Katty Kay Answers Your Questions With Pure Partisan Bias

The BBC’s highest-profile talent in the US, Katty Kay, held an audience Q&A session on Twitter this morning. Once the BBC publishes the transcript on their website, I’ll update this post with a link. She didn’t say anything that would get her in trouble like last time, but she did answer at least one question with pure, unadulterated, partisan bias:

This is one of Katty’s pet issues. She’s on record already advocating for it. Her reply:

And there you have it. The President’s  policies are correct, and the only thing preventing Him from saving us is Republican intransigence. Notice also Katty’s  belief that taxes and government spending will be at least part of the solution. This is pure Left-wing ideology, and the anchor of a BBC News broadcast produced in the US and aimed directly at the US audience is espousing it without  reservation or qualification. Whether or not you or I agree with her politics is irrelevant. The fact is that she is biased and displays it here. Here’s another one on essentially the same issue:

Katty’s reply:

Is she correct? The Wall Street Journal said no in 2009.

Yesterday’s September labor market report was lousy by any measure, with 263,000 lost jobs and the jobless rate climbing to 9.8%. But for one group of Americans it was especially awful: the least skilled, especially young workers. Washington will deny the reality, and the media won’t make the connection, but one reason for these job losses is the rising minimum wage.

Earlier this year, economist David Neumark of the University of California, Irvine, wrote on these pages that the 70-cent-an-hour increase in the minimum wage would cost some 300,000 jobs. Sure enough, the mandated increase to $7.25 took effect in July, and right on cue the August and September jobless numbers confirm the rapid disappearance of jobs for teenagers.

But wait, there’s more:

As the minimum wage has risen, the gap between the overall unemployment rate and the teen rate has widened, as it did again last month. (See nearby chart.) The current Congress has spent billions of dollars—including $1.5 billion in the stimulus bill—on summer youth employment programs and job training. Yet the jobless numbers suggest that the minimum wage destroyed far more jobs than the government programs helped to create.

Congress and the Obama Administration simply ignore the economic consensus that has long linked higher minimum wages with higher unemployment.

Katty Kay is an opponent of the consensus.

We can debate this issue of the effects of minimum wage laws until the cows come home, but the point here is that she stated this uncategorically as fact. The WSJ, on the other hand has a different opinion. If the WSJ is nominally right of center, then the opposite position must be on the Left. Katty Kay’s ideology is Left-wing. Her tweets (see her listing on the “In Their Own Tweets” page) and pundit appearances on MSNBC reveal her personal Left-wing ideology, and the same bias in on display when she acts in her official capacity as a BBC journalist. There is no question here about personal ideology directly affecting and being evident in her BBC journalism. This is just the latest example. Many more can be seen here, here, here, here, here, and here. And that just for starters.

Fixing the management structure and adding layers of accountability on internal spending will not fix this problem.

Boom And Bust

 

 

 

 

 

Here’s the BBC’s take on the economy:

We’ve got some really good growth….but it’s based on Services….which means ‘consumer spending’ the BBC tells us…which, as consumers have no money (cost of living crisis!) and no savings, must be funded by borrowing…which is unsustainable…therefore the recovery is built on sand….it’s the wrong sort of growth!

 

Trouble is…’Services’ doesn’t just consist of Retail…Services are an industry in their own right…We were told they don’t produce anything today by a BBC ‘expert’ journo….which of course is bollocks….what would you call software (Microsoft), art, music, media, education, mechanics, designers, architects….even journalists?  They all produce a product….and apart from that, ‘Services’ must service something…presumably at the request of somebody who needs them…..like ‘Industry’ which produces the physical products….which might suggest those industries are also picking up.

And as for ‘Retail’…well it has to sell something…therefore it has to have a product…one made in a factory, designed by someone, transported by a man in a lorry, put on the shelves by shop staff…and as for the money to buy it…who says it comes from borrowing?…where is the BBC’s proof?  So far it seems just a statement of ‘fact’ based purely on wishful thinking (on Mickey Clark’s part) and speculation.

Never mind that retail isn’t booming to any great extent….we heard that people are still being very careful with their money and doing their research for the best prices before buying…doesn’t sound like an irresponsible rush to bankruptcy does it?

 

Curiously the BBC (and Labour) ignore the businesses that say, and have been saying for a longtime now, that in fact they are doing very well thankyou and they think the future looks bright.

Phone in after phone in on the BBC businesses say they are doing well….I haven’t heard a  negative one yet.

 

And what of that great employment puzzle that the BBC always raised to cast doubt on the ever rising employment figures (as well as dismissing them as part time, temporary, or low grade)?  You know, the BBC says….it is just inexplicable that employment is going up in a such a terrible recession.

They did speculate momentarily that it could be that the economy was in fact doing much better than the figures suggested…but they laughed that off.

The answer they decided was that industry was unproductive, underperforming.

But that raises the question, yes employers might want to keep on skilled staff on lower wages (which of course means they are still productive…as costs go down), but why would they employ more if they were already so unproductive with underemployed staff?

 

The answer of course, if the BBC had cared to ask, is that many businesses were doing well and so not only kept on staff but employed more…and new businesses started up also employing more people.

Today we heard of a website design company that started up in 2009, right at the heart of the bust…..it initially employed 4 people…so that’s 4 to start with…it now employs 13.

How many more of these small companies stared up and succeeded…must be many out there providing those ‘mysterious’ jobs?

The BBC didn’t bother seeking out the answer because it didn’t suit the narrative that the employment figures, and the economic success that suggested was all smoke and mirrors about to collapse as Plan A and Austerity ‘kills the patient’ as Evan Davis (amongst others at the BBC) kept telling us it would.

 

anigif_enhanced-buzz-19854-1380554808-12

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

What really amuses me is that Micky Clark on Wake Up To Money bangs on relentlessly that this is a recovery based on low interest rates and easy credit funding an unsustainable consumer boom and a housing bubble….which he tells us  ‘is what led to the recession in the first place’….you can question his analysis of the present growth but he ain’t wrong about the cause of Labour’s ‘Great Recession’….and it wasn’t the fabled Cable’s ‘Casino Investment Banks’…it was retail banks (like RSB and Northern Rock) lending out too much money and doling out cheap mortgages to people who couldn’t afford them, here and in the US, who laid the foundations for the bust.

…the truth is out there then……but strange he never mentions who was responsible for all that cheap credit and slack regulation of the financial services.

 

 

 

 

 

What A Coincidence

 

 

Yesterday the BBC, in the shape of Victoria Derbyshire, was plugging the Mumsnet campaign for compulsory sex education in schools….targeting Free Schools and Academies…which immediately raises some suspicions as to what is really behind this….no mention of Labour…just a ‘group of campaigners’.

Justine Roberts, founder of Mumsnet, was leading the charge.  Here is Justine Roberts, with Labour’s Yvette Cooper in September last year co-ordinating Labour’s childcare policies:

 

 

At this Resolution Foundation and Mumsnet event Yvette Cooper MP (Shadow Home Secretary and Shadow Minister for Women and Equality) discussed the Labour agenda for the future of childcare. Vidhya Alakeson (Resolution Foundation), Anand Shukla (Family and Childcare Trust) and Justine Roberts (Mumsnet) responded, providing insights into the potential policy responses Labour might choose to pursue. Yvonne Roberts (The Observer) chaired this event.

 

 

Today we find out about this:

Labour: ‘Make sex and relationships education compulsory in schools and update teaching guidance’

   By Yvette Cooper, MP for Normanton, Pontefract and Castleford

7:00AM GMT 28 Jan 2014

 

 

Co-ordinating with Mumsnet?  Note the date of Cooper’s meeting with Justine Roberts….

The future of childcare with Yvette Cooper MP

Date: 23 September 2013

 

Then look at this announcement

Yvette Cooper: Labour would update sex education to include ‘zero tolerance’ of violence in relationships

2:59PM BST 25 Sep 2013

 

Yesterday Justine Roberts is kicking off her campaign and today Labour are on board.

Not a coincidence I’d suggest.

 

Nice of the BBC to provide a platform for a Labour policy announcement, though forgetting to announce that it is a Labour Party policy.

 

And yesterday we also had a Labour front ‘think tank’, the Centre for Cities’, given priority in the news for its misleading story of ‘unbalanced’ growth as London booms and the regions bump along….this morning strangely enough the BBC was looking at how the regions are doing economically.

No doubt we can expect a Labour policy announcement on regional development and growth shortly.

 

 

 

 

 

GOOD NEWS IS BAD NEWS…

You have to laugh at the sheer cynicism of the BBC. This morning we awoke to the news that official figures show the UK’s economic growth in 2013 was the strongest since 2007, the year before the financial crisis. Instantly, the BBC produced an economist who was able to tell us that whilst the UK IS experiencing economic growth, it is mostly in London and the south of England. Ah, that pesky growth, discriminating against our friends in the North. The BBC increasingly sounds like an echo chamber for Ed Balls and his cliched mantra that WHATEVER the growth is does not resolve his “cost of living crisis”. Nor can it – since that is a political invention to replace his clapped out “Plan B” narrative.

EXTREME PROPAGANDA

Anyone catch Mishal Husain climate scaremongering on Today this morning just after 7.10am? The difficulties affecting the Somerset Levels are apparently part of “extreme weather” we are now experiencing and an “expert” was on hand to confirm this was undoubtedly linked to “climate change.” After the Today AGW propaganda fest, there was another BBC Radio 4 programme called “The Long View’ which looked at the Big Flood of 1953. Michael Fish was on hand to confirm that this was caused by climate change and that with global warming and rising sea levels (his words, not mine) we will be lucky if we do not face further and more frequent events. The truth is that the BBC still shills for AGW even though the facts do not support it. For the comrades at the BBC, it is a matter of faith.

We Must Obey The Obamessiah, Rather Than Human Beings

The President of the US will give His latest State of the Union address this evening, and the BBC has published the press release with key talking points.

Obama State of the Union speech to act on income inequality

Sound promising, no? Just by His words, He can move mountains. What they mean is that the President will announce one of His latest executive orders to help the poorest and most vulnerable and strike a blow against what Katty Kay has described as a social injustice which causes economic problems. There can’t be any doubt that she’s writing her from her personal beliefs. But is that really what He will be doing?

The White House said Mr Obama would unveil an executive order to raise the minimum wage to $10.10 (£6.10) an hour for new federal contract workers.

Oh. So He’s just spending more money that we don’t have, increasing our debt, as an ideological gesture. Not really doing anything to help the working poor in my neighborhood, then. The BBC wants to make sure you get the desired impression, though, so they add key details about who those public sector workers will be:

To sidestep lawmakers, Mr Obama will issue an executive order raising the hourly rate of federal workers with new contracts, such as janitors and construction workers. However, that measure is only expected to benefit a few hundred thousand employees.

Yeah, it’s only going to add a few hundred million dollars to the debt, but at least you know it’s going to noble blue-collar jobs. Now, what’s this about sidestepping lawmakers, you ask? After almost five years of this, we should all know the BBC’s Narrative by heart:

Just over a year after his re-election, Mr Obama must contend with determined opposition from the Republican Party, which controls the House of Representatives and has the numbers in the Senate to block his agenda.

Time is running short before Washington DC turns its attention to the 2016 race to elect his successor, threatening to render him irrelevant even with three years remaining in office.

In the face of a divided Congress, Mr Obama has pledged to use executive action to bypass Congress, and the White House says he will flesh out some of his plans in the State of the Union speech.

As always, the problem is an intransigent Congress, blocking His every move. Screw the separation of powers. Never mind that during the two years where He had super-majorities in both houses of Congress we got the disaster of ObamaCare and a failed Stimulus. It’s His Plans For Us that must be passed, regardless. As the BBC’s friends in the US Left-wing media and the Administration have been saying, the President has been acting too much like a Prime Minister and not seizing power like He should.

“The problem for us is that the test of our success became what we passed in Congress, and even in the best case — if the fever had broken and the clouds had parted — we still would have only gotten maybe 40 percent of what we wanted,” one senior White House official told the Post.

“The political discussion, the press, the politicians want to pull the president into the role of prime minister,” added the official, whom the Post did not name. “So you have to swerve really hard to the executive powers at a time like this.”

According to the report, an internal review of Obama’s failures last year — from Obamacare to sequestration to Iran to the 16-day government shutdown that cost American taxpayers $1.4 billion — led the White House to conclude that the president “too often governed more like a prime minister than a president.

“In a parliamentary system, a prime minister is elected by lawmakers and thus beholden to them in ways a president is not,” the report noted.

Obama will kick off his new agenda in his State of the Union address on Tuesday.

Funny how the BBC decided not to include that bit of information. And they certainly won’t be reminding you that the Junior Senator from Illinois criticized President Bush for doing this.

No. The thing is, the BBC is all for it because they support the President’s policies and report as if His Plans are correct and all opposition is wrong. What the BBC is doing here is more than reporting and analysis: they’re presenting this as if the President’s way is correct and Congress is wrong for not cooperating.

The worst part is Katty Kay’s inset “Analysis”:

Washington can be a cold, cruel city, as anyone who is living here this freezing January is well aware. And as he heads into his sixth State of the Union address, no-one is feeling the chill more than Barack Obama.

In last year’s address to the nation, Obama promised action on three important issues: immigration, guns and the environment. As of today, there has been no legislation on any of those. A gridlocked Congress has thwarted his every attempt to pass laws that would make it possible for undocumented immigrants to stay here legally or increase background checks on gun sales or expand environmental controls.

The president has three years left in the White House, but already everyone here is focused on who replaces him in 2016 and who will win the midterm elections in 2014. With time moving on, chances are slim that he can get anything major done in what remains of his presidency.

No questioning whether or not what He’s doing is entirely legal, no wondering about whether or not the policies He wants are correct, no asking if maybe Congress didn’t pass the legislation He wanted because maybe the majority of the public they’re elected to represent didn’t want it. No, to Katty Kay and the BBC, His Plans are correct, and inaction on them is wrong.

“As for God, his way is perfect:
The Lord’s word is flawless;
he shields all who take refuge in him.

For who is God besides the Lord?
And who is the Rock except our God?”

2 Samuel 22:30-32

Katty’s full editorial piece is more or less a pity party for Her beloved Obamessiah. Read the whole thing if you must, but have a sick back ready. While she points out that there have been some relationship problems for the President, none of it is apparently His fault. He has “an aversion to schmoozing”, but all that means is that He’s above the ugliness of political logrolling. It’s not meant as a criticism at all. Aside from an admission that He mishandled the discussion of attacking Syria, even the ObamaCare website disaster is presented as something that affected His political capital, and no mention of the damage the law itself has done and is doing.

Now is the time where a BBC journalist bashes and mischaracterizes Republicans and their policies:

His saving grace is that Republicans are in an even weaker position than he is. The party’s approval ratings are lower than the president’s. They are failing to reach out to women, young people, Hispanics and African Americans – all important voting groups. And on the signature issue of income inequality – something Obama intends to spend a lot of time on this year – Republicans are struggling to come up with any ideas that don’t smack of “let’s just cut taxes.”

This is an editorial remark, Katty’s opinion of her political opponents. Notice that cutting taxes is treated as an anathema. Also notice Katty’s ignorance on young people. They are in fact turning away from Him because of His policy failures. But Katty lives in the bubble, so isn’t aware of it. Now turn back to your hymnal:

This buys the president a little bit of time. He can still use that to get things done over the next six months, which is really all he has before mid-term fever makes legislative action totally impossible.

The smart money in Washington thinks two things could get done this year. First, we could see some form of immigration reform: not a big comprehensive bill, but something smaller. And, Mr Obama may be able to use his Presidential powers to bypass Congress and get something done to raise the minimum wage. That could help narrow the gap between rich and poor.

It is a far cry from the lofty, change-the-world approach of the first term. But six years have beaten the idealism out of Barack Obama. The man who goes to address Congress on Tuesday is more pragmatic. Forget changing the way government works here.

Here’s another way of saying it:

“Truly I tell you,” he continued, “no prophet is accepted in his hometown. I assure you that there were many widows in Israel in Elijah’s time, when the sky was shut for three and a half years and there was a severe famine throughout the land. Yet Elijah was not sent to any of them, but to a widow in Zarephath in the region of Sidon. And there were many in Israel with leprosy in the time of Elisha the prophet, yet not one of them was cleansed—only Naaman the Syrian.”

All the people in the synagogue were furious when they heard this. They got up, drove him out of the town, and took him to the brow of the hill on which the town was built, in order to throw him off the cliff. 30 But he walked right through the crowd and went on his way.

Luke 4:24-30

Everyone else is the problem, not Him, not His policies. The policies, as we learn from the personal friend of the White House spokesman, are good and just. So everything He does now will be correct in the eyes of the BBC. Can’t wait to hear the rejoicing in His word from the BBC tonight, and the scorn heaped upon Republican rebuttals.

PS: Post title is from Acts 5:29 with one alteration.

 UPDATE 1/29: The BBC has completely replaced the preliminary article I linked to and discussed at the top of this post with what seems mostly to be Katty Kay’s pronouncements on the speech. Not even News Sniffer has the original, so it’s down the memory hole.

Now You See It, Now You Don’t

 

 

This morning the BBC were trumpeting on the radio some research by a think tank called ‘Centre For Cities’ that said London was growing much faster than other UK cities as the much vaunted ‘Recovery’ left them behind as economic also-rans…presumably hinting they were being ignored or abandoned by the Government.

The BBC said it was an independent think tank, but admitted that it had been set up by Labour peer Lord Sainsbury…the man who donated nearly £20 million to Labour.

Apparently…. Centre for Cities was launched in March 2005 as part of IPPR and became independent in November 2007.

 

So independent of the IPPR now…Labour’s very own think tank?

The Chief Executive of Centre for Cities is……

 

Alexandra Jones

Chief Executive

Alexandra worked as a private secretary for the Permanent Secretary at the former Department for Education and Skills and as a researcher at the Institute for Public Policy Research.

 

 

What’s odd, apart from the ‘independent’ label is that after trumpeting this ‘research’ early on in the day, it being the lead story on the news bulletins, it suddenly vanished….almost as if someone responsible had come on shift and pulled the story as  headline news….due to it being a Labour Party stunt?

 

There is no doubt London is massive compared to other regions but this story has been knocking around for a long time now….so why is it being pushed once again…the thought that the Coalition’s ‘Recovery’ is leaving other regions behind?  Will Miliband be announcing a new policy on cities in the next few days?

Who knows…at least it seems to have been pulled by the BBC as a lead story…or as a story at all in fact on the radio….after being bombarding us with it early on it vanished.

 

The story seems to ignore some other truths about ‘the Regions’…the streets may not be paved with  gold but things are moving:

Record growth for business activity

Business activity rose at a record rate in the West Midlands in December according to the latest purchasing managers report for Lloyds Bank Commercial Banking. West Midlands private sector companies reported increases for the eighth month in a row with the rate of expansion the strongest in the 16-year-old survey’s history.

 

This is from Manchester which they tell us is doomed:

It’s double joy for regional growth

Experts said the two per cent growth estimate for 2013 represents some of the strongest figures since the QES began.

Greater Manchester’s economy grew twice as much as predicted in 2013, a study out today reveals.

A total of 623 businesses were quizzed between November 11 and December 4 2013 as part of the QES – the largest of its kind in the country.

The Chamber also said international sales and orders have increased on every measure with manufacturing performing better abroad than in the UK.

 

This is from the Guardian:

Manchester’s boom shows what can be achieved when councils work together

The city centre has seen a 40% increase in private sector jobs, and one of the UK’s largest expansions in recent years

 

 

So why is the Centre for Cities claiming, and the BBC reporting this:

Manchester ‘underperforming’