No sooner had Cameron announced his intention to double free provision for three and four-year-olds in England than the BBC ran this angle on it..
“Childcare changes threatened by underfunding, providers say”
I suppose with Labour in its death throes the BBC feels an obligation to use its multi-billion pound media soapbox (extorted from the License payer) to attack the Conservatives but I don’t see why I should fund this outrageous bias.
I cannot quite recall how the BBC behaved in that period after the 1997 election when the Tories were in utter turmoil, no obvious leadership and not in a place to offer serious opposition.
I seem to recall though that they piled into William Hague when he became leader, unremittingly and never really stopped.
How times change, but I’d say that Labour are in a much worse place now than the Tories were then.
They didn’t invite Tories on their political programmes to provide balance as they have done with Labour. Ever seen George Osbourne without Balls in tow?
Ever seen George Osbourne without Balls in tow?
Pardon????
My one clearest recollection of how the televisual nomenklatura reacted, post-1997, actually comes from Channel 4 (also a subsidised channel, as it miraculously happens), from the time when William Hague was Conservative leader. After one of the Conservative election victories in the Eighties, a beebyanka producer had announced that, given the scale of labour’s defeat, his colleagues and he would have to form the effective opposition.
Oddly enough, he and his kind felt no similar patriotic obligation, when Blair won a landslide. Accordingly, we had a stomach-churning piece of self-styled “satire”, entirely directed at the Opposition, in which the hosts of the show set up very cheap and unfunny laughs for one of the characters responsible for the very cheap and unfunny “Spitting Image”, who was, by then, in true Mandlesonian style, employed in Downing Street.
As that ghastly labour fraud (and beebyanka favourite), Woy Jenkins, might have said: “Taaaawibly daaawing.”
“I suppose with Labour in its death throes the BBC feels an obligation to use its multi-billion pound media soapbox”
Death throes may, unfortunately, be a little premature. It is our job to try and ensure that the moribund monster actually dies.
The Labour party does not seem likely to get votes in Scotland any time soon.
That leaves the public sector, non-whites and a rump of bitter enders elsewhere. So the Labour strategy will be, ensure as many aliens as possible are encouraged to come to the UK (they already have form for this); and nationalise everything they can lay their hands on.
Interesting Timeshift 2015-06-01 “The Golden Age of British Rail”. Showing the train service in an idyllic, golden lit, way. Overmanning, strikes, go-slows, work to rule and waste on a colossal scale, did not occur.
I do not think this is BBC “business as usual”, I believe they are really desperate and will resort to ruses and tricks more extreme than ever before.
The BBC has a default position now with regard to any news topic. The reporting must contain the buzz words, ‘cuts, underfunded, un costed, heavily criticized, etc etc.
The one sided reporting including opinions of ‘members of the public’ who strangely never support the government ( where are they!) can be heard uninterrupted but no government expert or minister will be allowed to respond, only library film will be shown of government figures with voice overs by reporters suggesting that the government thinks the opposite.
The BBC now believes it is at war with the government, and tries to be the voice of the public…..yes, the very public that put the Tories into office! They didn’t learn from labours devastating loss that the messages they excrete are not wanted.
Another excellent illustration is the beyond biased and bizarre Radio Question Time presented by the more stupid hereditary Dimbleby.
Not only does the presenter (an arrogant ingratiating numpty who make his brother look like Robin Day) ALWAYS interrupt and effectively disrupt the delivery of any tory, frankly, stupid enough to go and try and present government policy to an audience that is substantially to the left of one of those Owen Jones Austerity Parliament travesties and just go mental at every positive mention of immigration, Human Rights, Islamophobia, Climate Change The EU or bashing of evil tory cuts, jews (sorry Zionists) etc etc. All views strongly endorsed by the majority of the British people as the election demonstrated.
They must go to enormous trouble to find this gruesome rabble; or perhaps they just e-mail the NUT and Local Government Association. It really is strikingly weird and the tories and UKIP should boycott it until they restore balance.
The threat of underfunding is the official BBC position on this Tory policy. Have heard it trotted out (see what I did there?) on R4 several times.
Strange how the lunatic policies of The Green Party never, ever got any detailed scrutiny from the BBC during the election – like, for example, how they might reconcile uncontrolled immigration with a zero growth target – yet they can always find somebody to denigrate every single Tory policy.
Wankers.
Delightful quotes from BBC Director of News, James Harding:
…’the fabled left-wing bias’ was ‘unfair and unfounded’ and was ‘hard to take seriously’ given the Conservative victory….
The sad little man really doesn’t seem to grasp the inherent bias in those last three words – but since they were not direct quotes in the article, maybe a minion added them in an attempt to be helpful?
PS The post of Director of News is at a lower grade than Controller of News which is in turn on a lower pay-scale than Chief of News.
Great stuff, Beltane. He doesn’t even realise that his own words prove that he’s dripping with that very same bias even while attempting to deny it exists! But, ‘maybe a minion added them in an attempt to be helpful?’ Not according to the Independent (website) who supply the full quotation below:
The Director of News rounded on claims of the BBC’s “fabled left-wing bias.” He said: “I find this increasingly hard to take seriously. In the light of the Conservative victory, what’s the argument?”
In a further attempt at exculpation he offered this bit of sarcasm directed towards those claiming BBC bias:
“That the BBC’s subtle, sophisticated left-wing message was so very subtle, so very sophisticated that it simply passed the British people by?”
You have to laugh! It’s completely beyond his wit or imagination that, after the weeks of completely unsubtle and unsophisticated Red-Ed cheerleading fed to them by the Bloody Brainless Corporation, the majority of British voters could possibly retain minds of their own and have enough good sense to say ‘Bollox to the BBC’ and then go out to the ballot box and vote anything but Labour.
So, what he is basically saying is It’s the BBC that won the election for the Tories?
Not the fact that the electorate had seen quite enough of Labour for 3 months in the run up on the BBC, and had seen through the tissue of lies, the flip-flopping of policy, and had seen the slavering bias shown by ALL on the BBC towards Labour?
No, they think they are that important that they win elections…wake up call for the BBC…you are not important, you are irrelevant, and I do not wish to pay a single penny for your shite “service”
Basically what he was saying would have had Inigo Montoya quipping.
But seriously, folks…
http://tradingaswdr.blogspot.co.uk/2015/06/commission.html
There’s that tricky strategic vision thing, which gets them hiring ever more, and more expensive talents who cannot be removed (well, then again… http://tradingaswdr.blogspot.co.uk/2015/06/soft-perm.html), to come up with pearls of wisdom.
Meanwhile, the man who knows ‘vital’ programming when he sees it is clearly on a roll, even with that dodgy chequebook..
http://tradingaswdr.blogspot.co.uk/2015/06/you-muppet.html
‘Perhaps Danny has some of the money that’ll be saved from endless Family Guy runs in his back pocket…’
Whatever he comes up with, Muppets seems apt.
He is right,the BBC did largely support the Tories throughout the election. Most of the important issues were kept of air whilst the BBC hammered home the notion of an SNP LAB pact. At no time was the issue of ‘the economy is getting better’ critically examined. Moreover, the Labour party was depicted as moving to to the left,which is completely untenable if compared to the policies of the popular Blair years.
Sadly the whole elections turned on who could best eat a bacon sandwich. Happily though we do still have a great representative democracy. Ignorant fuckwits are handsomely represented by ignorant fuckwits. It just cant get better than that now can it!
manonclaphamomnibus – We hope that your readers and supporters are voting here, as you are doing a grand job – 155,018 so far.
https://you.38degrees.org.uk/petitions/end-the-bbc-licence-fee
“He is right; the BBC did largely support the Tories throughout the election. Most of the important issues were kept off air”
If he, and you in support, are correct, then there can be only one consequence.
The BBC is not there to support anyone, or censor anything. For instance Ed’s howler in his speech, which Labour was so reassured the BBC had treated kindly.
Hence they need to be removed from any form of public funding, especially the unique variety.
I would support this. What gets interesting is who suddenly gets very protective about preservation. One can only then ask why.
How strange then, that the quote ends at ‘seriously’ in the BBC’s own article and yet at the sentence ending word ‘argument?’ in the Independent’s version.
Surely the grandiose organisation are not stooping to the use of unsubtle spin? How very coarse.
It appears Danny Cohen is threatening to pull programmes if the democratically elected by the British people ( does albeeb believe we exist ?) Conservative government try to stop people being dragged to court for not paying the BBC penance fee.
Since when was a body paid for by the public allowed to dictate government policy?
The unions tried it and look what happened to them, almost disappeared into obscurity…Oh well, one can only hope!
Oh stop being so melodramatic, and stop believing every little spin the Daily Mail puts on any BBC story just so it can enrage people who don’t like to think for themselves.
All Cohen said was that any measures that caused a reduction in licence fee income would inevitably have an effect on BBC output.
Which is, of course, completely true. But the Mail wraps it up as a threat because, well, it’s the Mail, and they know that the mindless zombies who take their editorialising at face value won’t bother engaging any grey matter.
A moment as I wipe a small tear from my eye… and now, to business.:
‘Oh stop being so melodramatic…’
You, presumably, are on hand to offer BBC-approved courses in the avoidance of melodrama?
It’s lucky the zombies who take BBC editorial at face value are… sorry, can’t keep a straight face any longer… Scott, you are simply too precious, bravo!
Hiya everyone, Kyle here from the online pressure group Gays Against Scott.
Our activists have recently recieved confirmation that Scott is due to leave for the United States for a 2 week holiday in New York.
We at Gays Against Scott are horrified by this sad little mans excuse for a holiday destination, hasnt he ever heard of global warming and a carbon footprint
Doesnt Scott realise that by jetting off to the other side of the world that he is not only killing the planet, but also polar bears and penguins, not to mention the poor kids in Africa who will now not have enough water to drink all because Scott is an ignorant facist who puts his own well being before that of the planet and humanity
Well, the activists at Gays Against Scott wont tolerate this, especially from a so called gay man. Any real gay man would be supporting gay bed and breakfast owners in Brighton or Blackpool.
Once Scott is out of the country, our activists will be protesting outside all airports and the Home Office chanting “we’re HERE, we’re QUEER, dont let Scott back HERE”
One can only wonder why Scott has chosen New York as a destination. Maybe he is on a pilgrimage to see where his muslim heros attacked the twin towers, or Times Square so see were his muslim lover was going to bomb.
Who cares why hes going, just so long as he’s gone and doesnt get back into the UK
Oh look, it’s the latest pseudonym from the weirdo loser who thinks that paying a little too much attention to my social media posts is a perfectly normal thing to do.
It’s little wonder David Vance protects you as much as he has done in the past. After all, with you around, the rest of Biased BBC seems just that little bit less insane by comparison.
We at Gays Against Scott are not climate criminals like you Scott. We love our planet, humanity and also the hundreds of gay bed and breakfasts around the country. If we at GAS didnt care about the environment and our carbon footprint, we’d be protesting against Mr Vance shouting “we’re HERE, we’re QUEER, dont let Scott post HERE”
btw Scott, if you havnt already got something that costs the NHS 25 grand a year to treat, dont be bringing it home with you
Funny use of the royal “We”. I thought that was the preserve of the monarchy; now it seems any old lunatic can use it.
Gasbag, you should maybe try giving the multiple pseudonyms a rest, getting off your capacious backside and heading outside for once in order to start living a happy and fulfilled life. Not being a dickhead won’t kill you. Who knows, you may even find you like being an adult – should you ever give it a try.
how queer of you to think royalty use the word “we”, i always thought it was “one” instead of “i”
Scott, my life is great, gorgeous wife, 2 great kids, i earn more money than i can spend, my car is fast as feck, but the traction it produces round corners is even more fun. i’m living the life. i only live in a 3 bed semi, but thats because my property portfolio is worth more than you’ll ever earn
hows your fulfilled life going Scott? Are you still acting like a dickhead threatening to book yourself into a hotel room, run a bath and slash your wrists? – Being a dickhead will kill you though Scott wont it, maybe you should give it a try for once not being a dick head
btw scott, u seem to have dick on the brain, whys that?
Interesting. You are angry towards a gay man you’ve never met. Some would say obsessed with him. You got out of your way to chase him while posing as a gay man yourself. And then when “revealed” you make sure to mention your “wife”, fast “car” and “large” property portfolio. Then you end by wondering about “dick on the brain”
I’m sure Scott thinks about homosexual sex as much as any gay man. But you seem to be o
Obsessed with it and him. Do you think about sex with a man often? Wonder what is would be like? Are you thinking about it now?
Still thinking about it?
no im just playing a troll at his own game. oh and btw, bum sex isnt natural and should be treated with medical help, eg drugs electric shocks
the old game of trying to say someone who opposes bum sex by saying they must be supressing bumsex feelings in order to repulse them doesnt work on me as im secure enough in my own normal sexuality
steven fry should have tried it on muslims instead of christians, there’d be a nice vid on youtube now
Scott, my life is great, gorgeous wife, 2 great kids, i earn more money than i can spend, my car is fast as feck, but the traction it produces round corners is even more fun. i’m living the life.
Hmm. Given that only a few hours ago you were pretending to be gay, and that in your previous attempts to harass me you’ve claimed to be a former work colleague of mine (which wasn’t true) and that I had a drug addiction (which isn’t true now and has never been), I suspect this latest protestation about your wonderful life is also a pack of lies.
Unless, of course, your wife knows about your habit of attempting to dox people on the internet? Of how you harassed my work colleagues, and tried to encourage others on this site to do the same?
Would this fictional wife and children not be wholly ashamed of the pitiful excuse for a human they have the misfortune to have infesting their family?
You don’t sound like a happily married man to me. Indeed, you sound more like a desperate, damaged individual who needs help.
And yes, I was in a dark place a couple of years ago. I got help, and got better. Learn from my lesson, and seek help for whatever it is that is ailing you.
are u on prozac Scott? it may suggest why u act like you do here, id ask your doctor to decrease your dose as its giving u a bit of an OCD with regards to this site
Scott & the other trolls just like advertising this link……..
https://you.38degrees.org.uk/petitions/end-the-bbc-licence-fee
Crikey.
Let’s see: you pose as a number of different people to attack me; you post details of my home, my workplace and my daily commute in an attempt to intimidate me; you harass my work colleagues, and encourage others to do the same; you lie, lie and lie again; you obsess about what little you know of my sexuality.
And yet I’m the one with issues?
Honestly. Listen to yourself. Take a long, deep breath. And then, for your own sake as much as anyone’s, try and grow up.
Scott
Do you deny Cohen said that the BBC would have to cut programmes if the government had it’s way in not allowing the corporation to take people to court?
Incidentaly the BBC would claw back something like 155 million in it’s recovery of fees yet two of it’s top talents cost around 12 million per annum each one being leftist Graham Norton.
Perhaps you could get back to me and confirm I am correct.
Or will you stick with your rather vague assertion that he said any reduction in fees would inefitably affect output?
Scott, why are you on this site ? Whatever your motivation,
your presence boosts the numbers voting here….
https://you.38degrees.org.uk/petitions/end-the-bbc-licence-fee
MB, I have the same question – why does Scott (and his pals) post on this site? I have a theory, actually – I believe he and his chums come here to spout their total nonsense in the knowledge that all that will happen is that there will be a sharp and usually comical (to us, anyway) response, whereas if he/they were to spout their bollox down the Kings Head/Royal Oak (you know what I mean), the chances are that, after a few sherbets, their fellow pub-goers would really show how much the lefty clap-trap is appreciated. Mind you, there can’t be too many “boozers” left where Scott et al are to be found – it’s all “Cafe Nero”, whine bars, and so-called trendy “in-places”. Wonder if he’s ever had a pint of bitter, or mild, or even mixed?
‘Attention seekers’ comes to mind ? As per ‘the clapped out bus’ and all the ‘Toons’ on-board . Plus one or two ‘sockpuppets’.
I wonder about your motivation too. I mean your little petition to close the whole BBC has half the number of signatories of the campaign to stop BBC Three going online only. Basically twice as many people feel strongly about saving just one service as the numbers you can muster.
Every single time you post that link that’s all I can think of. How your campaign just demonstrates how much the public love the BBC.
Have you signed the BBC Three petition yet?
https://www.change.org/p/to-the-bbc-trust-savebbc3#share
Speaking of love for sale, this one has a poll:
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/newsbysector/mediatechnologyandtelecoms/media/11646654/BBC-licence-fee-under-unprecedented-pressure-from-Netflix.html
Spin!
Err.. Danny Cohen actually said the above as I have paraphrased, they are in quotation marks in the press. Best do your homework before you come here sunshine. Or you will end up looking like you have egg on your face again!
The BBC’s response to childcare proposals is similar to their reaction to proposals for 24/7 healthcare – the BMA (the doctors’ union) are trotted out for a quote that it would need (surprise, surprise) loads more money…
Have you noticed how ‘Robert the Pest’ was given media exposure recently on how he couldn’t believe how little money was spent on cancer after I believe a close friend needed treatment?
Any opportunity now for a snipe at government for any shortfall of money anywhere anyplace.
cancerresearch reported a 6% increase in income generation in their last accounts to £490 million – over £400 million was actively used to beat cancer.
A growing economy with an increase in wages allows people the opportunity to voluntarily donate money to charities – the recession post 2007 severely curtailed this.
As is the case of everything – “it’s the economy, stupid.”
So lets just get this right bigger economy,no curbs on known carcinogens,greater consumption of known carcinogens,massive profits and subsidies to the producers of known carcinogens,lower government expenditure on cancer treatment relative to population,increase in blaming people for their own ill health. Solution = give more to charity? Got it!
As usual there is no mention of just who is going to pay for the ‘free’ child care !