I happened to watch Newsnight on BBC2 last night. It’s been a while and with good reason. The entire programme was one long extenuated assault on the Conservative Party. We had geo-political analysts such as “White Dee” (from Benefits Street) there to explain why Welfare reform is an evil. It is clear that the BBC has decided it must be EVERYTHING possible to help get Ed into Downing Street and with around two weeks to go, it is throwing ALL it can to ensure Cameron is “locked out” of Downing Street for the next five years as the Left run amok with their glove puppet Miliband installed as glorious leader.
SNOOZENIGHT
Bookmark the permalink.
And do the “Conservatives” complain? If they do, it’s very quietly: after all they wouldn’t wish to offend the BBC, would they.
But you saw the stick the Farage got from the BBC and the left when he accused the BBC of bias and of rigging the audience.
The sneering ridicule that he got was beyond belief.
In unison BBC commentators (and others in Sky and LBC), were vindicating their bias claiming that it was a sign that Farage had lost the argument.
As for the BBC which still largely gets by on its benign ‘Aunty’ persona, revenge will be a dish best served cold. For that reason I pray for a majority Tory government. Only then can Cameron begin to sort the bastards out.
I only wish.
Margaret Thatcher had a huge majority, as well the intellectual and rhetorical ability, and political guts to let the BBC have it in the guts. But she did not. I never could understand why.
If the conservatives win, then they should gut the BBC using modernisation as the reason. Under this guise, one can gut the BBC, or any other government funded organisation, without being accused for doing it for political purpses.
But this is where the BBC are hoist on their own petard.
If the BBC is a neutral organisation, how would the Conservatives gain from ‘gutting’ it?
How could the BBC claim, if it were impartial towards the right, that the right has a political motivation, for surely if the BBC were neutral then the Tories would gain no advantage from destroying it.
I really don’t think the BBC was as bad or at least not so blatantly biased as it is now. The era of Blair and the spin doctor had a profound effect on reporting and commenting. It is unbelievable that someone like Alistair Campbell who lowered standards in public life to such depths is now regarded as some sort of guru by the BBC. Remember one of the first things Blair did was to get rid of the neutral press officers in government departments and replace them with spin doctors.
And Blair got rid of those neutral press officers in his first month in office. I was in the Civil Service in the 80s when press officers were respected and we just knew that no political partisan statement was permitted. Within one month of Blair every press release started …’This Labour Government……..’
Mind you it might help, a Tory position, if a Tory turns up when he s supposed to, but no show, no debate, evade scrutiny, no policies, no ability to explain their fairy story economics
… lie, lie and smear, it appears that’s the Tory/Lynton plan
The Tories will not get a majority government because Cameron doesn’t have the balls to lead alone – especially as the next government will have an almost impossible job of staying popular.
In a ‘normal’ term of parliament, the Conservatives would be miles ahead, but because they haven’t bothered to counter the utter bullsh*t and lies spewing from the Labour corners, they are allowing Labour in through the backdoor of deceit.
“… especially as the next government will have an almost impossible job of staying popular”
You are so right on the money there Edward. Check out the Hollande story in France which has every chance of coming true for EM. Elected because he wasn’t the government, but then extremely difficult decisions to make cutting expenditure which were not in the manifesto.
My favoured outcome is the Tories with most votes and a few seats more, but unable to produce a working majority so HM asks Ed to have a go at forming a government, which he could with the SNP albatross around his neck.
We also need to bear in mind how the rules about ending governments early changed with the fixed term parliaments we have now. The P.M. of the day cannot just call an election by a simple majority in the Commons so he might have to limp on for quite a while.
I’m not sure that Cameron would sort the BBC out even if he had a Commons majority, although I hope you’re correct. The BBC’s bias is so deep seated that it would be quite a challenge to turn it around without radical change.
According to a press report, Farage wants to cut the licence fee to £50 and to oblige the BBC to stick to public service broadcasting, which presumably doesn’t include its existing highly biased news and current affairs output. So maybe some UKIP (if they get any seats)- Conservative arrangement would be the best way to change the BBC.
I hadn’t seen this on your RSS feed, so I was going to point it out, but you’ve beaten me to it.
I caught the last part of this and thought that this was “a little biased”. As in “Horribly biased”. It seemed to be a hostile presenter, and 5 of the 6 panel members were stooges.
I then quickly looked up the “Panel”, and had it confirmed.
White Dee: IIRC a staunch Labour voter (may be erring to UKIP)
Penny Pepper: Having looked at her blog, she’s certainly not Right Wing. I think I saw the phrase “Evil Tories” in there somewhere.
Will Hutton: Writes for the Guardian. Nuff Said.
Food Bank Lady: Gave some questionable (IMO) details about the sanction numbers causing the rise. IIRC she said 66% of her clients were there due to sanctions, but 2 recent talks I’ve heard put food bank use due to sanctions at ~15%. Perhaps her food bank is different. Axe to grind one way or the other.
Suit Guy: Didn’t get his name, but was shown looking with complete loathing at The Spectator guy.
Spectator Guy: Again, didn’t get his name. Token right-winger being picked on by the rest of the panel + presenter.
It was so biased, I wanted to vomit with rage. So I turned it off and went to bed instead.
Is there an alternative news feed I can use? Even though I mentally sort through the bias, the BBC news feed is still fairly good. All the other ones I can find are all totally US centric, or only do a few in-depth stories.
I feel your pain too!!!!! The BBC are doing their bit for Labour when all the postal voting is happening now.
Their bias is breathtaking and it hurts to think my licence money is paying for that.
Tune into Guido Fawkes website it helps to balance things.
Oh come on….You know if they complain it will be used against them big time ,not that the coverage from BBC could get any worse .They cannot do anything about the anti right bias unless the right gets a majority.With the vote split by UKIP it is unlikely to happen…….
I want a majority so this can be tackled head on but I fear we are going to get another “namby pamby ” to quote Boris,government.
Have you ever tried to complain to the BBC. get real.
A coalition of the ‘Cons’ with UKIP and the DUP is the answer …..
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-northern-ireland-31853527
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/politics/nigel-farage/11467020/This-is-my-deal-Mr-Cameron-an-immediate-EU-referendum-where-my-German-wife-is-banned-from-voting.html
Nigel Farage stated that only Christians from the ME be allowed to come to Europe. I think this eminently sensible , as Christians are the ones who are facing the most persecution, as well as, they will not be alien to our culture.
The BBC of course would deem that racist. They would rather we let in tens of millions of Muslims, who themselves, or their descendents will impose sharia on us all.
I do not understand why the BBC and the EU, are hell bent on either committing suicide, or hell bent on murdering Western civilisation.
It is only explicable by accepting that either the liberal left really despises it’s own civilisation or that it is something beyond human control and that this is a time for a civilisation to come to an end. This latter is unlikely so it seems that the liberal left really does want to destroy it’s culture and replace it with a dream of the unreal that it’s thinkers have created from their own fantasies.
So far the liberal left has had a clear run but in the real world this never continues. To every action there is a reaction. For all our sakes I hope this is not as extreme as It looks it will be.
The 68ers and their fantasies have so much to answer for.
I can understand why Conservatives seeking re-election are running scared of the BBC, but surely Tory peers in the Lords could kick up a rumpus about this outrageous bias. Of course they will be ridiculed on BBC but someone ought to have the courage to step forward.
Phil
Cameron and Co are part of the problem, not its solution.
Homosexual Weddings pulled out of thin air for votes, not in the Manifesto.
Scottish independence vote organised in ten minutes, EU withdrawal vote organised in ten years, maybe.
Etc, etc, etc.
Could be Cameron is Blair light. He certainly swallowed the Climate Change nonsense.
Ofcourse Climate Change is not nonsense to the left, as it is a carefully designed instrument, through which to impose general taxation worldwide – one world government.
Marxism/socialism/communism is the great evil of our times. After running its full course in the USSR, Eastern Europe, China, Vietnam etc, and just about not killing all the people therein, the survivors have developed natural immunity to marxism. So much so, Communism/Marxism is regarded as even more evil then Nazism, which itself is a milder version of full blown Marxism.
Maybe we have to go through the Gulag and the re-education labour camps, before we develop some sort of immunity.
DP
Yes indeed , the answer to the horrors of Marxism is yet more Marxism.
Not that Marxism gets the bad publicity it deserves. Something to do with its Jewish origin, the Bolshevik leaders being Jewish, Yagoda Fenkel and other mass murder organisers being Jewish. Most KGB, GRU illegal leaders (Reiss, Krivitsky) being Jewish. Most traitors in the West who supported the USSR being Jewish.
A high proportion of the most prominent anti-Communists were also Jewish; most of the traitors were Public School Lefties.
A high proportion of Maggie Thatcher’s Cabinet were Jewish.
The reason why Marxism does not get the bad publicity it deserves has nothing to do with the fact that Marx was Jewish – Marx (like many on the Left) was a raving anti-Semite.
It is because Marxism is a creed which appeals to many pro-regressives who hate free markets.
Wild
Marx received a Jewish education and was thus perfectly prepared to create a political system based on envy and hate.
Many Jewish ex-communists became prominent anti-communists, because Jews like to be prominent.
The public school lefties were in the UK, not the West.
The traitors in the USA were 90% Jewish, many prominent.
The reason the 100 million or so killed by the Communists is rarely discussed is precisely because of its Jewish associations. The same reason the “Holocaust” is rammed down throats every time the sun rises, because of its Jewish associations: and the hope that if it is discussed permanently no-one will have time to discuss the much greater death toll caused by Jews.
Here is the “r” omitted from Frenkel, above.
‘envy and hate’
Like Hitler was about Jews.
“because Jews like to be prominent”
You mean like winning Nobel Prizes?
‘because of its Jewish associations…the “Holocaust” is rammed down throats every time the sun rises’
It sounds as if you would join the queue to be one of the guards.
‘discuss the much greater death toll caused by Jews’
Stalin was not Jewish he was a Jew hating Communist.
You sound like a ten year old child who eats three square meals of propaganda every day.
@ TheLeftHunter …. Wow!!! a few more posts like that and I`ll bet you will be goosestepping round ur Fuhrerbunker eh??? Here`s a question you might want to ponder….You stated this …… `The reason the 100 million or so killed by the Communists is rarely discussed is precisely because of its Jewish associations` … Well what about the millions of NON Jewish deaths in the Chinese theatre of conflict?? I can`t seem to find stats for those who were Jewish, Marxist or responsible for the millions of deaths when Japans Nationalists and Germanys Nazis decided to start carving up the populace of mainland China in the midst of the Chinese civil war between Communists (no Jews) and Nationalists led by Chiang Kai Shek (He wasn`t Jewish either!!) Yet again Communism and Nazism were responsible for a massive death toll and there were no Jews involved … just lots of spiteful little cnuts like yourself who think it`s all down to the Jews…. well, i would rather live next door to a Jew than a distastful little siht like you mate!!! Now you can `F` off and google The Rape of Nanking can`t you?? Don`t forget to lube up first though… as you might rub the skin off ur penis whilst you masturbate in front of the mirror….
JC, are you the Messiah?
Please provide details of this German invasion of China. Meanwhile we will continue with normal respiration.
You need to read before you can write, you have not understood my contribution.
Alternative explanation, you have willfully chosen to misrepresent it. Which is what I would expect.
A plethora of insults, an absence of facts. I suspect a salary from the BBC.
Okay then Obersturmfurher … Google this….. which countries were allies in WW2? Or how about reading this …. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Rabe also look up Siemens during this period too….. as Rabe was sacked by them for helping the Chinese under direct orders from Hitler himself after the Japanese complained he was getting in thier way when they were murdering approx 600,000 chinese civilians in under 14 days after they took Nanjing which was until then the Nationalist Capitol City and Japan took thier wrath out on the civil population after Chang Kai Shek and his forces locked the city gates and retreated before the Japs could get near them…… Meanwhile Siemens was happily getting various mineral resources from the Japs as they had overun Manchuria and Korea and here`s a lil info u might not see on BBC sites…. Xyclon-b was originally a Biological weapon from these guys… http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Unit_731
Unit 731 was actually commanded directly by Hirohito himself as he studied as a Bio chemist when he was at UNI in England!! Also the Commanding officer at Nanking was his Uncle and the second in commnad was either his brother or his son…. So!!! Now lets get back to Siemens….. where do you think the Germans got thier base elements for thier Atomic programs? Also certain semi precious minerals need for the Nazi Wunderweapons programs?? Not only that…. Who do you think told the French to hand over thier overseas assets to the Japs??? Why were the Nazis sending subs to Japan even the last weeks of the war?? Perhaps a few lampshades made from human skin eh??? In fact!! I`m wasting my time here ur obviously a purile little twit anyways… .so GTFO!!
heres one more link http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Unit_Ei_1644
It is because Marxism is a creed which appeals to many pro-regressives who hate free markets.
Marxists also hate free men and women, who decide their own future.
For Marxists/leftists, the Kulaks are to be guided by the ruling class. Socialists/marxists/communists never did create a classless society, as they purported to do. What they created everywhere they had the power, was to create a subject and impoverished class, and a ruling class that could shop in “foreign currency only” shops.
An we could have a Marxist Prime Minister in two weeks time.
Daddy would be pleased, his indoctrination of his sons come to fruition.
Apparently Mr Katz is now paid more than the PM, while Newsnight’s ratings plunge still further
Reward for failure indeed
I watched this with incredulity. It was the most ludicrous, biased and one sided’ debate’ I have ever seen. There was one non Left wing commentator (Fraser Nelson of The Spectator) and five left wingers. The level of ‘debate’ was – as you would expect – puerile. I have not really bought into the ‘left wing biased BBC’ thing before, but I have to say, this was remarkable and actually quite embarrassing.
Yes Chris, it’s a bit like looking for wild mushrooms, once one’s eye is ‘in’ they can be spotted easily. Once one really gets atuned to this bias it suddenly becomes very conspicuous. The problem is it flies past most people’s heads unnoticed.
And always consider the interruption factor by the interviewer.
You tend not to interrupt those saying something you “agree” with , and in group discussions you may notice the leftie tactic of talking over the person attempting to make a point the leftie disagrees with and the BBC person rarely tells them to shut up and let the other person speak.
As CranbrookPhil says when you are aware of it, it is quite noticeable.
That interview interrupting is perhaps the worst thing. Yes they divide the interview times up fairly but never really let a Tory or UKIP speaker answer a question or make a valid point.
That interview interrupting is perhaps the worst thing.
This is a tactic that the BBC uses against the Conservatives , Israel, and anyone that does not have lefty credentials. As Russia, Hungary and the Czeck republic, after their experience of full blown Marxism, have exited from the left fold, they too are subject to harrassing interviews.
Also on Newsnight as well as a web article, the BBC uses a report issued by a charity which either purposefully or accidentally makes a claim that over 1 million people in the UK are using its food banks. However the real figure is nowhere near it as many use food vouchers twice. There is also no attempt to show just who the people requesting these food vouchers are. Are they really needy and have a genuine claim, or are they abusing this charity with dubious claims.
A good journalist would attempt to find out this information and make it part of the story, but that’s not the way the BBC operates. Since it suits their agenda to malign the Tories, they run the story as if the erroneous claim was completely valid. Only at the bottom of the article is their an faded quote ‘update’ to show the figures are not accurate, so leaving the article as written, instead of scrapping or amending it, is purely to mislead readers. You can see how the BBC have quotes from most other political parties to rub salt in the Tory ‘wound’.
This is what the public is forced to pay for, and our spineless Tories do nothing about it.
Here’s the BBC article:
Record numbers use food banks – Trussell Trust
Here’s the Spectator take on it.
The Trussell Trust’s misleading figures on food bank usage help no one
The BBC will never recognise that it is biased because within the corporation there is a general consensus that a leftist political philosophy is the only possible course – almost a kind of blind faith. Any alternative is seen as some kind of aberration that has to shouted down or derided. The incredulity with which the BBC reacts to accusations of bias is in fact sincere. They are unable to see it for themselves. Obviously there are some exceptions, but clearly alternative voices are very much in the minority and often patronised.
But that’s just stating the problem, and I doubt that there is a simple solution. A right wing bias would be equally bad. If the BBC has a function it should be as a platform for free speech. That should override everything.
did you watch that disgusting,smearing anti ukip biased interview of nigel farage yesterday by evan davis on bbc 1 7.30 pm,it was a total discrace,why nigel bothers with the bbc anymore is beyond me.
Just so that people can see how biased they are and he can play the martyr.
Would have thought that UKIP supporters would be going out and appealing to the voters about the traditional British sense of fair play and justice.
It’s possible he bothers because it works in his, and the party’s favour.
I thought the BBC and senior staff were smarter at propaganda than this. It’s so overt, and clumsy, it backfires every time.
Look at such as the Tim Stanley article; even dyed in the wool Telegraphists know a stitch-up when they see it, and are professionally aghast enough to raise a weak hand in protest.
As to voters, who knows?
Labour not even a blip in my constituency.
Tories are going to walk it, not least because the MP is OK and the rest are, frankly, dire.
But I went to a hustings last night and am now seriously flipping from reluctant endorsement to sending a message. UKIP or abstention… to be decided.
One speaker proudly stood up and said they currently a majority of the vote in a poll, which showed the people were not swayed by silly electioneering from the Lib Dems & others.
He then said the next party in line was… The Greens.
So I stuck up my hand and asked how, if the electorate were so smart, the Greens had any support at all?
He asked what I meant, and I simply said ‘You have seen their manifesto?’.
Got a laugh.
After watching this I was left wondering whether I had been watching a debate or a party political broadcast for the Labour party. Unfortunately I have no choice about having to contribute to the BBC, but if the day ever comes I know exactly how I will respond. When did this once proud organisation become so left wing and so pro-europe? Something needs to be done and done sooner rather than later.