Biased BBC contributor Hippiepooter sent me this most excellent link to a Delingpole article on his encounter with Richard Bacon.

“Bacon, remember, has recently been fighting a public battle against the various internet trolls(especially on Twitter) who have made his life hell. Had he bothered to read Watermelons and got as far as chapter ten – They Don’t Like It Up ‘Em – he would have seen catalogued in some detail the cases of vile bullying experienced by climate sceptics like myself, Johnny Ball and David Bellamy deliberately orchestrated by green activists, and stoked up by BBC presenters like Richard Bacon (and Sir Paul Nurse) when they use inflammatory words like “denier”. (What, so questioning the validity of AGW theory is roughly equivalent to denying that six million Jews were exterminated in the Holocaust? Nope. I don’t think so).”


Biased BBC contributor Graeme writes;

“Richard Bacon produced a very good programme on internet trolls broadcast on BBC 3 a couple of days ago, The Anti-Social Network.

Firstly, I’d like to say, on the basis of what was broadcast about the internet troll stalking him and his family, who updated his anti-Bacon Twitter id with duplicate photos of Bacon after he’d got beaten up and fantasised about killing him, I’m glad he took expert advise to make a complaint to the Police and I wish them every success in finding the evil creep.

He interviewed a supposedly repentant troll who lied to him about not posting offensive messages on an RIP tribute site. He admitted this later to Richard Bacon in writing, claiming to regret what he did but saying he found some of the responses “hilarious”.

Quite rightly, Richard Bacon questioned how sorry this person is when he still finds reactions to his trolling on RIP sites ‘hilarious’.

The same question might be asked over how sincere Richard Bacon’s ‘apology’ was over referring listeners to youtube of Doug Stanhope mocking Sarah Palin’s Down’s Syndrome boy, Trig. Does a lie accompany a sincere apology? Surely his ‘apology’ should have been to Sarah Palin and Trig? According to 5Live Richard Bacon was not endorsing the Stanhope clip he referred his listener’s too. Here’s what Bacon said during his interview:-

00:57:12 [To Stanhope] “I’m genuinely a really big fan of what you do”.

00:59:43 “If you want a flavour of what he’s like go to youtube now and type doug stanhope sarah palin [snigger]”

01:04:50 “A remarkable standup comic, one of my favourte (uninteligible)”

01:18:25 “I can’t recommend it enough, you go and see Doug Stanhope at Leicester Square Theatre”.

Clearly Richard Bacon directed his listeners to this clip because he loves hearing conservative Christians being subjected to sick vitriol and wanted his listeners to share his twisted pleasure.
The question arises, is Richard Bacon’s mentality that far removed from the trolls he exposed this week?

Bacon did not carry the moral authority needed to present this BBC3 programme, but nevertheless, what I’ll end with Regard to the assault he suffered a couple of years ago is to note that a number of commenters here revelled in that and I did wonder if his stalker could be someone who posted here. If that is the case, well, I end as I started ..


This is a guest post by Biased BBC contributor Graeme Thompson aka Hippiepooter.
“B-BBC regularsmay be aware that I think BBCRadio Five Live is excellent.  Commentsand digs here made against 5Live presenters leave me baffled and confused.
As far as I’m concerned it has some superb presenters,strongly committed to impartiality.
I get a smidgen that Shelagh Fogarty is a bit of aconservative but may be wrong.  Veryimpartial.  Great pleasure to tune in to.
Nicky Campbell, an outstanding broadcaster who’ll go down asone of the BBC’s all timegreats.  Generally a bit of a leftie butstrongly committed to impartiality.
Peter Allen, ‘left wind’ as opposed to left wing.  He tends to blow with the gusts of BBC left wing bias if they whip up too much of agale for him.  His wit and congenialitymore than make up for the few times this occurs though.
All in all, I’d say R5L presenters do Britain proud.
Apart from Richard Bacon.
It seems that the afternoon slot on 5Live is reserved forbiased lefties.  It’s as if some sort oftrade off has been made with the BBC’sGramscian left.  I think it was SybilRuscoe who I once heard interview Charlton Heston and comment afterwards howshe liked him, but “it’s a pity he’s right wing”.  Then we had Simon Mayo.  And now, Richard Bacon keeping the traditionalive.
A good enough broadcaster I’d argue, he has enough talentfor his job, but when push comes to shove, a Labour lackey through andthrough.  Worse; a Brownite lackey, andoutside of the BNP and ‘Respect’,it’s hard to get nastier than that.
He didn’t cover the Labour conference as a Labour supporterbut he has covered the Tory conference as one. Tone and comment made this evident, but then he surpassed himself onThursday when he informed us (01:56:46):-
“Like the cat in Dick Whittington, Theresa May’s moggy isnot just helping humans its entirelyfictional”.
The DailyMail has gone to the trouble of reading the Court transcripts and come to avery different conclusion.  I think anyfair-minded person – and the BBCdoes have a duty to be fair-minded – would take the view that while Theresa Mayoverstated the matter, her comment was grounded in fact.
Facts and fairness don’t matter to Mr Bacon.  Smearing Tory Government Ministers does.
This latest example of egregious bias from him comes in thewake of him referring listeners with a snicker to go to youtube to listen to anAmerican ‘comedian’ savagelymock Sarah Palin over her Downs Syndrome son Trig.
This time, if his R5L bosses do nothing more than issueanother insincere apology on his behalf they may start to lose publicconfidence.
Take a listen to the very end of Bacon’s programme to findout just how much contempt he has for his duty to impartiality.  Accompanied by the usual schoolboy snicker ofcourse.”


Doug Stanhope is encouraging his adoring fanbase to contact the BBC to defend Richard Bacon. In trademark foul-mouthed style he rants against the “fuck-mouth” at the Down’s Syndrome Association who wrote Friday’s official statement, saying the person “is not fit to protect the retarded. Oh… and go fuck yourself in the head.”

He just doesn’t give a fuck, does he? In case you miss the point, he even says it: “I don’t give a fuck.” That’s his thing, not giving a fuck.

He offers this argument in defence of Bacon:

Imagine if Richard Bacon had actress Sasha Grey as a guest, someone who is known for her cross-over from pornography. He warns the audience over and over that some of her x-rated work would be upsetting. You race to your computer to watch, then blame Mr Bacon and implore folks to file complaints saying that Richard Bacon was “directing” you to do so?

For the comparison to work Bacon would tell his listeners: “Sasha Grey is here. Just a remarkable actress. If you haven’t seen her and want a flavour of what she’s like go to a search engine now and type “Sasha Grey Anal Cavity” [laughs] and get back to me.” I somehow doubt Bacon would feel comfortable about that, realising it might overstep a line or two at the BBC.

Here’s a more direct analogy. Stanhope describes his stuff as “flat out shock humour”. Imagine he’s got a shock routine, equal in depravity to the Palin one, only this time it’s about one of the Obama kids. On Stanhope’s terms it could be defended as a satire on politicians using their children in politics or something. For argument’s sake, let’s say it’s an expletive-filled violent pornographic fantasy revelling in the prospect of raping one of the young Obamas. Is that about on a par with fantasising about shooting Palin’s child in the head as it’s born? I don’t know, but we’re playing imagine so let’s imagine it is. Now, would Richard Bacon have said to listeners, “If you want a flavour of what he’s like, go to YouTube and type ‘Doug Stanhope Barack Obama'” knowing full well that’s what people would find? No, of course not. It’s the fact that Stanhope’s target was Palin’s child that made it OK to mention because hey, that shit’s cool and hip right there. Stuff about underage Obamas – man, that would be just sick.

Interestingly, if you do a YouTube search for “Doug Stanhope Barack Obama” it turns up a video which includes a clip of him discussing his choice for president in 2008. He says he’d like to vote libertarian but can’t bring himself to do so. His choice instead?

“Barack Obama’s my fucking dude. He’s fucking cool to watch, so why not? It’d fucking make us look better to the rest of the world when I go to play in fucking Norway next time or England or the UK. They won’t spit in my sandwich because they heard my accent and think I’m an asshole.”

For someone who doesn’t give a fuck he seems unduly worried what right-on Euroweenies think of him. Still, it’s one more reason for Richard Bacon to like him.

Oh, and before any Stanhope fans come on here and tell me I don’t “get” him – don’t bother. I do. So go fuck yourself in the head instead.

UPDATE 17.30. Apology to the DSA from BBC 5 Live and Richard Bacon:

The Down’s Syndrome Association has today received and accepted a full apology from Radio 5 Live and Broadcaster Richard Bacon following his show on Thursday 4th August. The official statement and letter are printed below.

Statement on behalf of 5 live:

“During a live interview on Thursday 4th August with American comedian Doug Stanhope, Richard Bacon made an unscripted comment referencing an online clip of one of his guest’s stand-up performances.

“Richard has apologised for referring his listeners to the video of his guest. At no stage did he or does he condone the offensive material in that sketch, none of which was broadcast on 5 live. It was still unacceptable to highlight the clip and he fully accepts that it was inappropriate. It falls below the standards our audience expects from us and both he and 5 live apologise unreservedly for any offence caused.”

Letter from Richard Bacon:

I am writing to apologise for any offence caused by my live interview with the American comedian, Doug Stanhope, on the 5 live radio show on Thursday 4 August.

In order to illustrate the comedic style of Stanhope’s stand-up performances, I referenced available You Tube clips. This was a poor recommendation and I whole heartedly accept that this reference was inappropriate because of the subject matter. I full well understand my responsibilities as a broadcaster and such a reference fell below the standards I set myself personally in my broadcasting.

I am sorry if the reference has caused offence to anyone in anyway. I shouldn’t have done it.

Yours sincerely,

Richard Bacon


Further to yesterday’s blog post, the Down’s Syndrome Association has issued the following statement:

DSA make official complaint following Richard Bacon’s Radio 5 Live Show

The Down’s Syndrome Association is shocked that a BBC employee has publicised the work of a comedian which is nothing more than a vile offensive rant and conflicts with BBC guidelines which state a responsibility to ‘protect the vulnerable and avoid unjustifiable offence’. During Richard Bacon’s BBC 5 show yesterday afternoon he directed listeners to a video of Doug Stanhope discussing the son of Sarah Palin on YouTube. The child was born with Down’s syndrome and Mr Stanhope’s comments about him were abhorrent.

As a public body the BBC should not be promoting the work of such an individual. Therefore the Down’s Syndrome Association has logged an official complaint with the BBC. We encourage everyone to do to the same using the link below –

On Twitter yesterday Bacon stated:

I don’t like what he said in that clip. And I don’t endorse it. I meant only for people to see his STYLE.

Make up your own minds.

Richard Bacon (mp3)


Here’s Richard Bacon introducing one of his guests this afternoon:

“Doug Stanhope is here. Just a remarkable stand-up comic. If you haven’t seen him and want a flavour of what he’s like go to YouTube now and type “Doug Stanhope Sarah Palin” [laughs] and get back to me.”

Bacon could have recommended any Stanhope routine, but it was the Palin one he wanted his listeners to hear. Here’s the meat of it:

Sarah Palin is the most fucking horrible, horrible [sic] – on so many levels…

Sarah Palin is this woman – she’s the mother of five, two of whom are retarded. One of them has Down’s Syndrome and the other volunteered for Iraq. She’s got a baby with Down’s Syndrome for Christ’s sake. How do you expect America to get behind her when even God hates her…

…after that last fucking retard baby came out of her – did you see the size of the head on that thing? The alien skull on that fucking retard baby had to tear her apart. Can you imagine the carnage, the violence of that thing coming out of her. It’s like someone stood at the foot of her cunt and yelled “Hey Kool Aid!” They [sic] bursting through her. That baby had to do more damage to her undercarriage than the Viet Cong did to McCain’s entire upper torso. I believe that if she were in the White House when she tried to deliver that child the secret service would’ve had to shoot it in the soft spot as it was crowning to save her… I think the Democratic Party is really dropping the ball if they don’t hammer the big cunt retard baby issues for the rest of this campaign and just stay on point. Don’t get distracted with all the other nonsense. Stay on point. Bring everything back to big cunt retard baby. They shoulda done that in the vice presidential debates and Biden dropped the ball. Everything shoulda come back to – whatever red herring she tries to throw at you – “Well I broke up the old boy network when I was the governor of Alaska” ” I heard the only thing you broke up was that sorry cunt of yours when you fucking threw that spastic out of your tard launcher, that’s what I heard.” And the moderator would’ve said “You have two minutes to rebut the big cunt retard baby allegations” and she’ll throw some other nonsense – “How’s your campaign equipped to deal with that proverbial 3am phone call?” And he goes “I don’t know but we’re not going to have some fucking waterhead running around kicking the phone of the hook so it goes straight to voicemail with his tongue on the button. I know that! What’s up with that?” And then the moderator would chastise the crowd to hold their applause to the end and remain seated. “What’s your record on earmarks?” “What’s your record on spitting out fucking bulb-headed [laughs] – I heard your fucking snatch is so split open they had to put a tent zipper on your snatch so your guts don’t shoot out when you sneeze. That’s what I heard.”

The routine ends with Stanhope saying: “Fuck you, go blog about it.” Thanks, I am doing.

This hateful shit is amusing to Bacon because it’s about Palin. The fact that he felt comfortable recommending it to his listeners speaks volumes about the groupthink that pervades the BBC/media luvvy world he inhabits.

This recent retweet by Newsnight’s Gavin Esler reveals the same mindset:

If anybody thinks the BBC’s coverage of the 2012 presidential election will be impartial I’ve got something they might like to buy.

(I read somewhere that Richard Bacon’s wife is pregnant. I hope she has a safe pregnancy, an easy birth and a healthy child.)

Young Voters’ Question Time

If comments on Twitter are anything to go by, Richard Bacon was an extremely inept and very biased host on last night’s Young Voters’ Question Time. This will come as no surprise to regular readers of this blog who already know that he is simply incapable of being impartial and shouldn’t be covering politics at all, either on BBC TV or radio. One audience member even tweeted that Bacon said openly that he was going to vote “yes” in the AV referendum. Quality impartial BBC journalism, that.

Click on the images to view just some of last night’s Twitter commentary.


More still:

And to counter any feeble suggestions that Bacon doesn’t have a dog in this fight, here’s what a member of the audience tweeted:


Here’s Richard Bacon dog-whistling his Twitter followers to get angry about a New York newspaper which is not supporting the Democrats:

Murdoch’s New York Times? Someone’s a bit too keen to play the Murdoch card to bother paying attention to detail, there. The image to which he links is of the New York Post. The New York Times is, as usual, backing the Democrats, which is what all newspapers are supposed to do (in the mind of a right-on BBC media luvvie, that is).

(Richard Bacon occasionally accepts money in exchange for putting his name to pointless drivel in The Sun. Sorry, I mean “Murdoch’s Sun”.)