I mentioned the BBC having fitted up UKIP in their ‘Meet the Ukippers’ film in the last post and curiously the subject has come up again…the BBC being quite proud of that little film.

The Guardian tells us that ‘BBC2 controller Kim Shillinglaw calls for shows that ‘grab you by the balls’ for an audience she described as the “punk” generation.  The channel, which has become synonymous with cookery and craft shows, has just seen the average age of its audience rise above 60 for the first time.  Shillinglaw called for more presenters with edge and attitude, and appeared to call time on “straight cooking” shows despite the imminent return to the channel of Nigella Lawson.’

I don’t know about you but that is probably quite scary….what the BBC believes is grabbing you by the balls is undoubtedly being openly biased and over-dramatic about subjects such as immigration, Islam and climate change…the BBC going all out to grab hold of your misperceptions about these subjects, give you a good shaking and rigorously emphasise and press home the ‘real’ facts that you never knew you didn’t know but the BBC will gladly re-educate you about.

Shillingshaw says…..

“We made a flawed but very interesting documentary called Meet the Ukippers which had some moments in it which just made your jaw drop.”

I’d be fascinated to know exactly which bits of the programme she thinks were ‘flawed’.  Could one of them be the way the BBC set out to tar a completely innocent woman as a racist?  Probably not as that is presumably the bit which made Shillingshaw’s ‘jaw drop’.  Clearly she didn’t actually listen to what the woman,  UKIP councillor Rozanne Duncan, said on the film and understood its actual meaning….we’ve looked at that film in a previous post….A Peculiar Kind Of Racism.….Duncan is in no way a racist…..and yet the BBC deliberately trailed the film, finally released in February, suspiciously close to the election, when it was already in the can in December, and ‘leaked’ that Duncan was making ‘racist’ comments.

The BBC crucified Duncan and hung her out to dry for their own political motives.  In effect this was BBC ‘racism’…you’re in UKIP you must be bad and therefore we can abuse you at will,  say anything we like about you however false, however slanderous, no matter if it destroys your life.

Hilariously Shillinglaw said ‘she wanted BBC2’s factual shows to be “a little bit more contemporary. Life isn’t just about bunting; we could do more to get closer to the national conversation”.’

Get closer to the ‘national conversation’?  You’ve got to be kidding…Evan Davis just spent half an hour lambasting Nigel Farage for his ‘unacceptable’ tone, ie, that he opposes mass immigration, wants to get out of Europe and spoke openly about the difficulties caused by immigrants who refuse to integrate and instead form their own ghetto societies…..all things Evan and the BBC find taboo subjects and yet are all ones that the ‘national conversation’ has views on that are contrary to the BBC’s and wants represented in a more balanced, reasoned and less vitriolic way…not to mention truthful.

If the BBC wants to reflect the national conversation then it will have to change its tone and start telling the truth about immigration, Europe, climate change and the consequences of the Islamisation of parts of the UK and of the political sphere as politicians sell out the country to buy minority votes.

At the moment the ‘Punk Generation’, and everyone else, is being ‘Punk’d’…fooled, humiliated and lied to by the BBC… so I look forward to a new era of openness, reconciliation and a new vision for the future that means we can talk about immigration without being called racist, talk about Islam without being vilified as Islamophobic and criticise climate ‘science’ without being deliberately associated with Nazi ‘Holocaust Deniers’ by BBC presenters.



Bookmark the permalink.

28 Responses to Punked

  1. RJ says:

    ‘BBC2 controller Kim Shillinglaw calls for shows that ‘grab you by the balls’

    As LBJ said a long time ago: “When you have them by the balls, their hearts and minds will follow”.


  2. Lobster says:

    “I’d be fascinated to know exactly which bits of the programme she thinks were ‘flawed’.” I should imagine that the people watching it thought it was the bit between the opening titles and the closing credits.


  3. Rob in Cheshire says:

    The BBC’s idea of a “national conversation” is having a leftist with a megaphone haranguing the masses who are too stupid to realise that he is right about everything, and they are deluded little Englanders.


    • DP111 says:

      is having a leftist with a megaphone haranguing the masses who are too stupid to realise that he is right about everything, and they are deluded little Englanders.

      Yes like their star intellectual David Dimbleby, a third rate third class honours in a non-subject.

      Or their star Climate Change scientists in E.Lit.


    • DP111 says:

      This is worth watching

      Bill Whittle gives a lecture on something that frankly, we should all be embarrassed is even necessary. And yet it is.

      Via Vladtepes


      Bill W points out that socialist strategy works on greed, identifying an enemy, then promising the people all sorts of goodies if the enemy is destroyed.

      1. For Stalin – it was the Kulaks.

      2. For Mao – the educated – doctors , engineers, writers etc

      3. For Hitler – the 1% who owned all the wealth.

      For Ed Mlliband’s Labour and the BBC, it is the 1% who live in mansions. Labour promises that all of us can have everything, by going after people who live in mansions.


      • More Like The Soviet Bloc Every Day says:

        Yeah, this is so true, it seems to me that every utopian idealogy always share some characteristics,

        1.An unwinnable dream of human paradise

        2.Totalitarianism, so everybody is in lockstep and dissenters are punished/eliminated.

        3.A very specific enemy that must be wiped out.

        In the case of Islam, it’s non-believers. In idealogies of the left it was originally the business class or bourgeouis. And although they still notionally seem to concentrate on the very rich, now it seems to me that for the left, the enemy is the indiginous native majority, ie all of us. We’re the ones with “priviledge” whether working class or not. The grooming gangs in the Uk are proof of that.

        OUtlawing Islamophobia… this just shows how dangerous and damaging Ed Miliband is and how little he cares for the people who would vote for him.


  4. AsISeeIt says:

    If the BBC is after the “Punk Generation” why the heck do they keep plugging the Steve Miller Band?



    • GCooper says:

      Actually, if you look at the age of many of the BBC’s presenters and pundits, the ‘punk generation’ is about right.

      That’s a generation that was conned into believing an artificial money-making scam was a ‘genuine youth movement’.

      People might, rightly, look down on the ’68ers and the Hippies, but the other name for ‘punks’ could just as easily be ‘dupes’.

      Which explains a lot about the current BBC.


      • AsISeeIt says:

        “Punk Generation”

        By my reckoning a 16-year-old in 1976 would now be 55

        That would reduce the BBC audience demographic of 60 by all of 5 years


      • Jack says:

        Good point, the whole Sex Pistols swindle was a PR exercise for Vivian Westwoods clothes. McLaren was a shrewd cookie who made the most out of youthful stupidity and groupthink.


    • #88 says:

      Don’t forget the ‘Dave Clark Five’ which the BBC gladhanded last year as ‘One of the four top bands of the 60’s’

      It might have had something to do with publicists etc having friends in high BBC places.

      It’s not just in the political world that the BBC rewrite history.


      • Rufus McDufus says:

        Oh my goodness that documentary was dreadful! How much were the talking heads (including Paul McCartney) all paid (or blackmailed) into eulogising about the Dave Clark 5?


        • Jack says:

          Yes it wasn’t The Beatles or The Stones or The ‘orrible Who who took the States by storm, it was the Dave Clark 5. Who’ve thunk it?


  5. DP111 says:

    “We are going to make it an aggravated crime. We are going to make sure it is marked on people’s records with the police to make sure they root out Islamophobia as a hate crime,” Miliband told the Editor of The Muslim News, Ahmed J Versi in a wide ranging exclusive interview.


    Labour, after allowing millioins of Muslims into Britain, and they raping tens of thosabnds of young Kuffar girls, is going to make pass laws making it a crime to hate Islam or Muslkms.

    Labour is prostituting itself before Muslims, just as the BBC does, but it will do no good. Muslims are not going to vote for a party led by a Jew.


    • DP111 says:

      A commentator on Jihad Watch sums up Ed Milliband’s Labour
      on Muslims
      jayell says

      April 27, 2015 at 1:03 pm

      “The Muslim community is as an “incredibly important, incredibly rich, incredible asset to our country” and so it was really important to put on record.”……

      1. UK Population statistics have shown the muslim element of the UK population to be a little under 5% of the total. For such a small minority to be ‘an incredibly important, rich asset’ to the UK they would have had to have a made a huge positive contribution to the UK, economically, socially and culturally that would be far out of proportion to their numbers and in ways that would benefit all UK citizens.

      2. According to fairly recent statistics, about 75% of adult muslim females and nearly 50% of adult muslim males are ‘economically inactive’; i.e., officially unemployed and claiming benefits. Even if these figures have improved more recently they would still show muslims to be a net drain on the benefit system and therefore the economy.
      And so on…

      This list could go on and on. Quite how the Muslim community is supposed to be an “incredibly important, incredibly rich, incredible asset to our country” frankly defeats me – and practically everyone else in the UK.



      • Rob in Cheshire says:

        If Muslims are such an asset to our country, where they constitute 5%, how come that the countries where they constitute 100% are such shitholes? I only ask because I want to know!


        • Richard Pinder says:

          A very intelligent scientific method of deduction, of which the inferior left-wing mind has the same type of problem with other subjects such as:
          (1) Why if the two largest economies in Western Europe not in the EU are the two most successful economies in Western Europe would Britain want to remain in the EU shithole.
          (2) If carbon dioxide rules the Climate of the Earth which constitutes only 0.04 percent of the Atmosphere, then how come a formula and solution to the problem of calibrating carbon dioxide warming is not better known beyond a few Astronomers, Mensa members and Piers Corbyn. What with Venus with 250,000 times more Carbon dioxide and a 96.5 percent Carbon Dioxide atmosphere providing a more accurate calibration for any warming.


        • DP111 says:

          Well Rob, because dar ul Islam is 100% good. Therefore they have no other way to go but shitwards.


      • DP111 says:

        And we havn’t even considered Muslim contributions to advancements in FGM and other gynocology areas. Halal slaughter of British soldiers in Britain, the enormous advancements in mass surveillance of everyone- mainly because of Muslims, advancements in airport security, and security in general, advancements in high tech X-ray imaging systems. I’m thankful to Muslims, as they have made airplanes and other mass transport systems, far safer then they were before.

        These are just a few high tech advancements that have occurred in the last decade – primarily due to Islam and Muslims living in the West. That is why Ed Milliband thinks it necessary that the highly qualified Muslim high tech engineers from Somalia, Eritrea and much of Africa, coming on boats to Italy, should be brought over to the UK asap. Somalia’s loss, Britain’s gain.

        Voting Labour has nothing to do with it.


  6. johnnythefish says:

    Shillingshaw hasn’t changed the way she looks at the world since being a left-wing student.

    She arrogantly deduces the same attitude applies to those who enjoyed a bit of punk ‘rebellion’ in the seventies. However, with age and experience comes calm and wisdom, a more balanced view of life and time to enjoy more refined pastimes. A television broadcaster who sets out to educate and inform, taking a balanced and well researched approach, would be more in tune with the needs of the late fifties-plus ‘punk generation’ than any shouty, opinionated, dumbed-down trash she is obviously hellbent on broadcasting.

    But then, as Alan rightly suggests, it’s all part of the agenda and nothing to do with meeting the needs of the viewer.


  7. Dave says:

    The BBC doesn’t like people it considers old: In its own institutionally agist mind it exists primarily to serve and direct ‘da yoof’, making sure they always take the path of enlightenment that leads to the left. ‘Old’ people are no use to them – they have already made their minds up, formed opinions honed by experience of the real world. They might even be UKIP supporters, and once they get to 75 they no longer have to pay the license fee so can be safely ignored.

    A couple of other thoughts:
    I thought BBC3 was for the Punk generation?

    I don’t see why this figure is such as surprise to them: Young people no longer get their entertainment from live broadcast TV. They get it on demand, from the internet where they can make their own if they want. Auntie doesn’t like this – they are escaping from the mind control of the BBC, and it makes the concept of the license fee seem even more outdated.


    • Jack says:

      That’s because the BBC is institutionally paedophilic. Why do you think they commissioned Eric Gill ?


  8. Fred Bloggs says:

    Probably lost on the bBC, but Punk is referenced in Shakespeare, it refers to a prostitute. How poetic the media outlet the bBC that prostitutes itself.


  9. John Standley says:

    Seems like she’s just realised with apparent horror the SHE is approaching middle age and needs to distance herself from the BBC metropolitan perception that BBC2 is for oldies.

    So she invents a new sub-class “Punk Generation” in order to maintain some yoof credentials

    “I may be getting on a bit, but hey, I was a Punk. Y’know, not a fuddy-duddy typical 50-something”

    Yada Yada Yada.

    Her apparently narrow view of the age fails to recognise that punk was a relatively short-lived genre – I’m in my late fifties and I was around then but I preferred Rock/Blues/Soul and even Folk and Classics, tastes which I retain to this day.
    I get the impression that she wasn’t ever a punk but has had a quick look at the histroy books and applied what she has seen in isolation from all that was going on at the time.

    And it about more than punk.

    Another lazy BBC cliche.


  10. mikef says:

    I genuinely had to check she was a real person – she sounded too much like a parody (W1A say) to exist.