Let me start by saying that like so many other people I was saddened to read of the death of former Lib Dem leader Charles Kennedy at such an early age. The loss to his family and friends will be immense. However, does anyone else find the BBC coverage of this excessive? Time after time in the past TWO days, I have turned on the various BBC channels to hear glowing eulogy after another paid to Kennedy. It makes me wonder how it can be that someone who was such a political giant was comprehensively rejected at the polls just a few weeks back? Kennedy was well to the LEFT of Labour and he was also avowedly anti the Iraq war – as was the BBC. I wonder does this colour the scale of the coverage afforded? I am not seeking to be mean spirited or unsympathetic BUT the grief-fest the BBC has been engaging in seems way too much. Thoughts?
CHARLES KENNEDY…
Bookmark the permalink.
Seemed a decent enough sort, so empathies, sympathies, RIPs, condolences, etc fair enough.
However, like Mr/s Jenner, it seems twitter (doing so well currently) demands offerings, and hence you don’t just quietly pay homage if you expect to be left alone… you do it loud and often.
And you for sure don’t mention awkward stuff.
There were a few comments made by colleagues that were unusually phrased, to say the least.
And the party that is united in grief were not always united behind him.
So best go the BBC route and wail, rend clothes, gnash teeth like a Pallywood cortege.
These days any sad passing gets booted to mass derangement by the whole sorry media mess, but the BBC has added an extra dimension as only they can when one of those ‘on narrative’ offers opportunity.
Coverage has been effusive. We’ve been spared the trope ‘All political lives end in failure’ even though it seems apposite.
By all accounts a decent man though his well known alcoholism seems to be usually referred to discreetly as ‘battling demons’. If it was drink that killed him that should be reported. The tobacco industry would not be shown such indulgence.
Noticeable as well how little mention is made of The mickey-taking of Kennedy and his drink problem there was on shows such as Have I Got News For You.
Well the new narrative the BBC is spinning about Kennedy is interesting , why is this week a drunk politician a great and good man and last week an allegedly drunk Churchill was evil incarnate ? why when Kennedy stood against Blair’s wars is he now the bestest ever friend of BBC commander in chief Campbell? the man with the most blood and blame on his hands for those wars ,also is the BBC complicit in this as did they provide alcohol to Kennedy for his TV appearances the last one very much under the influence ?
It does make you wonder, if he was so opposed to the Iraq War, how he could even bear to be in the same room as Alistair Campbell, much less have him as a friend? It seems all things are possible in the Westminster Village. I expect he didn’t know Cyril Smith was a nonce either.
They had their alcoholism in common.
Sorry I don’t care how pissed you are being best friends with Campbell is wrong to anyone claiming to be against that war !
Rob Your ‘alcohol’ link between Kennedy and Churchill is very astute.
They showed a clip where somebody was haranguing Kennedy with the rhetorical question “Why are Liberal Democrats so ‘holier than thou’?” (or words to that affect) and he replied that this did not apply to him, which is fair. I notice that the house he died in was a very modest affair. So he was neither sanctimonious nor greedy. A very rare combination for a professional politician.
have to admit,the over the top coverage of 24 hour rolling coverage of charles kennedy death on the bbc and radio 5 live was a bit annoying,in contrast to that was the horrific scenes in china where over 400 mainly elderly pensioners are feared dead and many trapped in that overturned pleasure cruiser and that story was relegated to about 5th story in most news bulletins on thec bbc and radio 5 live yesterday,that i find disgusting.
It was announced that Charles Kennedy, former MP and leader of the Liberal Democrats party had died at the age of 55. His alcoholism is well documented and in recent years he had become a shadow of his former self. By all accounts he was a very decent man, self-deprecating and with a tremendous loyalty to his party who he had served in parliament for over 30 years until his defeat at the last general election. He made regular appearances on the BBC programme “Have I Got News For You” where his wit and humour were often on display.
What I find quite strange is that the BBC have spent the so much time eulogising Kennedy on both radio and TV, MPs rolled out along with numerous political commentators to say what a wonderful man he was. Even worse Alastair Campbell (Blairs former press thug and bully) has written and been interviewed about Kennedy and the “shared demons” they both faced.
I have no doubt of this but can we get things in perspective. He was an MP, not exactly the most demanding of jobs as you are not required to attend parliament at any time and are free to do “other jobs” if you so wish. Being an MP is the only job I know with a starting salary in excess of £60+k where NO QUALIFICATIONS at all are required (can you think of any other?). He has made no great scientific discovery, no medical breakthrough, not created an organisation of international repute, not come up with any new “breakthrough ideas” that have significantly benefited society……………so why all this eulogising?
He was by all accounts a very good constituency MP, well liked and respected but interestingly, voted out of office at the last general election by the SNP “tsunami” and he apparently took the rejection very badly (understandably after representing the constituency for over 30 years).
Yes, it is very sad that he should have died at the very young age of 55 and by all accounts was a very nice man, but I find it difficult to understand why the BBC in particular, have gone overboard on this story!
By this morning, like David, I had decided that the over the top eulogising by the BBC was because of his stance on the Iraq war – although I had forgotten it, his death allowed the BBC plenty of scope to remind us.
Ive brought him over to keep you all company.
It seems a little mean spirited to suggest that these eulogies have been a tad gushing, but I know what you mean. And I don’t recall the Beeb being quite so generous to Mrs T when she left this mortal coil…
However compared to the month long mourning the corporation went into after the death of Nelson Mandela, I think this time they’ve been astonishingly reserved. Programmes were cancelled, lefty luvvies lined the corridors of Broadcasting House to express their limitless love for this divine human being. Good God it was an utter sob-fest.
And, so far as I know, we’ve not been subjected to the warm memories of Stephen Fry (“he had such an amazingly warm smile”) Sandi Toksvig hasn’t stuck her oar in and numerous pop stars, footballers, models and air headed actresses have remained silent on the matter.
Perhaps we should consider ourselves lucky…
Heaven help us if Obama pops his clogs. We can expect collective grief from the BBC which would make the North Koreans embarrassed.
Quite right Jeff re Mrs T; and Mandela was just a terrorist, who happened to preside over the beginning of the end of a great country.
Wonder if someone might try to compare the coverage of the death of Kennedy with that of Lee the Singapore leader who died recently at the age of 92.Lee was arguably the most successful political leader of the last 50 years and yet his death got just a fraction of the coverage of Mandela`s death.It might be because he never played the ethnic victim card or it might be that he made comments like `that the primary cause of Britains decline was the creation of the welfare state`
I did notice that Margaret Thatcher had some really horrible things said about her on the BBC and Sky, insinuating joy at her death, and the impression was that she was pretty much universally loathed. The fact that she won three terms on the trot was ignored and of course she destroyed labour in that the working classes were encouraged to work for themselves… something the BBC will never forget.
Kennedy it seems was universally loved , so why the dark moments and alcohol issues he suffered from?
It is sad that anyone dies because of those left behind , but he really was no great presence once he left the leadership of his party.
BTW David Vance only those that come here with nothing much to offer would think you are mean spirited, so you have nothing to worry about!
I gather the BBC are going to send 40 Journalists and attendant camera crews to the funeral.
The BBCs ululations over the still warm body of Charles Kennedy remind me of the same lefty liberal guff they used for Tony Benn.
How the Left love their losers who were impotent at historys making-and how they hate winners like Wilson, Blair and Thatcher.
You wait until Kinnock goes…Hain…
Kennedy was a decent cove who was trashed by his party and removed-for being a pisshead, like so many others.
Bloody Braveheart has a lot to do with it-had Kennedy ever held power in any way, he`d be loathed much like Clegg is.
No disrespect intended to a decent bloke, but it`s the way the BBC stitch up their hagiographies while the family have yet to arrange the committal that sticks in my craw…the more the BBC do their bullet point toadifications for Kennedy-the more you want to stick the boot into their flawed and flabby icons.
Thatcher WAS a great-which is why the BBC dragged her coffin through the perfumed gardens and trashed her living relatives…yet they expect us to bow the knee for some serial fantasist like Benn?
You are right about Thatcher.She was a great which as you say. And I quite agree about Benn and this Kennedy chap both of whom should have been hung drawn and quartered for not being … Well not being Thatcher. By the way what did she do that was so good? Apart from the 17.5% interest rates and Unemployment and the poll tax……..
Can you read? Or think?
Please connect your fingers to your brain before you decide not to post next time.
What did Mrs T do? Never lost an election, never started or lost a war, got the UK a decent EU rebate.
Mrs T ,( God Bless Her) also back 2 very important projects , the 1st was getting BT & Vodaphone to take risks & develop ,well really invent , the switching systems for mobile phone networks , otherwise they would be like walkie talkie`s , with Press to Talk buttons . The 2nd great project , without public money , was to get the Channel Tunnel built . I know some here, hate any connection to Europe, but this has been of excellent benefit to the Kent,& English economy , I have used it many times , & its really good .
Essex Man – If you haven’t read it I can recommend Backroom Boys by Francis Spufford which includes the early days of mobile phone coverage in the UK.
The Chunnel is a great technical achievement, and unlike our Edinburgh trams it didn’t cost any public money, operates at a profit and serves a purpose.
Also created a financial industry which led directly to the 2008 meltdown.
She didn’t create the US market in CDOs.
Crisis in 2008. Mrs T resigned 1990, some 18 years earlier. Were her successors asleep at the wheel then?
Nope the wheel was detached. They just sat in the front seat and watched. Thats what the free market means. Its free, but not for taxpayers!
The wheel was attached by a regulatory system made by the fair hands of Brown and Balls.
But almost single-handedly propped up the country’s economy for 25 years before that. If you’ve had a nice life since the 1980s you owe them a bit of thanks.
Looks like another omnibus has just arrived with a few sockpuppets on board . Voted here ‘me old china’ ?
https://you.38degrees.org.uk/petitions/end-the-bbc-licence-fee
Mrs T certainly did not “created a financial industry which led directly to the 2008 meltdown”. Where do you get that daft idea from, MOCO?
1. UK Financial Industry existed long before Thatcher’s time as PM.
2. Her Government made changes to the ‘financial industry’, more specifically & separately to banking & broking, insurance, pensions & personal investment and was warned of shortcomings & faults in the former. That she didn’t listen & forged ahead without correction are a major stain on her Premiership but did not lead directly to the crash of 2007-2009.
3. Much of the blame for that lies with the Government of 1997-2010 not least for desiring to create extra markets, made possible by Thatcher’s reforms, through which it was possible to create for & then trade the derivatives which helped kick the whole thing off in the US.
Man on clap invested bus….I see you tick your own box as usual!
You mention Thatcher putting up tax to 17.5% that is of course VAT ( perhaps you didn’t know that one) …..actually it was once 10% it went up under labour and like most taxes it has continually risen to it’s 20% status now.
The main beneficiary of Thatcher is one that can be measured in more ways than one. I think the term ‘mondeo man’ comes to mind in that she gave ordinary working people the courage and right and help to work for themselves of which I am one.
Labour on the other hand encourages laziness, scrounging, dependence on the state in return for their vote ( which didn’t work, Ha ! ) the break up of marriage
and general moral decay.
I know which I prefer.
As for the financial meltdown, who deregulated the banks then?
You need to do more homework if you are to be of any interest here.
Er no interest rates
The tories and when the Labour party was in power the Tories wanted further deregulation.
Man with clap
Gordon Brown.. remember he sold the family fortune for tuppence deregulated the banks, don’t give me ‘the tories wanted even more deregulation’ It was Brown what done it.
At least with Charles Kennedy, most of the tributes relayed by the BBC were reasonable and accurate. The only thing that seemed to be left out was that some in his Party were happy to accept Shadow Ministerial roles from Kennedy as leader, only to knife him in the back a year or so later.
When Ted Heath died, I wouldn’t have recognised him or his time as PM from the glowing eulogies presented by all & sundry.
What did Mrs T do for the U.K.
A lot from my point of view, in fact enough for me to take a day of leave and pay to travel to London to add myself to the many who lined the streets for her funeral procession.
Best summed up if you know the Carry on at your convenience film, Renee Houston (Mrs T) puts Kenneth Cope (Arthur Scargill) over her knee and smacks his behind, whereafter when the factory has a shortage of toilet paper instead of the “everybody out” call, the shop steward (remember all the associations with those wonderful words) gets his wallet out to buy some more.
The film predated reality by more than a decade, but god knows what state we would be in now without her. We soon lost the “sick man of Europe” title after the removing of the union tanks from the lawn of No. 10.
Happily our French cousins would appear to be steadily donning the “sick man” mantle today, and I can see no Mrs T waiting in the wings over there!
To provide balance the BBC should interview those people who didn’t like him just as they did when Maggie died.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3112992/Hounded-SNP-hate-mob-weeks-lonely-death-Charles-Kennedy-endured-vile-campaign-bullying-abuse-separatist-fanatics-deeply-wounded-vulnerable-man.html
And -none of us will at all surprised to know that the SNP bloke who toppled Kennedy on May7th-Blackfoot Sue?-was near-on the FIRST bloke that Humphrys chose to use to “pay tribute” to his dead opponent.
Humphrys may well have been right then to crassly say that Blackfoot “fought him to the death”.
There was me thinking it was a crass figure of speech-maybe Scottish Law will bring up a few cybernats and their MPs to face charges on harrassment and online trolling evils….