I was no fan of the 2012 London Olympics but can appreciate that it may have done some good in a roundabout way. The point is that when our Capital city won the right to host the games under LABOUR, the BBC were to the fore in cheerleading for the the occasion. But under a Conservative led Coalition, well, things are a tad different. The Today programme this morning was long sneer at the alleged economic benefits of the Games. Even St Vince Cable was put through the mangle! It left me wondering if the games were such an epic fail, what does that make of the BBC coverage and the £££ millions spend on producing it?
AN OLYMPIAN SIZED BIAS
Bookmark the permalink.
The Olympics leaves me cold.
A rag-tag collection of sports not popular enough to pay their own way.
A supposed coming together of the peoples of the world for the sake of unity and sportsmanship – all desperate to dominate one another with a flourish of flag waving and fanfare of their national anthems.
The socialistic double-think of open access and equality amid aggressive competitiveness and striving for excellence.
It just doesn’t add up.
Tax breaks, fauning over the Olympics officials and backhanders to secure the thing in the first place. Secret ticket allocations, exclusive Olympic traffic lanes. Ploughing up sports fields to concrete over for car parking.
The BBC narrative was correct, however, in one crucial phrase – the whiole thing was one big party.
A party which the British and especially the London tax payer financed. A party we were then, by-and-large, excluded from. Unless one became a ‘games-maker’ ie unpaid waiter/flunky/glee clubber for this party. Mass issue of visas – then ludicrous asylumn claims – now the numbers for those are hushed up. All so very very BBC.
The party was expensive – all the bills have not yet been opened. But the party-ers move on to Rio.
Quite right. Football, cycling and tennis have no support.
Being healthy should be really frowned upon!
The BBC couldn’t help themselves even with the London Olympics.
I’m not a big sports person(hate it actually) but clearly remember them fawning over and giving lots of coverage to a black runner called Mo Farah.
It was just a case of “here we go again”……..
the message from al beeb for months and months after the olympics was “wasnt it great, look at all the medals ethnics got for britain. isnt multiculturalism great, without them we would have done shit”
Was there a single ‘ethnic’ medal in the following successful sports: track & road cycling, rowing & sculling, equestrianism and yachting? Track athletics did have such successes, with Farah & Ohuruogo; does Jessica Ennis count as ethnic?
jessica ennis was used as the poster child of multi cultural bliss by al beeb after the olympics. ideal for al beeb as she has white / black parents
“…………….. but clearly remember them fawning over and giving lots of coverage to a black runner called Mo Farah.”
Congratulations on passing the bBBC selective memory test which will ensure you garner loads of likes from those who share your bias.
I can clearly remember the BBC (and almost all of the UK media outlets) “fawning over and giving lots of coverage” to every GB medalist no matter what event they participated in or what colour their skin happens to be.
I REALLY hate the Olympics so sorry for the vitriolic rant……….. The Olympics and everything associated with them are corrupt to the core, venal, drug-fuelled, unbelievably expensive, self important parasites. Sounds like the IOC has something in common with another entity that I know of………
I recall John Inverdale ‘fawning’ over two (white) rowers who had missed a ‘gold’ in a sculls race by a hairsbredth – he asked what it felt like to miss out by so little after having trained for four years….One guy was in tears at the question. Still he was no looker so it didn’t matter.
Anyway the Olympics was the single most monumental utterly pointless waste of public money – that we have had to borrow from the Chicoms – in British history with the possible exception of the totally unexamined by the BBC £12bn catastrophe that was the Labour NPFIT IT project at the NHS. At least that had some sort of vague deliverable*.
The Olympics was an entire order or magnitude worse that the previous Labour Millennium billion pound fiasco which managed as its sole legacy to provid a concert company with a huge venue for which the taxpayer got about £3.50.
My fundamental problem is that I feel that it is entirely wrong for the state to tax citizens (and will be doing so forever given that the party bill has been placed on the never-to-be-repayed-but-always-costing-interest national debt) to fund £10 – 12 billion for a three week party. This is an entirely reasonable view and it was never reflected for one second by the BBC – cheerleader in chief for public spending.
At the time the BBC never questioned the ‘business case’, never looked at the derelict and abandoned billion pound Olympic white elephants dotted across the globe at the time, it never questioned the entirely spurious assumptions about the economic legacy.
How many times have the Olympic facilities been used since the closing ceremony of the para-olympics? Are the receipts from these events enough to pay for the chaps who sweep up the dead leaves in autumn – far less re-paying the multi-billion pound capital costs and the ongoing subsidy for thousands of so-called athletes and hangers-on who feel that I should fund them for running round in circles or jumping over sticks? Just ask a gold medallist to open your village fete and see how much they demand as an ‘appearance fee’ (min £5K)
The question is why, after ignoring the vast costs and utterly spurious ‘legacy’ case – so obvious that a blind halfwit could see how weak it was – at the time, why has the BBC decided to question current ministers who were not party to the spending decisions NOW?
*Primarily creating a verifiable national population register linked to the ID card database. Pretty sure that simply digitising hospital medical records and creating a database couldn’t cost 12bn.
Ah Albania Man just the person.
I saw about thirty seconds of a documentary the other night. In it Donald Trump was (literally) pushing around a fat little boy with curly hair.
Trump turned to one of his minions, and pointing at the fat little boy he was pushing around said,
‘This is the baaass of Scaaatland.’
Who tf was that?
Still, I shouldn’t complain, whoring round after Donald Trump – I suppose – beats *snigger* wind-farming as a country’s future.
“Still, I shouldn’t complain, whoring round after Donald Trump – I suppose – beats *snigger* wind-farming as a country’s future. ”
Yep, our future is all tied up in wind and Donald Trump’s golf courses!!
http://wingsoverscotland.com/the-oil-debate-for-busy-people/
I appreciate it is OT but then again you once again started it by likening Scotland to Albania which I suppose means that without the oil England will be just as bankrupt.
Oh yes, how sickening. That would be the ‘black runner’ who had just won the 5000m / 10000m double, emulating some of the greatest long distance runners of all time, in a race described by Jonathan Edwards – himself an Olympic champion – as a performance that will be remembered for eternity. Let’s hope it’s a nice white athlete who wins next time so that you are spared this upsetting spectacle.
As usual Jim, Nicked or whoever is is you are dressing up as today, you’ve missed the point. It’s not Mo’s achievements people on here have a problem with (I personally think he’s a great advertisement for integration that the separatist majority of Muslims on this island would do well to emulate), but the over-fawning attitude of the BBC. And if you think other medal winners got equal treatment, think back dear boy.
“And if you think other medal winners got equal treatment, think back dear boy.”
Can you prove that?
And is the fact that Farah won not 1, but 2 gold medals justification enough for a bit more coverage anyway?
Not very scientific but how about a Google search for the number of hits…..
Ben Ainslie 2012 Olympics “BBC” – 89,900
Mo Farah 2012 Olympics “BBC” – 350,000
Ben Ainslie “BBC” – 117,000
Mo Farah “BBC” – 582,000
Bearing in mind Ben has been competing for longer……..
Fair points, but a bit selective. For instance, search ‘Chris Hoy 2012 olympics” in the BBC search function and you get 554 results. Search ‘Mo Farah 2012 olympics’ and you get 444 results.
Mo Farah 2012 Olympics “BBC” – 350,000
Tom Daley 2012 Olympics “BBC” – 696,000
Mo Farah “BBC” – 582,000
Tom Daley “BBC” – 5,500,000
Yes, that is shocking but what is it about a photogenic bronze medalist teenager with bleached teeth and a perma-tan that the BBC like? I suggest that it is that he is an attention seeker with a good publicist.
Anyway James, this was just a bit of fun and in no way scientific. To conclude with some double gold medalists…
Charlotte Dujardain – 117,000
Laura Trott – 126,000
Jason Kenny – 1,440,000
I’d never even heard of Jason Kenny. He’s a cyclist apparently.
….morphed into ‘Chris’, or just taken over the baton on the afternoon shift?
Mo was the BBC TV’s poster boy for the Olympics weeks after it finished, and Radio 4’s living proof that it was multiculturalsim what won it for us. It was relentless.
Nicked Emus is almost as obsessed with race as the BBC. Presumably he keeps changing his name because he never has anything new to say.
“Nicked Emus is almost as obsessed with race as the BBC. ”
Classic quote when you loom at the content of many posts on this site. I can only think that you missed out a “b” in front of BBC.
Fair point Albaman, but I think that a lot of people are obsessed with the BBC’s overt obsession with race. This is apparent in absolutely everything that it does.
CCE that is too subtle for Albaman, it will go right over his head. The colour blind BBC – yeah right.
Ah, another case of Biased BBC complaining that a non-white person being featured through merit is evidence of some sick agenda. And then suggesting that it’s everybody else who has a race problem.
We do this so you don’t have to address the real issues of bias.
“suggesting that it’s everybody else who has a race problem.”
I think you will find that it is being suggested that is you not “everybody else” that is obsessed by race. Try to get over it.
And he wasn’t even British, but Somalian.
johnnythe fish, just a small point……..”(I personally think he’s a great advertisement for integration ……”
Well, he might be, but he’s integrated himself into the US and not the UK…he relocated to Oregon in 2011.
And once again the low-hanging fruit of a racially-charged comment allows defenders of the indefensible an opportunity to preen and scold and avoid discussing the real issue of BBC bias brought up by the main post. Keep up the good work, everyone.
This picture puts things into perspective:
Clearly it didn’t.
I’ll try again.
Perhaps you’d care to point out the *other* track or field double gold medalist in that photo. If you can do so I’ll accept that the press coverage of Mo Farah was over the top.
Why just track or field – because it suits your purpose?
Happy to point out Chris Hoy, Laura Trott, Jason Kenny and Charlotte Dujardin however.
Well the miserabilists who profess to loathe the Olympics may not appreciate this nicety, but track and field medals are where it’s at. And it’s much more difficult to win more than one than in the velodrome.
Ahh yes, “where it’s at”. Everything is much clearer now.
‘And it’s much more difficult to win more than one than in the velodrome.’
So how does that work? If it’s easier for one, it’s easier for the competition as well.
The triathlon looks pretty tough to me. Would have thought Gold and Bronze worth an occasional mention.
Cyclists compete in up to six events. Swimmers even more. This is why purists value multiple wins in the athletics more highly. Track and field are the (forgive me) gold standard at an Olympics – the main event, in the main venue. But I wouldn’t expect the mean spirited and anti-sport types to understand this.
Mo Farah was fantastic, no argument: two Golds in 5km and 10km on the track. But is this really that much more effort or merit than, say, Ed Clancy the cyclist?
Clancy as in 2008 won Gold in the 4km Team Pursuit with three flat-out rides at over 60 km/h average speed. Then he tackled the gruelling multi-event Omnium, where he won a Bronze and posted a sensational time for the 1km time trial part of it.
“Pesez ces efforts et jugez” as Voltaire nearly said.
If you think gold in a team event and bronze in the omnium is even faintly comparable to the 5000/10000m double you clearly know nothing about sport.
“where it’s at” and now “gold standard” – meaningless subjective phrases. But people who don’t agree with you are “miserabilists” and “mean spirited”.
Why won’t you explain why some events are harder to win than others when the same conditions apply to all contenders?
I think he means that some events are more strenuous to enter. They’re all “difficult to win”.
Look up the page. Full of comments from malcontents complaining about a fortnight that gave millions enormous pleasure and pride. And if you can’t take pleasure in what Mo Farah achieved, and see that it was a truly special accomplishment, then perhaps wallowing in your bitterness is no more than you deserve.
And a cyclist called Bradley Wiggins who also was BBC personality of the year.
Bloody White bias again.
Decided by public vote, not the BBC, therefore doesn’t absolve the BBC of anything.
If only Today was just as sceptical of all the other junk pushed out (eg this morning’s scare report announcing that a primary cause of female deaths due to alcohol consumption was – according to the BBC’s treatment of the report – the price of alcohol). Remarkably even Steph – the great believer in government spending: any spending – was a sceptic here.
As DV writes, the BBC’s cheerleading and endless coverage of the buildup to the Olympics plus its encomiums of praise for Coe and Livingston have been (temporarily?) thrown down the memory chute. OTOH, on the plus side, this spurious confirmation that the Olympics were a massive financial benefit to the UK was completely debunked by Evan, Steph and Montagu – a “broken clock” moment on Today if ever there was one. I suspect that had a Labour government been in power both last year and now, those same Today “journalists” would have been slagging off/aggressively dismissing any sceptics claiming that the report was rubbish.
Note to Maria Miller. If you want to do something useful next then SORT THE BBC OUT! You waste a glorious opportunity while you pursue your stupid feminist bandwagon about golf clubs.
In case you haven’t been told, the BBC falls under your remit.
http://uk.eurosport.yahoo.com/blogs/world-of-sport/shocking-judging-exposed-rhythmic-gymnastics-104646147.html
The New York Times is reporting on a scandal that’s consuming more than 60 individuals all across the judging ranks of rhythmic gymnastics
The Olympics are a sham
I see the BBC just had to include a wee anti-Coalition snippet from that vacuous hot-air bag, Tessa ‘Useless’ Jowell, over non-existent cuts to sports activities in the National Curriculum.
Missed every bit of the Olympics, I am proud to say…the Opening ceremony gave us all fair warning of what happens when oodles of public money gets squandered in a Lefty Jamboree of cultural deceits and flatulence.
As if none of us had lived through the Commies sports propaganda displays of the 70s and the 80s.
Only sad, weird little misfit countries like the old Bulgaria-and the current North Korea-put so much godless faith, and the cash of their citizens into the posing pouches of greedy drug addled sporties and their medics.
Which is where the Premier League/World Cup and the Olympics come in….and all with sporty gushing by the State Broadcaster…
And is even North Koreas state siphon as creepy and as biased as our BBC?…Eurovision through a monocle!
You missed it but still comment on something you didn’t see. What a troll.
Pity Labour MP Kate Hoey never got much coverage at the time of the Olympics. As Sports Minister she had campaigned against Britain hosting this 4-yearly festival of contractor kickbacks and drug-taking (she wanted better funding for real sport instead) which is why Blair sacked her in 2001.
I don’t know how she survives in that party – she hates the IRA and the EU and is chairman (yes, man) of the Countryside Alliance.
I thought Kate Hoey was, once again, quietly impressive on the EU and other topics on “Any Questions?” on Radio 4 on Friday 19/7 from 20:00 to 20:50. She was very brave to say that she thought Paris would get the 2012 Games ahead of London, and that London didn’t need the Games in any case! It’s good to find MPs who will speak their mind and not just play the career game.
It strikes me that a city or country can’t “half-host” the Olympics, any more than they can “half-build” the Concorde: they either do a feasibility study and then pull out (because of cost fears) or dive in and accept the consequences, i.e. usually a project several times over budget.
In rough figures, Concorde was 11 times over budget (£ 1.1 billion instead of the estimated £ 0.1 billion, base 1960) … but at least we got a nice-looking plane out of it, even if 1970s oil price rises damaged its economic viability.
When London 2012 won the bid, I seem to remember £ 2.7 billion being mentioned; I always imagined that you could at least double that to be safe. In the end, it was well over three times … still, three not eleven, so we should be grateful I suppose! I believe that Los Angeles 1984 made a small profit, whereas Montreal 1976 was a locus classicus of absurd low initial estimates and poor project management: it was over 30 years after those games before the debt was paid off! And, as with London 2012, circumstances changed between the awarding of the Games (May 1970 and 6/7/2005 respectively) and the staging (oil price inflation and the Credit Crunch).
From the BBC bias perspective, it would have been better for the corporation to either (a) accept that the estimate would seriously understate the final cost but argue that it was all worth doing anyway; or (b) oppose the bid on the grounds that the money would be better spent on other priorities such as nurses, schools, etc. They and we can’t have it both ways.
The biggest bias in BBC sports coverage is its wanting the British competitor to win. A British second or third, or plucky also-ran, gets more time than a foreign winner.
In my opinion this is probably the worst thread I have seen on this site. There are a number of posts that make it look as if this site is as bigoted as the lefties claim. Nearly all the likes I have given on this thread (before I gave up reading it) went to the Beeboids. They have been given lots of ammunition to use so they can avoid adressing the issue of real BBC bias on other threads. No doubt they will keep referring back to this one. The Olympics were great as a spectacle, great for UK sport and great fun in the main. Mo Farrah got lots of attention because he won two difficult golds for GB (neither won before in the mens) and is a great personality. Well done Mo and the other winners and competitors.