’t do. Why is the Guardian still allowed to operate when the NotW was closed down? It shows the complete lack of integrity of all left-wing organisations of course.
That was in reply to Prole. He’s not very good at this Beebatron stuff is he. He needs to be recalled to be fixed like the Dez Mk. 1.
And it’s hemorrhaging money so who is paying their bills ?
Auto Trader, along with all those public sector job adds – you can never have enough diversity managers.
‘Why is the Guardian still allowed to operate when the NotW was closed down?’
Well, without it, the BBC would be in a pickle.
They need the Graun, its commentators and trusted journalism because there are things even the BBC knows it alone cannot run with, hence the need for a notional degree of separation on a ‘critics are saying’ basis, or to dust of Pol Potty for yet more ‘analysis’ from the Tuscan daughter viewpoint that ‘speaks to the nation’ in Penge so eloquently.
Interesting that my email in-box got these two back-to back:
http://digitalpolitico.net/2012/11/30/leveson-ducks-uncomfortable-truth-about-milly-dowler-phone-hacking/
The key point of the story by The Guardian that shut the News of the World was incorrect.
And then…
http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/news/danhodges/100192335/the-vichy-evening-news-formerly-known-as-the-guardian-has-gone-bonkers-over-leveson/
‘And then I turned on the radio and heard Alan Rusbridger on the Today programme.’
Now, as Dame Judy says in ‘Riddick’… ‘who could have predicted that?’
Not sure about that. Read their very own guidelines, and see if once again you are wrong.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/editorialguidelines/page/guidelines-privacy-doorstepping/#doorstepping-for-factual-programmes-without-p
This was in response to Prole as well. Either he truly believes the things he writes or he is using the Clinton defence. You know how it goes. I did not doorstep that person. I did not have sexual relations with that woman. I did
not sex up that dossier. I did not lie under oath at Leveson.
If you are going to lie make it a big lie!
Not just the Murdoch press. What about the Guardian’s dirty tricks?
http://britain-today.blogspot.co.uk/2012/06/news-of-world-investigation-guardian.html
Ian, I like your blog. Where did you get the white girl/supermarket chicken image from your Rochdale thread earlier this week?
Thanks Span – but I’m buggered if I can remember where I got my white girl/supermarket sardines picture from. Feel free to download it though.
BTW, what does Span Ows mean?
It might be a bit off topic but all the same relevant. The Energy Bill was published yesterday according to EUReferendum.com and yet thanks to Leveson we haven’t heard a peep about it. This is so wrong as the implications of this bill are enormous. go here and read.
http://www.eureferendum.com/blogview.aspx?blogno=83375
‘24,000 ‘died because of cold homes’ last winter’ http://bit.ly/VhrhhC
On the positive side, such as Cameron, Miliband, Clegg & Lord Hall Hall are index-linked, full-cost-of-living and where necessary subsidised toasty.
Great to have such folk as ‘leaders’ or ‘speaking for the nation’.
Well won’t global warming (man made or otherwise) resolve that problem?
After all the science is settled
Yep, a good day to bury bad news…
Palestine psuedo Statehood
It’s not the BBC, not for a month anyway, but the LBC – Leveson Broadcasting Company.
This morning’s by-election results are by 11am off the BBC website’s main headlines and cut back to a small headline reading ‘Labour in triple by-election win’.
UKIP might as well not have bothered while the Rotherham child snatching report remains unread on the council leader’s desk.
One wonders if that now UKIP came second in Rotherham beating the tories (who incidentally came in behind both the BNP and Respect; two diametrically apposed parties) and the now very aptly “punned” limpdems who came last behind the BNP, Respect, the English Democrats and an independent and lost its deposit after winning just 2.11 per cent of the vote; the uncle beeb will now take this into account when giving “fair coverage” during the next election and so if it repeats the “three party voice off” will exclude the limpdems in favour of UKIP.
Naaa can’t see it happening myself.
Id love to see Farage up there with Cameron, Milibland and Cleggy.
Unfortunately, it all comes down to seats in parliament.
Anyone else notice on the Ten o clock News (I think it was) that the names of the first two party’s were given, then the analyst moved on to fourth place!?
Before going to check the result to confirm your suspicions, you know the answer!
This is deliberate misinformation by omission of a salient fact.
“Unlearning liberty.
“Leading American free speech advocate Greg Lukianoff tells spiked about the dire state of free speech on US campuses, and how censorship is teaching people to be dumb.”
by Tim Black.
http://www.spiked-online.com/site/reviewofbooks_article/13130/
Does anyone wonder if Labour were tipped off a couple of weeks ago as to the Leveson findings. They seemed to suddenly go hard on their determination to implement every finding without, apparently, knowing what they were going to be.
I know we could all probably guess that Leveson was going to go down the route of stamping on freedom and democracy, considering how he was determined to choose what bits of evidence to include and which to ignore. Also how it was clear this was little about phone-hacking as much as going after NI and ignoring otherNews organisations who had openly commited the same crime. With that Labour could feel they were on a sure bet that the findings would assist them in pursuit of their main ideals, i.e. anti-democracy and freedom. But it still makes me wonder if they had had a tip-off from Leveson or one of his creatures even so.
3 of his 6 assessors were from the Media Standards Trust, which is linked to Common Purpose, Labour’s version of the Freemasons.
Leveson,bloody Leveson.
Have deliberately kept away from the news, knowing that the BBC will be class snitch and prefect…oh, how prurient and how sad. The irresponsible press-so unlike the BBC eh?
OK …I get the BBCs point…McCann and Jeffries were terribly treated, and deserved every penny.
Yet-like Millie Dowler, something stinks about the cant of the BBC…I don`t mind them nobbling the Press as long as the BBC gets reined in.
Anyone tell me why we`ve heard plenty from the traduced hacked off bunch…including the good folk I mention above…but nothing from Lord MacAlpine or Alex Ferguson etc..it`s as if the BBC choose their “lepers” to suit their agenda, whereas equally valid victims of the media-to wit the Beeb itself-seem not to get that 8.10 interview…that PM slot, the Media Show,…etc , etc.
Ah, the Mau Mau eh?…the gift that keeps on giving.
On Today this morning, we get an “update” saying nothing new, but the BBC don
What?
The BBC don`t want us to forget the Mau Mau, so we get Prof David Anderson (he`s from Oxford you know…International Relations, if you please!)…and Sarah Montague gives him all the help he likes to shaft the white squaddies of 1959 and their atrocities.
And no mention of his being a material quisling witness on behalf of the three “elderly Kenyans” in the case that our useless judges decided was white imperialism and in need of compo.
No sir-independent you see.
As to the prospects that the white trash out there might have suffered a bit themselves in a nasty dirty little war…well no excuses will ever do for them…a different standard I`d expect.
Just like Israel…the BBC always get the wrong end of the stick…and back the wrong horse.
We`ll not forget!
Some seem quite keen on this at the moment…
Massive compo on its way dovetailing nicely with the ‘social justice’ – i.e. redistribution of wealth – agenda.
More countries to follow. Big victory for leftie Brit-hating English lawyers, not forgetting massive wonga in their own back pockets.
Text “Screw the racist imperialists to….”
I can see how the Labour/BBC axis is going to work over the next few weeks: Every day now the BBC will report on a different ‘celebrity’ who originally gave evidence at the enquiry and have now released a statement criticising David Cameron by saying how disappointed they are at his response.
It will allow the BBC to remind us of previous celebrities who have already expressed their disgust at and also remind us that Labour and the Lib Dems are both fully behind Leveson by demand Government regulation.
Thursday was Charlotte Church, Friday it was the McCanns and the Dowlers, today it is JK Rowling. No doubt Steve Coogan and Hugh Grant et al are lined up for the coming days and weeks.
Each piece by a celebrity won’t of course be balanced with the Tory/Cameron view and if the celebrity gets to speak, you can be sure there won’t be someone from Cameron’s Government speaking.
Drip drip drip.
Without knowing too much about the individual cases of the likes of the McCanns and Jefferies, I can fully understand their rage and despair at what the Press(yes…and the BBC, although we hear little about their reporting at these times) did to them. They deserve every penny-and if that means that those papers are shut down , then I`m OK with it.
Trouble comes when the BBC parade these living stumps of wronged humanity as “the ishoo”. Clearly the BBC care as little about the McCanns as the Guardian does-and did- in regard of Millie Dowler. Such civilians are just lily pads to hop in search of the big flies…like Murdoch and BSkyB etc.
The “liberal media” are as one on this-no alternatives to their truths allowed.
My own view is that Leveson will be the sandbag deliberately to be forced on the free Press, so the role of the BBC and its “progressive broadsheets” won`t be ever arrraigned for their hacking and phone taps, Met schmoozing…and probably the associated paedo rings that surely won`t be all the fault of Savile alone.
If a few tissues are spent on poor Maddie, but Moseley, Partridge, Grant or Bercows can hide behind the useful sandbags of McCanns, Jefferies and the Dowlers…you get the commercial press and media strangled at birth, leaving the BBC and Guardian to get away with all they`ve done(and colluded in, as well no doubt).
Hope the pawns on the chess board realise that they`re expendable-their BBC is using them to screw Murdoch, no more-no less.
Tonights news tells me that 60,000 people have signed up for a petition that wants “Leveson enacted in full”.
Now-how many people wanted capital punishment back a few years ago?..how many wanted an EU Referendum to get out of Europe then?
Don`t ever recall the BBC giving us those figures…and do recall some guff about populist grandstanding, political posturing, gestures and not following the directly accountable will of Parliament…and of course that threat of ” opportunism and playing politics” with grand fundamental issues of State.
Nah…nor me…let`s ask the BBC…as if!