Printable version of thread

Posted by: Big Boobs Vjay! 4th November 2019, 12:07 PM

A thread for egregious examples of pro government BBTory bias. We can't list every example as it never ends.

This week: Bojo got booed out of a hospital. BBTory buried the story. Corbyn was greeted at a hospital. BBTory: Corbyn is politicising the nhs. Sigh. I guess it's only not politicising it when you're privatising it. Complaining about privatisation is politicisation.

Posted by: Tones and Iz 4th November 2019, 12:18 PM

Well, I posted this in the Labour thread but to rejoice in this thread let's put it here:

Oh, and by the way: the first person to respond with the 'well if both the right-wing and the left-wing complain about the BBC it must be in the middle' gets a VERY withering look.

Posted by: Big Boobs Vjay! 4th November 2019, 12:37 PM

Remember the Russian hat gate? BBTory cleared itself over it, and that is part of the problem! It dismisses criticism.

Posted by: JüpaHulaHula 4th November 2019, 03:24 PM

https://www.thelondoneconomic.com/opinion/jeremy-corbyn-is-the-most-smeared-politician-in-history/18/07/

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2019/nov/04/no-10-blocks-russia-eu-referendum-report-until-after-election

Need I say more? 😑

Posted by: Big Boobs Vjay! 8th November 2019, 08:46 AM

https://news.sky.com/story/jeremy-corbyn-proposes-bbc-overhaul-as-part-of-labours-radical-media-plans-11479466?fbclid=IwAR2kp2O-6URs-Po3AvPhYa4isUfMoHfDkfNDyxSanFIaZpQ9JG-6C3fOYX4

Labour wants to completely reform it. BBTory have brought this on themselves!

Posted by: Big Boobs Vjay! 11th November 2019, 12:52 PM

https://www.mirror.co.uk/news/politics/breaking-bbc-uses-old-footage-20858947?fbclid=IwAR0twxx7A2a_N3_tdmaGns_68n-xNh5DUXGWIUiKotIA_virpyLxLqwcqes

BbTory protecting Bojo again and also not reporting on the fact that Congress is talking about him as compromised by russian agents.

Posted by: Botchia 11th November 2019, 10:13 PM

All decent suggestions tbf

Posted by: blacksquare 15th November 2019, 02:05 PM

Very normal.

Posted by: Big Boobs Vjay! 15th November 2019, 02:19 PM

Oh my GOD. The state propaganda news channel has to go.

Posted by: Tones and Iz 16th November 2019, 08:56 AM

Relevant Guardian opinion article: https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2019/nov/15/tories-rightwing-press

Sharing it because it's an interesting read about how devoid of democratic process our press is, but also to make a point that we need to be fighting back rather than just moaning about it. Grassroots campaigning and new media (from online print publications to a rise of video makers, we can share and drown out the noise of the reality-devoid right-wing points.

Posted by: Big Boobs Vjay! 16th November 2019, 11:15 AM

Labour has complained to Ofcom about the pro-Tory bias at Murdoch's Sky News!

It is hard ro fight against the anti-democratic FLOODS of misinformation and propaganda (and their ignoring of Tory gaffes/ problems). It takes over the discourse and brainwashes the simple-minded, thr gullible, and people who don't even have access to the internet to see our videos and left media in the first place! Look at common sense! He's completely far gone. Completely brainwashed.

Posted by: Brett-Butler 16th November 2019, 11:27 AM

Rupert Murdoch doesn't own Sky News. Fox sold its share in Sky last year.

Posted by: Big Boobs Vjay! 16th November 2019, 11:51 AM

I didn't know that. They haven't changed stance much though!!

https://www.businessinsider.com/former-troll-russia-disinformation-campaign-trump-2017-10?utm_source=facebook&utm_medium=referral&utm_content=topbar&utm_term=desktop&referrer=facebook&fbclid=IwAR05ckABJsAMRkybbbrJz7lPlT9tVnL2WyK_FiPlRqRz9eARhDVN9LjXzvY&r=US&IR=T

This is what a Russian troll revealed about the troll farms. Umm has anyone checked common sense's ip location??

Posted by: common sense 16th November 2019, 03:18 PM

Did someone mention me?

Posted by: common sense 16th November 2019, 03:19 PM

Okay time to come clean. I'm a RUSSIAN.

Posted by: blacksquare 18th November 2019, 12:24 PM

Absolutely no bias in this reporting at all — the tone is completely impartial.

Posted by: Big Boobs Vjay! 18th November 2019, 12:37 PM

The utter bias!! You can tell she's a Tory.

Posted by: blacksquare 18th November 2019, 12:50 PM

It really is tiring.

Posted by: Doctor Sleep 18th November 2019, 06:45 PM

I don't watch BBC News anymore - Channel 4 News is a lot better plus they give an hour for the news which means that they can cover it in much more depth/detail.

Posted by: Big Boobs Vjay! 18th November 2019, 07:14 PM

People are asking C4 to investigate BBTory bias. It's bad. We have a state propaganda channel, just likr Russia, Iran and North Korea.

Posted by: blacksquare 19th November 2019, 09:46 AM

She's not even pretending anymore, and the story linked doesn't actually mention any Tory candidate. He was suspended over alleged anti-semitic comments about the Holocaust. Is that not worth mentioning because it doesn't fit a particular narrative?

This, and the Peter Oborne https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2019/nov/18/boris-johnson-lying-media?CMP=twt_gu&utm_medium=&utm_source=Twitter#Echobox=1574104702, go hand-in-hand.

Posted by: Tawdry Hepburn 19th November 2019, 10:48 AM

Bloody hell.

I didn't quite realise just how much of a nasty piece of work Laura Kuennsberg was until recently, but it really has become apparent with such crystal clarity.

She's being paid her £250k salary for what is supposed to be an "impartial" political commentator role, but she's essentially Boris Johnson's mouthpiece and she's ramping it up atm. Grim.

Posted by: Big Boobs Vjay! 19th November 2019, 11:49 AM

100% agreed. Grim is thr word. BBTory news just needs axing at this point. We don't need it, and this vile evil authoritarian proto-fascist Tory gkvernment has shown just how easily an authoritarian government can co-opt it and turn it into pro-government state propaganda. In the sea!

Posted by: TheSnake 19th November 2019, 02:26 PM

So a lot of us here now prefer ITV equivalent Robert Peston (who a lot of people find annoying, a bit unfairly imo) to the BBC's Laura Kuennsberg. Never would have thought that in a million years!

Where is the link for this story?

Posted by: blacksquare 19th November 2019, 02:50 PM

Posted by: Big Boobs Vjay! 19th November 2019, 03:21 PM

Imagine if that were a Labour candidate!! BbTory would never stop. The Tories under Bojo have lurched so far right, these bnp nutjobs have joined - and their chickens have come home to roost.

Posted by: TheSnake 19th November 2019, 03:22 PM

Oh it wasn't showing up on my computer for some reason before...thanks for reposting.

Posted by: blacksquare 19th November 2019, 03:45 PM

Oh, no, you hadn’t missed it.

Laura Kuennsberg didn’t post a story about it, just one about Labour.

Posted by: blacksquare 20th November 2019, 09:26 AM

Laura Kuenssberg finds it ‘daft’ that people have an issue with the Tories rebranding themselves as ‘FactCheck UK’ during the debate. BBCRealityCheck are the only fact checker that haven’t responded. The other factcheckers condemned it as an attempt to mislead voters.

Fortunately, someone has been doing their job at the BBC.

Posted by: 5 Silas Frøkner 20th November 2019, 06:52 PM

It’s refreshing to see people waking up to the walking propaganda outfit that is BBC News. We’ve been dismissed as being loons or cybernats for years now for correctly pointing out that BBC is a unionist Tory propaganda outfit and nothing more. BBC Scotland especially horrendous to the point that it’s now completely unwatchable. Thank god for STV

Posted by: Big Boobs Vjay! 20th November 2019, 07:56 PM

THIS!! It's state propaganda.

BBTory has been quoting a FAKE YOUTORY POLL THAT WAS RELEASED AN HOUR BEFORE THE DEBATES THAT CLAIMED BOJO WON, WITH A SAMPLE SIZE OF 100!!!!! Every other poll, with samples up to 30k each, have been massive victories for Corbyn, 70%, etc. YouTory published a fake poll and it's the only one BBTory used to inform their 'coverage'. Dystopian nightmare.

Posted by: Doctor Sleep 20th November 2019, 08:45 PM

Can I just say how much I am enjoying 'Woke Oborne'? His article in the Guardian yesterday was class, and the rant at Kuenssberg's blatant bias on R2 the other week brilliant.



YES to Woke Oborne.

Posted by: Suedehead2 20th November 2019, 09:18 PM

Do you have sources for these assertions?

I saw some claims last night about the YouGov poll results supposedly being released before the debate had even started. I saw nothing that convinced me that the alleged tweet was actually put out at the time claimed. Even if it was, it could still have been a cock-up. It is likely that YouGov will have prepared a tweet for at least three possible outcomes of their poll - a near 50-50 split, a clear Corbyn win and a clear Johnson win. You cannot rule out the possibility that one of them was released in error. Similar things have happened before

Where did the sample size of 100 come from? YouGov, along with other major pollsters, are signed up to a code of conduct. Among other things, that should forbid claiming that a reliable result can be obtained from a sample as small as 100. Can you provide links to these other polls?

Posted by: vidcapper 21st November 2019, 06:30 AM

I'm assuming you are not referring to a voting system here?

Posted by: 5 Silas Frøkner 21st November 2019, 07:37 AM

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/STV_(TV_channel)

The independent holder of the ITV franchise in North & Central Scotland (notably not the tory leaning border region which is lumped in with Cumbria in ITV Borders) and is the only part of the Channel 3 network not owned and operated by ITV Plc. It carries a lot of ITV content but the news and current affairs are all programmed locally.

Posted by: vidcapper 21st November 2019, 08:23 AM

OK, thank you for the clarification.

Posted by: blacksquare 22nd November 2019, 10:22 AM

Well, well.

Posted by: Klaus 22nd November 2019, 10:36 AM

Reality Check is good and all but it’s nowhere near as prominent as it needs to be. It was there during the referendum and I’m sure (although don’t want to state this as a fact) that the BBC themselves were critical of the level of exposing false information in the referendum.

Just look at the most recent example with the man saying more than 50% of people in the UK earn more than £80,000 as I put in the other thread. The Reality Check has rightly stated he is in the Top 5%

However, how worthwhile is it posting this information 12 hours after the actual event, which was broadcast to potentially millions of viewers and then the clip was uploaded on their Twitter account without any statement that what he was saying was wrong, on a secondary account that may or may not be retweeted by the BBC News account. Particularly when all the information from reality check appears to be uploaded on social media accounts rather than broadcast on the TV.

There needs to be a reality check team on all political TV shows to immediately call out any false information.

Posted by: Tones and Iz 22nd November 2019, 02:09 PM

It may be a silly thing, but the name of Reality Check itself feels wrong. Too authoritative and paternalistic, which I feel puts people on the defensive when checking it - don't underestimate people's willingness to disagree with reality. They themselves can be okay but as shown today, often too late.

Full Fact is for my money a far superior fact checker.

Disturbing. That's the JOB of the supposed neutral news - to correctly say 'this person is lying', when they are - and, when they continually do so, to call them a liar. Indicative in that statement is that they would have to call Johnson at least a liar along with everyone else on the right perpetuating fake news, and they're not willing to do that.

God, imagine a universe where Johnson, or any future chancer, puts out a dodgy claim and in reporting on it, the BBC directly said after it 'Johnson has lied X times about similar subjects, you might find these links relevant'.

Posted by: Suedehead2 23rd November 2019, 01:13 PM

It is being alleged that the person who asked the first question on Thursday's Question Time (standard edition, not the leaders' show last night) was a Tory councillor. Yet, only the previous week, the chair of Brighton and Hove Lib Dems was told she couldn't be in the audience because local party officers were barred from the show in election campaigns. Of course, the likelihood is that the person involved failed to declare that he was a councillor, in which case this should perhaps be in the Tory lies thread.

Posted by: blacksquare 23rd November 2019, 04:12 PM

Managed to keep the applause, though.

Posted by: 5 Silas Frøkner 23rd November 2019, 05:19 PM

There needs to be a root and branch review of the BBC from the top down. This is what I expect from the media in Russia, China and North Korea. Not a functioning democracy

Posted by: Big Boobs Vjay! 23rd November 2019, 05:21 PM

Our democracy has failed. Once you let the Tories in, they'll never get out. They have turned the BBTory into state propaganda.

Posted by: Big Boobs Vjay! 23rd November 2019, 05:25 PM

They edited this and they edited the memorial day footage to protect him. Absolutely vile. Axe the BBTory!! Give Doc Who and Esstenders to ITV. They'll do a better job with them anyway.

Posted by: common sense 23rd November 2019, 05:42 PM

Don't see anything wrong with editing booing out. It's disrespectful to boo our newly elected PM so the BBC was right imo to edit it out. Nothing to see here folks.

Posted by: common sense 23rd November 2019, 05:43 PM

The memorial day editing was a genuine mistake and we've moved on since then.

Posted by: coi 23rd November 2019, 05:48 PM

I watched both of these clips again from the programmes where they were broadcast, the BBC News broadcast at 1pm is only a 12 minute programme and they would have only edited it to reduce the length of the clip - they cut out the bit where Johnson was stuttering and repeating himself so they can get straight to his answer, and they would have cut out the applause as well if the applause wasn't still going on when his full sentence started. They did the same for the applause after a question to Jo Swinson (cutting it out to get straight from the question to the answer), so I doubt it's bias but rather just clipping the video to fit in their short broadcast time.

Posted by: Klaus 23rd November 2019, 05:48 PM

You’re the perfect pawn to live in a dictatorship.

Posted by: Big Boobs Vjay! 23rd November 2019, 05:57 PM

An unelected oaf not fit for office who doesn't deserve any respect. At all. Enjoy your dictatorship x The BBTory has shown with this that what happened with the memorial footage was NOT a mistake, not that it ever COULD have been one, seeing as they had to delve deep into the archives for it.

Posted by: common sense 23rd November 2019, 05:58 PM

See folks. The real explanation. Have just watched them again too and coi is spot on. The fact Jo was edited too means there was no bias and am sure the BBC will point that out.

Posted by: common sense 23rd November 2019, 05:59 PM

So are you saying the BBC tells lies too?

Posted by: common sense 23rd November 2019, 06:44 PM

Union leaders have reacted with dismay to the Conservatives proposing to introduce laws to prevent all-out rail strikes.

The party, which is due to unveil its manifesto on Sunday, has announced plans to legislate for minimum train services to run during industrial action in the event that it secures a majority government in the upcoming election.

Train operators and unions would be required to sign an agreement to run a minimum number of services in the event of strikes.

The Rail, Maritime and Transport (RMT) trade union has pledged to lobby against any attempt to stop its members from going on strike.

Posted by: Suedehead2 23rd November 2019, 07:10 PM

Somehow, I don't think the Daily Mail would have accepted that excuse if they had cut Jeremy Corbyn being booed.

Posted by: Tawdry Hepburn 23rd November 2019, 07:34 PM

Stop using "we" and "our" as if you speak for any of us, because you don't.

Posted by: vidcapper 24th November 2019, 06:35 AM

You do remember that 'no adverts' is one of the BBC's main selling points?

Posted by: coi 25th November 2019, 02:45 PM

The response from the BBC seems to match up with what I said - and I said it first

Posted by: blacksquare 25th November 2019, 03:19 PM

Editing out one second of laughter still leaves a lasting impression, especially critical during an election. His response seemed far more confident than the reality. The BBC shouldn’t be making mistakes like this so often, intended or not. I’m unconvinced.

How is this impartial and balanced? It’s classic spin.

Posted by: Big Boobs Vjay! 25th November 2019, 06:10 PM

Sooo why have they now apologised?

Posted by: common sense 25th November 2019, 06:16 PM

I mean us the general public and not all you Boris and Tory haters here.

Posted by: mald487 25th November 2019, 07:17 PM

The general public consists of many different people with different opinions, you might speak for some of them but you certainly don't speak for many.

We don't like him because his actions and his party are despicable and he doesn't give a shit about vulnerable people on society.

It's not about "winning" or "losing", this isn't an episode of X Factor.

Stop being so bloody childish. You're what, 65?

Posted by: common sense 25th November 2019, 07:21 PM

How rude. I'll be 60 in January and look nowhere near my age.


Of course it's about winning or losing. All the parties refer to winning the election or winning a majority. No one likes a loser.

Posted by: T Boy 25th November 2019, 07:25 PM

You’d know, I guess.

Jokes aside, people don’t dislike someone just because they didn’t win something. They dislike them because they’re either utterly horrific as people or they will stop you getting what you want.

Posted by: Big Boobs Vjay! 25th November 2019, 07:27 PM

If you care about winning or losing, go watch X Factor. Leave politics to the young who care about FIXING THE COUNTRY, not bragging about "winning" on a few internet forums.

Posted by: mald487 25th November 2019, 07:58 PM

The parties may "win" or "lose" but this isn´t one big game. A vote for Tory means years more austerity and hardship for many.

I have friends and family(degree educated) who are working harder than ever but are getting POORER. This wasn´t happening to them under Labour.

Of course this is an alien concept to you because you´ve NEVER had to lift a finger on your ADULT life. So forgive us if we take issue when you start to spout nonsense about how people shouldn´t be so greedy and should be happy with their lot when you literally get money for doing SWEET F.A.

Maybe if you had to actually get off the sofa and go and earn your crust for the pittance that many people get in return, then you would have a different view.

Posted by: common sense 25th November 2019, 08:12 PM

Except us oldies have been around a bit longer, have more life experience and may know what's best for the country.

Posted by: T Boy 25th November 2019, 08:16 PM

Being older doesn’t mean you know any better. Having experience can mean anything and everyone’s experience is different.

I hate being in that in between age where I’m no longer ‘young’ but I still get condescended to by older people, I would have hoped that would have stopped by now.

Posted by: ElectroBoy 25th November 2019, 08:21 PM

Never read such shit in my life

Posted by: mald487 25th November 2019, 08:28 PM

How do YOU know what´s best for the country??

Times change, things move on, work differently.

Not wanting to go all Michael here but there are many young creative minds out there, whose ideas and concepts need a chance to be allowed to shine through.

Posted by: Tawdry Hepburn 25th November 2019, 08:39 PM

OK boomer.

Posted by: Tawdry Hepburn 25th November 2019, 08:46 PM

Anyway, you don't even know your arse from a hole in the ground let alone what's best for the country.

Posted by: common sense 25th November 2019, 08:51 PM

You don't even know me. All you know is what you see typed on a screen. For all you lot know I may be a 25 year-old woman.

Posted by: Tawdry Hepburn 25th November 2019, 09:00 PM

I think when you see thousands upon thousands of somebody's posts on an internet forum you get a pretty good insight into how their mind works, regardless of whether you know them or not.

But just because you're old doesn't automatically mean some of the things you come out with deserve to be given credence or that you have the wisdom of somebody younger than you.

Posted by: blacksquare 27th November 2019, 03:18 PM

This is ridiculous. They should have had all leaders confirmed before airing any notoriously difficult Andrew Neil interviews. Another potential breach of impartiality.

Corbyn didn't perform well yesterday and he certainly didn't make any new fans. Sturgeon also struggled. I don't particularly enjoy the Neil style of interviewing, he routinely interrupts, but I knew that Johnson would have to deal with the same.

Posted by: Suedehead2 27th November 2019, 04:21 PM

I assume the BBC felt they had to go ahead with the earlier Andrew Neil interviews to avoid running out of time. Johnson has already wimped out the seven-way debate on Friday.

Posted by: common sense 27th November 2019, 04:25 PM

My guess is that Boris won't do it which I suppose is his right. They may think he has nothing really to gain and plenty to lose by doing it as Neil can ask some awkward questions as showed with Corbyn. Someone on DS has emailed him daring him to ask Boris about the wrong DWP assessments and why so many appeals succeed.

Posted by: blacksquare 27th November 2019, 04:29 PM

It'll be interesting to see what happens here.

Posted by: mald487 27th November 2019, 04:31 PM

"Daring?" As if that's a naughty question to ask?? Those are the types of questions he SHOULD be being asked. He's Prime Minister FFS!

Posted by: common sense 27th November 2019, 04:34 PM

Yes I know he should be asking that. Why millions of taxpayers money are being wasted on appeals which wouldn't be needed if the correct decision had been made in the first place.

Posted by: Suedehead2 27th November 2019, 04:35 PM

Don't you think answering difficult questions should be considered part of the job of being PM?

Posted by: common sense 27th November 2019, 04:37 PM

Yes of course I do and would like him to ask that myself and see how he answers it.

Posted by: Suedehead2 27th November 2019, 04:40 PM

So the fact that he may manage to duck out of such an interview ought to make him less suitable for the job? Don't try and say he's busy running the country unless you can guarantee there will spend no time electioneering between now and polling day.

Posted by: common sense 27th November 2019, 04:42 PM

I agree he should do the interview and we've yet to learn whether or not he will do.

Posted by: Brett-Butler 27th November 2019, 05:55 PM

If Boris Johnson chickens out of the Andrew Neil interview, what the BBC should do is give the slot over to Andrew Neil to deliver a 30 minute monologue on Johnson & the Tories' record over the past few years. Anyone who's watched This Week will know just how powerful his 2-minute opening monologues can be (in particular his evisceration of Fidel Castro & his legacy was particularly scathing), so imagine if he was given 30 minutes to do the same, straight to camera, on the Tories legacy since 2010? It would be even more devestating to Boris than any interview with him could ever be.

Posted by: common sense 27th November 2019, 05:58 PM

I think you'd find that would break impartiailty rules and land the BBC in a heap of trouble with Ofcom as the Tories would complain.

Posted by: blacksquare 27th November 2019, 05:58 PM

Yikes

Posted by: Brett-Butler 27th November 2019, 05:59 PM

Just stick an "empty chair" in the room with him. Problem solved.

Posted by: common sense 27th November 2019, 06:03 PM

Oh and Labour are just bringing up the NHS document now to deflect from the fact that he won't apologise for anti-semitism. The sooner this election campaign's over and we have a Conservative majority the better.

Posted by: ElectroBoy 27th November 2019, 06:05 PM

And the Tories and the right wing media are just bringing anti-semitism up in order to cover for Boris' lies, homophobia, sexism, racism and the fact the Tory party have their own anti-semitism and anti-islamic problems.

Why the heck shouldn't Labour bring this document into the public domain? the voters have the right to know what is being discussed and what lies the Tories are getting up to. Or should we just live in blissful ignorance, like yourself

Posted by: common sense 27th November 2019, 06:07 PM

I agree entirely with this excellent DS post.


It may just be me, but I think, we have finally hit 'peak' election time. Red and Blue seem obsessed with destroying each other at the moment.

Who's scandal is bigger, what can do the most damage to the other and how can we try and unleash all hell to the other side.

The problem with all of this ramped up rhetoric is that it's the electorate losing out.

It appears from the outside looking in that the two parties care more about destroying the other than they do actually getting elected. It was alway going to be a dirty election, however this just ramps up the clear disdain that the two parties have for each other and be damned who gets caught up in the collateral as long as the other gets rinsed.

We are at a point now where we are looking at effectively school kids screaming at each other as to who is the worst or less worse than the other and it stinks of desparation.

With the date of the country at hand with Brexit and been paralysed for years by the same thing, no one, neither of Red or Blue are coming out of this with any credit at all.

Looking further afield at the leader polls, none of them whether Red blue yellow etc have any positive outlook and that's as damning as all hell as to where we are at.

Does anyone have ideas as to how we pull ourselves back from the seeming drive to full on catastrophe as the next parliament is likely to be a very short one before it spectacularly implodes?

Posted by: common sense 27th November 2019, 06:09 PM

I think this is the peak time too and if Labour are to start closing the gap in the polls it'll be soon, this weekend maybe.

Posted by: mald487 27th November 2019, 06:23 PM

What are your thoughts on that document?

Posted by: Big Boobs Vjay! 27th November 2019, 06:29 PM

You simple-minded old fool!!

1. JC has nothing to do with antisemitism, except that it is used as a slur by right wing brainwashed dolts like yourself, as you cannot say A THING about his policies or statesmanship.
2. We have EVIDENCE now that the tories want to sell it ro the Americans.
3. They are basically following the blueprint for stealth privatisation point by point, you blinkered old dotard.
4. Antisemitism comes from the right wing. Tories have problems with it and islamophobia, so why the f*** would you want a tory majority if you ACTUALLY care about anti-semitism? Ho hmm. Questions, questions...

Posted by: Big Boobs Vjay! 27th November 2019, 06:30 PM

100% THIS. Also agreed r.e Andrew Neil. Empty chair Blojo.

Posted by: common sense 27th November 2019, 06:31 PM

1. He has failed to stamp it out in his party as he should have done as leader. What did the Rabbi say?

His policies would bankrupt the country.

Posted by: common sense 27th November 2019, 06:32 PM

It doesn't say anywhere that the NHS will not continue to be totally free, as it always has been, at the point of contact.

Posted by: common sense 27th November 2019, 06:33 PM

I agree that Boris should face Neil as the others have. Labour are taking legal advice on this as they were told all main leaders were appearing.

Posted by: Big Boobs Vjay! 27th November 2019, 06:34 PM

WROOONG. We would have lower government spending than France and a bunch of other modern countries under Labour's plans. Stop being so thick.

The rabi is a TORY and personal friend of Blojo. Do the f***in maths. Jewish groups have come out and attacked him for his politicisation of the issue.

Posted by: ElectroBoy 27th November 2019, 06:36 PM

Considering both the Lib Dems and Tories are in the same boat, the inference onto Labour is odd. Also another Tory MP has been suspended in Scotland today due to Islamaphobia.

How would his policies bankrupt the country - they've been costed haven't they? or are you taking what Sajid Javid has spun (ie making up numbers to get at Labour) as factor?

Posted by: common sense 27th November 2019, 06:36 PM

Glad you've taken me off ignore. Now may I PM you as you keep PM'ing me?

Posted by: common sense 27th November 2019, 06:38 PM

Maybe I am a fool but stop calling me old you young whipper-snapper.

Posted by: common sense 27th November 2019, 06:40 PM

I think Boris will have to appear really now. Labour consulting lawyers as they say they can prove that the BBC told them they were all taking part over 2-3 weeks. They say they'd never have agreed to take part had they known not every party had agreed. Can't see what legal action can do now Corbyn's already been on though.

Posted by: common sense 27th November 2019, 06:42 PM

I'm all for some American investment in the NHS as everyone should be if it means more money, more beds, more nurses trained.

Posted by: ElectroBoy 27th November 2019, 06:43 PM

Which off course is not what the document said or what the US intends.

Posted by: Big Boobs Vjay! 27th November 2019, 06:50 PM

Oh my god! It isn't investment.

Posted by: Tawdry Hepburn 27th November 2019, 07:23 PM

Better for who?

Posted by: common sense 27th November 2019, 07:24 PM

For the country. For all of us.

Posted by: Steve201 27th November 2019, 07:50 PM

Didn't even hear about the tory mp which says it all about coordinated media attacks are.

Posted by: ElectroBoy 27th November 2019, 07:56 PM

https://www.heraldscotland.com/news/18064079.scottish-tories-suspend-second-election-candidate-alleged-islamophobia/

I have BBC scrolling news on at work, so saw it pop up on there

Posted by: common sense 27th November 2019, 08:06 PM

Posting 6 times.

Posted by: Suedehead2 27th November 2019, 08:07 PM

The Chief Rabbi should not be assumed to be the leader of all Britain's Jews. He isn't. He has also described Johnson as a personal friend, so he is hardly impartial.

Posted by: common sense 27th November 2019, 08:08 PM

Can you delete all the duplicate posts Suedy. Ta.

Posted by: blacksquare 27th November 2019, 08:45 PM

I didn't quite buy the extent of the supposed bias before, but numerous mistakes in one direction, during one still ongoing election campaign, is quite something.

Fortunately, they are reporting even more important stuff.

Posted by: Doctor Bitch 27th November 2019, 09:10 PM

Well he's really PISSED me off there. It is cream first on a scone, what a complete TWONK. Can't even get that right!

Posted by: common sense 27th November 2019, 09:13 PM

I'd say jam then cream but never eat scones.

Posted by: Doctor Bitch 27th November 2019, 09:16 PM

Looking forward to tomorrow's in-depth BBC Political report on the Conservatives policy on the best biscuit for dunking.

That licence fee going to exceptional use.

Posted by: Brett-Butler 27th November 2019, 09:28 PM

You may joke, but I bet there's a lot of so-called "low information" voters for whom the order that one puts jam & cream on a scone could be the difference for voting for a candidate or not. Never make the mistake of thinking that people vote for rational reasons.

Posted by: common sense 27th November 2019, 09:43 PM

Yes, the electorate is very unpredictable and who knows what may influence them.

Posted by: Steve201 27th November 2019, 10:01 PM

Sorry I was at work and pressed escape and it seemed to post a load of times?!

Posted by: Steve201 27th November 2019, 10:02 PM

Idiots is what I would call them!

Posted by: common sense 27th November 2019, 10:03 PM

I keep double posting. Gremlins in here.

Posted by: Steve201 27th November 2019, 10:05 PM

Well you have been posting the same pro Tory propaganda for months now 😜

Posted by: Tones and Iz 28th November 2019, 01:32 PM

Corbyn gets a grilling in an interview. Boris Johnson gets to duck out of the interview and spread jam on scones (I mean, at least he got it the right way but that's neither here nor there). Christ this is blatant.

As Twitter thread above shows, the state of Tory control over our media is everywhere, it's beyond the BBC but they are at the centre of it. Kuenssberg just over the last 24 hours has retweeted Piers Morgan saying 'journalists should pummel Corbyn' before uncritically and literally sharing Dominic Cummings' Tory and Leave fanfiction of a blog.

It's becoming so ultimately clear what the Conservatives' plan has been, it's been going on for a while but right now it's mask f***ing off. Control the conversation, control the media, and you get to control democracy in your favour. That's what they have been working towards, and they've done it. Journalists at our state-sponsored media are sharing and amplfiying right-wing talking points while immediately questioning, downplaying and rubbishing any left media.

It's the legitimate way to turn a democracy into a one-party state with a 'natural party of government', propagandise the voters so they vote for you, even better, do it with an institution they have trusted and will accept their lines uncritically. Subtle persuasive language, add in some analysts to give their 'expert opinion', and people who do not question (which is most of the public) will never know.

to finish off, I guess they were having a normal one the other day:

Posted by: blacksquare 28th November 2019, 03:01 PM

It's working — I just had a conversation with my mother, someone who relies solely on the BBC, about how the US-UK NHS trade documents were 'fake news' because Laura Kuenssberg on BBC News had suggested so. It's hard not to sound like a conspiracy theorist when arguing with anyone who sees the BBC as completely impartial and factual.

Posted by: vidcapper 28th November 2019, 03:08 PM

Very droll.

Posted by: Steve201 28th November 2019, 03:40 PM

I can't help myself!

Posted by: Big Boobs Vjay! 28th November 2019, 06:29 PM

That is VILE. That is Putin levels of propaganda and I hope the electoral commission rakes them over the coals over this. They are ACTIVELY trying to get young people not to register to vote. This is obviously done to protect rhe Tories.

We have Tory Laura Nick Robinson whose links to the Tories run DEEEP, to say the least, plants all over ToryTime, and Andrew Neil, before we even mention that hard right old radio presenter who WE ALL KNEW WAS BIASED! He then ran to the Daily Mail after retiring, claiming he COULDN'T reveal his Tory views on the BBTory. Oh, really, then how did we all know? The fact that Andrew Neil, extremely right wing can be on the BBTory, but someone of a similar hardline position but on the LEFT being on the BBTory would be unthinkable, shows how big the problem is with the BBTory. It can't pretend to be neutral with people like him, Laura and Nick running around.

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2...vOAybvjPphou9Bw

BBTory has had to apologise over cutting out laughter, showing a three year old clip they had to get out the archives to save Bojo embarrassment over his memorial blunder, after first trying to defend both decisions!

Here we have the problems with Tory Time. First up, the Tory plant they keep wheeling out who was chosen to ask Qs to JC:

[Utl]https://dorseteye.com/ryan-jacobz-the-tory-plant-that-bbc-question-time-cannot-get-enough-of/?fbclid=IwAR2EdXKiG4PqFK0T-Aqn24BbWp7SR-aEpYI1LNzKnZT930ahHnaDRSXYsuk[/url]

A lot of Tory councillors are getting chosen, whoch is odd, as that shouldn't be allowed, and all other parties are under the impression that it's not...

Not sure how to embed tweets:

https://mobile.twitter.com/stevebrookstein/status/1198406956286971904?fbclid=IwAR3xnT_gGgdlCwXegMd4nojVA0qu38f-PLfPTSUq_D37Ti3jEFH2gk0CiO0

So the BBTory protected the Tories by searching for a part in the show where he said the same word to use that and to replace the laughter with applause. That should be a massive scandal in and of itself.

Here is the BBTory admitting it was a "mistake"!

https://www.thelondoneconomic.com/news/bbc-admits-to-making-a-mistake-when-it-edited-footage-of-audience-reactions-to-boris-johnson/25/11/?fbclid=IwAR3xsAlxqDcHmWioLK5H0g0X-guUAKq4oUazD04WHr0LdHRY2oCBYc4BjBs[/url

The Canary explains why their excuses are pathetic:


[Url=]https://www.thelondoneconomic.com/news/bbc-admits-to-making-a-mistake-when-it-edited-footage-of-audience-reactions-to-boris-johnson/25/11/?fbclid=IwAR3xsAlxqDcHmWioLK5H0g0X-guUAKq4oUazD04WHr0LdHRY2oCBYc4BjBs://https://www.thelondoneconomic.com/n...dHRY2oCBYc4BjBs

https://www.thecanary.co/trending/2019/11/2...lD03uvQ2GeG_sYE

Here is Preston claiming that Bojo WAS ALWAYS AGAINST AUSTERITY!! WOW!!

https://inews.co.uk/news/politics/boris-joh...tion-500869?amp


Here is Ofcom stating that the BBTory is at risk of destroying trust in it for a generation:

https://www.thelondoneconomic.com/news/medi...NTOVMeJP-kQxduA

It won't last. Thanks to all its pro government propaganda, it is finished when the one party state government finally gets the boot.

And here is a great piece on how the BBTory "mistskes" ALWAYS benefit the Tories but are bad for Labour. Funny that.

https://www.theguardian.com/media/2019/nov/25/bbc-admits-mistake-in-editing-out-laughter-at-johnson-in-tv-debate?fbclid=IwAR199K1JNkcpW4A3Mxr1kdHMyVYfOfZbIBqIjv8g4PFFDvvdUYcsOV39FrQ[/url!]

Aaand here's Hugh Edwards RUSHING to the defence of the BBTory and getting absolutely slammed for his ridiculous excuses.

[=url]https://www.thecanary.co/trending/2019/11/25/huw-edwards-slams-crackers-people-who-take-issue-with-the-bbc-editing-audience-reactions/?fbclid=IwAR3Zx97-tH26SUetUgnsCAy4lp_KkPivwFPoNnAtDE3Frs8BbLOlq7uoQS0://https://www.theguardian.com/media/2...rs8BbLOlq7uoQS0

And here are itv and BBTory referencing THE SMALLEST DEBATE POLL to try and say it was a draw, like Tory Laura, or that Bojo won, from a poll THAT WAS RELEASED BEFORE IT EVEN ENDED!!

https://skwawkbox.org/2019/11/20/video-youg...Nz_Kx6NlAeuAEQs

Yougov interview 1.9k people, BritainElects interviewed 39,000, and there were other similar polls showing the same, with Corbyn smashing Bojo in ALLbut that torygov one, and it wasn't close. We were talking about 70% Corbyn victories. Other polls showed him winning with the undecided voters - again, by massive margins. And yet BBTiry and ITV, plus the Tory press, o ly reported the tiny yougov one that was released before the debate ended

Posted by: Big Boobs Vjay! 28th November 2019, 07:01 PM

LOL!! I got you, beeb!



Thr channel has to go. It has lost all credibility.

Posted by: vidcapper 29th November 2019, 05:51 AM

Never mind everything non-Newsy it does?

Posted by: blacksquare 30th November 2019, 01:19 PM

Shame on the BBC for using the fatal stabbing of two people as an excuse to let Johnson grandstand without scrutiny.

Posted by: vidcapper 30th November 2019, 03:06 PM

And if he *hadn't*, you would do doubt accuse him of dodging the cameras...

Posted by: Big Boobs Vjay! 30th November 2019, 03:24 PM

Absolutely dusgraceful. They buckped the SECOND the Tories threatened them. Weak. It has no place as a state broadcaster. Axe.

Morw on that, the BBTory Trust found Tory Laura's latest Corbyn reporting to be "inaccurate". It really shows how the channel leans when someone as biased and as obvious a Tory as her is allowed to run the show.

Posted by: Suedehead2 30th November 2019, 04:00 PM

What makes you think that? When will you accept that the incoherent oaf is afraid of anything remotely resembling proper scrutiny?

Posted by: common sense 30th November 2019, 04:26 PM

AXE THE BBC? You must be joking. It's known worldwide and has an international reutation for fairness. What channel do people turn to in a dire emergency? The BBC.

Posted by: common sense 30th November 2019, 04:30 PM

What are you on about? He was scheduled to appear on Marr before the stabbings happened and will be scrutinised by him!

Posted by: Big Boobs Vjay! 30th November 2019, 04:37 PM

Bojo is a WEAK WORM. BBTory is little better for letting him escape scrutiny after LYING to yhe left wing opposition parties by saying Bojo would also face the NOTORIOUSLY RIGHT WING Neil.

Posted by: common sense 30th November 2019, 04:40 PM

Come On Boris, Get On Neil. You can do it. Silence your critics and sock it to him.


I agree he should go on.

Posted by: common sense 30th November 2019, 04:42 PM

She's not running the show though Michael. She has bosses. She's only a reporter, the political editor. She has senior editors and the head of news above her.

Posted by: Big Boobs Vjay! 30th November 2019, 04:46 PM

The weak and wobbly etonian SENT HIS DAD AROUND TV TO DEFEND HIM!! He signals for interviewers to stop questions ANGRILY and they comply, as he is their overlord. WEAK.

Posted by: Suedehead2 30th November 2019, 04:49 PM

No he wasn't. Johnson wanted to appear on the programme but the BBC said he had to agree to an interview with Andrew Neil first. He refused, so the BBC said he wouldn't be on Marr.

Marr is not as incisive an interviewer as Neil. Why do you think Johnson is so keen to avoid the latter?

Posted by: common sense 30th November 2019, 04:53 PM

Oh sorry I hadn't heard that about them keeping him off unless he went on Neil.

Marr can be a bit like a dog with a bone with a question though and keep asking it to try and get an answer.

Posted by: common sense 30th November 2019, 04:55 PM

No. Yesterday's LBC incident has been debunked. He was copying the editor who made the mouth sign just before him, to get the producer to get the caller off.

Posted by: Big Boobs Vjay! 30th November 2019, 05:01 PM

No. The media was protecting him and leapt into action ehen he wanted to ditch a question about the nhs.

Posted by: common sense 30th November 2019, 05:11 PM

Oh well if the media is protecting him a bit if it helps us not get Corbyn in No.10 it'll be a job well done.

Posted by: ChristmaSteve201 2nd December 2019, 10:55 PM

So you admit the media are on the tories side to keep the establishment in power?

Posted by: Crazy Chris-tmas 2nd December 2019, 10:59 PM

Maybe a bit but we need a Tory government returned to get Brexit done. Remember it's oven ready.

Posted by: ChristmaSteve201 2nd December 2019, 11:02 PM

The oven hasn't even been switched on.

At any rate the tories always find a reason to ask you to vote for them - they are addicted to power!

Posted by: Doctor Bitch 3rd December 2019, 01:35 AM

I prefer the term 'half baked', or to put it another way - 'this is just the withdrawal agreement that confirms how much we are paying the EU (£39 bn), agrees citizens rights once the UK is outside the EU, both of UK citizens in EU countries and vice-versa, and also border and customs arrangements such as keeping Northern Ireland in the single market/customs union. It speaks nothing to the trade arrangements that will be thrashed out over the (at least) next 3 years, nor the fact that the Tories have thrown away much of their bargaining position by stubbornly refusing to extend the transition period to beyond 31 December 2020 despite the fact that an extension will be required to get something favourable, meaning the EU can do exactly what they did last time and offer whatever terms they want and wait for the UK to be forced into accepting them under time constraints.'

Posted by: vidsanta 3rd December 2019, 05:56 AM

Are you sure that Corbyn's motives for wanting power are so pure?

Posted by: ChristmaSteve201 3rd December 2019, 01:32 PM

No but I agree with this economic, foreign policy and social views.

Posted by: December Dong 4th December 2019, 03:36 PM

https://inews.co.uk/news/politics/jeremy-corbyn-537890?fbclid=IwAR3mSCDrMg5bhJEcvvdvGzLnYHOjDuKTXjIRKafWaX3AQAnJx9wyq9Y7iWs

Corbyn has officially called out BBTory bias.

Posted by: vidsanta 4th December 2019, 03:53 PM

Yes, three months ago, in an non-mainstream article...

Posted by: Crazy Chris-tmas 4th December 2019, 04:07 PM

What about the fact that he'd keep a nuclear deterrent but would never use it?

Posted by: blacksquare 4th December 2019, 04:26 PM

'i' has won numerous journalism awards (including Newspaper of the Year) and, as of last week, is https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-50598506.

Perhaps you'll want to start reading it now.

Michael less so.

Posted by: Suedehead2 4th December 2019, 05:00 PM

It isn't owned by the Daily Mail yet. It has to be approve by the Competition and Markets Authority.

Posted by: ChristmaSteve201 5th December 2019, 12:43 AM

I agree wholeheartedly as I don't want a PM acting like a strongman which could potentially kill millions of people(even though in reality they would have no power as the United States holds all the cards here). One thing I would say is that they shouldn't have it in the first place.

Posted by: vidsanta 5th December 2019, 06:04 AM

Now that really would be the ultimate collusion with the Russians.

Posted by: ChristmaSteve201 5th December 2019, 01:44 PM

How?

Posted by: December Dong 5th December 2019, 01:57 PM

We don't need nukes. The end.

Posted by: vidsanta 5th December 2019, 05:00 PM

The country would be virtually defenceless.

I believe there was a Yes Minister episode on this?

Posted by: Suedehead2 5th December 2019, 05:02 PM

You mean we would be like almost every other country in the world?

Posted by: December Dong 5th December 2019, 05:12 PM

Not so. Europe, working together, is more than capable of defending itself. It's a shame the Aztecs didn't have nukes eh, or the Roman Empire, or the Babylonians. Civilizations have risen and fallen throughout history, and it's good they didn't have nukes. Humanity will continue, but it won't if we keep nuking each other. As far as we k ow we're the only highly evolved intelligence in the universe. We have a duty to preserve the species. That should be our first concern. Therefore, nukes = no no.

Posted by: Brett-Butler 5th December 2019, 07:30 PM

...and he spent 5 minutes doing just that at the end of his interview with Nigel Farage tonight, and challenged Boris to come and meet him face to face for an interview.

Posted by: Brett-Butler 5th December 2019, 07:35 PM

By Buzzjack law, any time Yes (Prime) Minister is mentioned, I am obliged to post the relevant clip -



Although it's worth mentioning that the pro-Trident argument is made by the deceitful, conniving Sir Humphrey.

My own view of Trident - Britain should agree to renew it, and then not do it and not tell anyone. They're secret nukes, who would know they're not even there?

Posted by: ChristmaSteve201 5th December 2019, 08:00 PM

The nuke issue always brings out the gammon nut jobs who think it takes a hard man to have a weapon of mass destruction.

Posted by: ChristmaSteve201 5th December 2019, 08:00 PM

Fair play!

Posted by: Brett-Butler 5th December 2019, 08:07 PM

The gauntlet is laid.

Posted by: ChristmaSteve201 5th December 2019, 09:52 PM

Seen the last part of the Farage interview there - he might be a Tory but I found myself cheering at the tv with what he said - he's by far the best interrogator on the tv - he used to make speeches like this on This Week now and again!

Posted by: Suedehead2 5th December 2019, 10:07 PM

I still find it hard to forgive him for what he did to the Sunday Times, at Murdoch's behest.

We have to accept that any political interviewer will have their own views. If they had no real interest in politics, they wouldn't be doing the job. Neil's past means we know that, on economic policy at least, he is a right-wing Tory. If he can put that to one side and demonstrate a commitment to holding politicians to account, that has to be respected - even if I still don't like him.

Posted by: December Dong 5th December 2019, 10:46 PM

https://www.mirror.co.uk/news/politics/labour-complains-bbc-chief-over-21035154?fbclid=IwAR2K8xUTadqL1yiEaraE_LwQ4GO9saagW2veomLGMPLot-7RwJPkN4bBUUc

Labour have officially complained to the BBTory about their bias. They also need to report it to the electoral commission and to Ofcom. In fact this whole election should be re-run due to the vile establishment and pro-gov bias of the media. Let's try again, and this time make it DEMOCRATIC!

Posted by: ChristmaSteve201 6th December 2019, 02:01 AM

Did you see what he said? In this interview at least he was brillant!

Posted by: vidsanta 6th December 2019, 05:44 AM

You seriously want to go through another 6 weeks of *this*? I was bored stiff after just 2 weeks!

Posted by: Suedehead2 6th December 2019, 08:13 AM

I saw his challenge to Johnson, yes. It was, indeed, brilliant.

Posted by: blacksquare 6th December 2019, 10:32 AM

Well, that is a no then.

Posted by: OVEN UN-READY. 6th December 2019, 01:00 PM

It's ridiculous that Johnson has decided to opt-out of the Andrew Neil interviews, obviously a calculated risk which he thinks he will undoubtably benefit from, let's see...

Posted by: Holly and Izzy 6th December 2019, 01:16 PM

I live in hope that he continually gets asked the question of why he refused to do it over the next week, what he's got to hide.

Conservative sources always sound ridiculously pompous: 'The public are fed up of politicians being held to account'

Posted by: Suedehead2 6th December 2019, 03:23 PM

Perhaps, in the interests of balance, the BBC should ask Labour and the Lib Dems whether they think the public has had enough of political interviews.

Posted by: December Dong 6th December 2019, 03:25 PM

Surely those who have had enough could just um SKIP the interview and watch/ do something else?

Posted by: vidsanta 6th December 2019, 03:29 PM

Who has actually had their choice of who to vote for altered by such an interview, though?

Posted by: Suedehead2 6th December 2019, 04:34 PM

That's not the point - and you know it.

Posted by: vidsanta 6th December 2019, 05:13 PM

Than what is the point, to embarrass party leaders?

Posted by: Santa Klaus 6th December 2019, 05:27 PM

Does it not exhaust you forcing yourself to play devil’s advocate 24/7?

If you don’t want politicians to be held to account, that’s fine. Vote Conservative on 12 December and they can attempt to remove judicial review of their decisions too.

Posted by: vidsanta 6th December 2019, 05:53 PM

Their decisions are reviewed by the *electorate*, that's what's gonna happen on Dec 12th.

Posted by: December Dong 6th December 2019, 05:56 PM

And like I have said, given the deception, lies and one party state-style media, this election is hardly a shining example of democracy. Sorry.

Posted by: Santa Klaus 6th December 2019, 05:59 PM

Thanks for not understanding the rule of law.

Posted by: vidsanta 6th December 2019, 06:04 PM

Will that still apply if Labour pull off a shock win?

Posted by: December Dong 6th December 2019, 07:01 PM

Not as much due to them not being the perpetrators, but yes. The Brexshit Party is running on a platform of: we have a manifesto, but we won't reveal it until after you've voted for us. Farage gets way too much airtime for having 0 seats - the Greens should get more than him. Yhat's bad. The media cheerleading the Tories on and attacking the opposition is even worse. Democracy? Hmm.

Posted by: Santa Klaus 6th December 2019, 07:45 PM

Not BBC bias but a general state of the media bias. Labour’s 20,000 more teachers/training more teachers pledge was reported by the BBC, Independent, i, Mirror and the Guardian.

I cannot find it in Daily Mail or The Sun. It is only mentioned in the Daily Express as part of reporting a criticism from BBC Breakfast.

Posted by: ChristmaSteve201 7th December 2019, 12:02 AM

Did you listen to Neill?

It's democratic to come on and defend your policies and principles against the media.

Posted by: blacksquare 9th December 2019, 06:00 PM

More great journalism from Laura Kuenssberg this evening:

Posted by: JingleBellJüpes 9th December 2019, 06:04 PM

The fact that that Kuenssberg gets paid 200k a year to peddle her crap is just heinous.

Ten times the average national yearly salary to speak shite and tell lies for ad clicks, while wearing the mask of an impartial political reporter just telling the truth.

Everyone on all sides should be concerned about that.

Posted by: blacksquare 9th December 2019, 06:07 PM

Remember when Naga Munchetty broke impartiality rules with her comments regarding Trump and racism... How has Laura Kuenssberg managed to avoid the same? She regularly spreads disinformation, Tory propaganda, and has a clear bias in one direction. Disinformation, directly from a BBC journalist, is the top story on the Mail and Telegraph. It's ridiculous.

Local journalists have been reporting circles around the mainstream journalists this election.

Posted by: Suedehead2 9th December 2019, 09:04 PM

Kuenssberg is now reporting that "Labour say" the Tories are lying. Note that she didn't qualify her report about the alleged assault in the same way. So, a blatant lie is reported as fact and the truth is reported as a Labour claim. She is, of course, not saying where the original claim came from. I'm normally all in favour of journalists being allowed to protect their sources, but not when those sources use the BBC to spread a blatant, potentially defamatory, lie.

Posted by: December Dong 9th December 2019, 09:09 PM

She needs to go. She should just go work for the tories. At least then she won't have to lie about being impartial.

Posted by: Doctor Blind 9th December 2019, 09:28 PM

I don't even watch BBC News anymore - no journalism just 'churnalism'. Absolutely awful - IF the Tories end up with a healthy majority I will not be that upset should they decide to scrap the licence fee and cut the whole thing back.

Posted by: Crazy Chris-tmas 9th December 2019, 09:31 PM

Scrapping the licence fee is needed. It's outdated and the BBC should take advertising like other channels do.

Posted by: Suedehead2 9th December 2019, 10:05 PM

And where is all that advertising income going to come from? If the BBC have to take advertising, that won't suddenly increase the amount spent on television advertising, it will just mean it gets spread across more channels. Besides, I'd prefer to be able to watch programmes without five minutes of adverts every ten minutes.

Posted by: Brett-Butler 9th December 2019, 10:57 PM

If the licence fee is scrapped (which I don't think is immediately forthcoming, regardless of who wins on Friday), I imagine its replacement will be a subscription-based service in order to use the BBC iPlayer. Given that less people are watching the BBC live than in the past, and given that many people already pay the fee monthly a la Netflix, Crunchyroll and the like (as I do), I imagine a significant amount of people would switch over without a fuss.

Posted by: Doctor Blind 9th December 2019, 11:04 PM

I don't want to turn this thread into a debate about the licence fee but I would welcome its replacement with an iPlayer subscription service.. certainly would be a much more sensible solution than this new 'BritBox' streaming service where you pay for both the TV licence, and then again for this subscription service?

Posted by: Suedehead2 10th December 2019, 07:56 AM

So goodbye BBC Introducing and any commitment to promote new music. Goodbye innovations such as Bake Off and Only Connect.

Just because the BBC’s journalism stinks at the moment, that’s no reason to destroy the whole institution.

Posted by: December Dong 10th December 2019, 06:06 PM

https://www.mirror.co.uk/news/politics/tory-chairwoman-tells-muslim-shopper-21055649?fbclid=IwAR0pcUQ18qelWYFQnhRORqzrS01OPg9fpLWhGu__SmrSPvA5I7pPpKPQans

The BBTory isn't screaming outrage over this. Selective media outrage = more bias.

Posted by: blacksquare 11th December 2019, 11:20 AM

I know I sound like a broken record but seriously — how does she still have a job with the BBC?

Posted by: JingleBellJüpes 11th December 2019, 11:23 AM

She didn't even spell check it. Wow.

Posted by: Holly and Izzy 11th December 2019, 11:26 AM

I mean, it’s near enough a modern version of the ‘coalition of chaos’ tweet. Which Johnson should be tweeting, not the BBC political editor.

Posted by: Holly and Izzy 11th December 2019, 11:42 AM

Inexcusable.

Posted by: Tawdry Hepburn 11th December 2019, 12:23 PM

I'm shocked it's only 88%, given that being truthful is such an alien concept to them.

Posted by: December Dong 11th December 2019, 12:35 PM

She needs to resign. Her bias is so, so blatant. They may as well have me on as the left wing correspondent for balance if they're going to allow these very obvious right wingers to dominate.

Posted by: blacksquare 11th December 2019, 03:21 PM

Isn't it against electoral law to view postal votes ahead of the election? Isn't it illegal to broadcast details of how people have voted ahead of the election?

Whatever the laws or the rules are — it's incredibly dubious for someone in her position to be acting so carelessly.

Posted by: December Dong 11th December 2019, 03:27 PM

One of the Tories, Rabb, maybe, they are all the same, blurted out live on air he'd seen postal votes!! He then tried to sidestep it. Apparently Mogg did the same and I just saw that one Tory asked constituents to send postal votes to their office?? If this is true it is DIRE. Has democracy already died?? I'm going to have to switch to the ballot box instead of postal voting. I can't trust it. That is bad when we can't even trust voting in a supposed democracy.

https://www.timesandstar.co.uk/news/18063388.candidate-faces-postal-vote-claim/

Posted by: Crazy Chris-tmas 11th December 2019, 03:34 PM

They were discussing postal votes getting looked at beforehand on DS the other day and the general consensus was that some postal votes figures do get leaked. Didn't Sturgeon say something during the Scottish referendum about it being close but quickly retracted it and then it was? They're not supposed to be opened until after the polls close but they apparently do take the outer part off to check the signature beforehand.

I know a girl who works for Newham council who's been counting votes in our town hall for a few elections now, asked me to do it if she put a word in, and she says they're all piled up on one desk unopened. Then when they start to open them a member from each party witnesses it. Who knows thought what goes on around the country?

Posted by: December Dong 11th December 2019, 03:38 PM

Right, so imagine if someone filled it in in pencil and someone is coming along looking before the count. This should not be allowed. They need to be opened in a controlled enviornment in the counting. Who knows what could happen to them otherwise - forcibly spoiled ballots, changed ballots, missing ballots, etc. Nornally this would just be conspiracy theory stuff, but apparently we have people viewing postal votes ahead of time!! So basically, who the hell knows? It just casts doubt on the process. There's a reason why it is illegal to look at them before the count. This is incredibly dangerous for democracy. Not only that, but then REPORTING on what they say, which can influence how people vote, not to mention being illegal pre-count anyway, is just unbelievable. I reaally hope it's not true. Well, that's me finished with postal voting then.

Posted by: December Dong 11th December 2019, 03:40 PM

Everywhere should do it like her place does, as it is the law.

Posted by: Crazy Chris-tmas 11th December 2019, 03:41 PM

According to this lass, they're all in boxes on a seperate table away from the counters and other people and opened with a member of each party present if they want to be. I'll ask her if they check the signatures beforehand next time I see her? What's this outer part that they're talking about on DS that they can remove first to check the signature? I've never seen a postal vote form you see. They say they can check the signature without seeing hoow you've voted.

Posted by: Crazy Chris-tmas 11th December 2019, 03:42 PM

We know that Michael, as J told me, there are strict rules for how it's done but who's to say what happens elsewhere.

Posted by: December Dong 11th December 2019, 03:43 PM

You fill in one sheet with dob and signature. That goes on the top over the voting envelope. You then fill in your vote, which goes inside a SEPARATE envelope. If they check the signature, they won't see the vote unless they open the second envelope.

Posted by: Suedehead2 11th December 2019, 03:45 PM

Yes, the signatures will generally be checked before the count. Otherwise, there would be a long delay. However, the ballot paper itself should remain in its sealed envelope until the count. They will then be opened at the count. As with the rest of the process, parties can have representatives present to observe and ensure it is done properly.

Posted by: Crazy Chris-tmas 11th December 2019, 03:46 PM

Right, so they can open the first envelope she says but NOT the second one, as they say on DS. I can't say if anything underhand goes on anywhere else can I but the returning officer should make sure it doesn't.

There have been rumours last week that Labour weren't doing well but how the hell do they know?

Posted by: Crazy Chris-tmas 11th December 2019, 03:46 PM

Yes, Suedy we know what SHOULD happen.

Posted by: December Dong 11th December 2019, 03:47 PM

But let's look at it from another angle. What if the Tory sources just PRETENDED it "looked grim" for Labour to Laura, and rhen she goes and repeats the lie? It's pure propaganda. What was she thinking repeating it!

Posted by: Crazy Chris-tmas 11th December 2019, 03:48 PM

I could have done it last time, 2015, but then as J said, they may find out and say I'm fit for work so thought it wouldn't be worth it for a few extra quid. She works in Finance and said they were short. She does a polling station all day too but you're not allowed to do your own, has to be further way from where you live. Then is up all night too!

Posted by: blacksquare 11th December 2019, 04:07 PM

She's going to be in trouble if this story gains traction. Well, you would think. So, probably not.

Posted by: December Dong 11th December 2019, 04:17 PM

People reported it to the EC, but it's a matter for Ofcom and the Met!!

It won't gain traction. The Met won't do anything, Ofcom can't, and BBTory and ITV won't mention it.

Posted by: Crazy Chris-tmas 11th December 2019, 04:19 PM

It'll be on all the new channels tonight. Remember tomorrow they can't discuss the election until 10pm. They'll just show the leaders voting.

Posted by: Suedehead2 11th December 2019, 04:34 PM

Why did you ask the question then?

Posted by: blacksquare 11th December 2019, 08:23 PM

And yet, they have removed the episode from iPlayer.

Posted by: Crazy Chris-tmas 11th December 2019, 08:35 PM

Very odd.

Posted by: Crazy Chris-tmas 11th December 2019, 10:53 PM

By Peter Oborne in The Guardian.

I’ve been a loyal Conservative voter. Until very recently, I’d exclusively worked for Conservative-leaning publications: the Telegraph, Mail, London Evening Standard, Express and Spectator. Most of my friends and relations are Conservative. But I cannot vote Conservative tomorrow.

Something horrible has happened. The Conservative party lies. It cheats. It bullies. It’s not the wise, gentle, decent party of the postwar era.

I wonder whether Boris Johnson and his squalid associates are Conservatives at all. The Conservativism I understand is about public duty, generosity, the instinct to conserve what is good in our society; the importance of the rule of law and of institutions; suspicion of leaps in the dark. I am thinking of the Conservatism of Burke, Lord Salisbury, Oakeshott.

Johnson has become the leader of a project – his adviser Dominic Cummings is an important part of this – to destroy Conservatism. This is why during his brief term as prime minister Boris Johnson has attacked parliament, mocked the rule of law, abused the monarchy, and shown a total disregard for the truth.

He suppressed a report about Russian interference in British politics, then lied about the reasons. In the past few days, the prime minister has resorted to an ugly racism towards EU nationals in a last-ditch attempt to win votes. In a genuflection to Rupert Murdoch, he’s calling the BBC licence fee into question. Johnson’s Conservatives are a revolutionary sect and should be understood as such.

That’s why many traditional Conservatives have left or been driven out of the party, including David Gauke, Rory Stewart, Amber Rudd, Michael Heseltine, Ken Clarke, Matthew Parris and many others. Former prime minister John Major’s public call not to vote for Johnson was particularly powerful.

The media makes little of this. The denunciation of Jeremy Corbyn by Ian Austin, a Labour politician of negligible importance who had already left the party, got far more coverage than the cry of despair from a former Tory prime minister.

In normal circumstances I would never vote for Labour, let alone Corbyn. I still wouldn’t if I believed the terrible charge that he is an antisemite. There is a problem of antisemitism in the Labour party. And Corbyn has handled the problem badly.

I don’t deny the dreadful actions of some members of his party, but I’m not aware of evidence of Corbyn using derogatory language about Jewish people in the way that Boris Johnson routinely has against black people, gay people and Muslims.

Imagine the collective denunciations of Corbyn had he been guilty of the racist and homophobic remarks attributable to Johnson: phrases such as “piccanninies”, “watermelon smiles” and “bumboys”. There’s a double standard here.

Johnson has not shown the slightest appetite to deal with the virulent Islamophobia that poisons the Conservative party. The mainstream press in Britain has practically ignored this issue. That’s because most British newspapers are themselves Islamophobic. Johnson’s claim that his party has “zero tolerance” for Islamophobia is yet another of the cynical lies that have been the defining feature of his political campaign.

The establishment has always hated radicals like Corbyn. And it’s determined to stop him. Hence the repeated attack that Corbyn can’t be trusted on security and foreign policy.

It’s true that he opposed the three great foreign policy catastrophes of the 21st century: Afghanistan, Iraq and Libya. The damage done by Iraq to our national security was huge. Corbyn was right, while Johnson and the Tory party were enthusiasts for all three.

What about Yemen? This election campaign has seen no discussion of Britain’s complicity in Saudi Arabia’s foul war. It’s a shaming omission because according to the United Nations, it has created the greatest humanitarian catastrophe of the century.

Johnson was the foreign secretary in the early stages of this conflict. He was uniquely well-placed, given that Britain was penholder at the United Nations and thanks to our alliance with Saudi Arabia, to avert the calamity. He didn’t lift a finger. Corbyn called for an end to arms sales to Saudi Arabia.

Historians will say that this election has only been about one thing: Brexit. Johnson’s election slogan – “get Brexit done” – is another of his lies. He’s a highly intelligent man and knows perfectly well that Brexit will not be solved if we leave the EU on 31 January. Trading relations with Europe will dominate politics for years to come.

Corbyn is offering a wiser solution to the Brexit problem than Boris Johnson: a final-say referendum offering a choice between remaining on existing terms or continued membership of the customs union.

By contrast, Johnson is offering a guarantee that we will leave in January, followed by a transition period lasting implausibly to the end of next year, after which we could find ourselves operating alone on World Trade Organization rules. He’s in open denial about the consequences for trade with Northern Ireland.

There will be no way back from Johnson’s Brexit. Whatever the possible economic damage inflicted by Corbyn and his chancellor John McDonnell, it will last for a maximum of five years before they can be kicked out by the electorate.

We have a strong Conservative candidate here in Brentford and Isleworth, a local woman named Seena Shah. I’ve seen her in action and in normal times I’d vote for her. Shah represents hope for the future. But she is much too good for Boris Johnson and the wrecking crew that surrounds him. I believe they want to destroy the Britain I’ve lived in and loved all my life.

Posted by: December Dong 11th December 2019, 11:27 PM

Sooo was it reported on the BBTory news, Crazy Xmas?

BBTory have pulled the footage and had a grammatically accurate, typo-free tweet saying they don't believe Tory Laura broke the law. Well, that's for the police to decide. This isn't something the internal BBTory tram can whitewash.

Posted by: ChristmaSteve201 11th December 2019, 11:44 PM

That article is brillant agree with it all especially on national security and the antisemitism claims.

Posted by: Crazy Chris-tmas 12th December 2019, 12:11 AM

No, not a word but they've issued a statement saying they believe she did nothing wrong.

Posted by: dancember 12th December 2019, 12:17 AM

I see this one hasn't been posted here yet, another Tory bias report

Posted by: December Dong 12th December 2019, 12:22 AM

I saw that earlier. VILE. Absolute Ministry of Truth pro-government BULLSHIT. 1984 is here.

Posted by: Crazy Chris-tmas 12th December 2019, 12:26 AM

Surely her saying the word deserves breaks impartiality rules blatantly.

Posted by: December Dong 12th December 2019, 12:34 AM

It does!

Posted by: Crazy Chris-tmas 12th December 2019, 12:36 AM

Well we'll see what happens then. Have you emailed Ofcom?

Posted by: vidsanta 12th December 2019, 05:55 AM

His opinion of what the Tory party was, would be like telling a kid that santa doesn't exist, at least to MM...




It's also not something that can be resolved *before* the election.

Posted by: Harve 15th December 2019, 09:32 AM

https://www.theguardian.com/media/2019/dec/14/bbc-staff-express-fear-of-public-distrust-after-election-coverage

Quite a chilling paragraph here:

Posted by: ChRiMbO LeG PiPe 27th December 2019, 01:34 PM

TORY NICK, former BBTory political editoe, has just accused the BBTory of anti-Corbyn bias!!

https://www.thecanary.co/uk/2015/11/20/nick-robinson-accuses-bbc-anti-corbyn-bias/?fbclid=IwAR0zKHaWBGG5P_uDzcMftPOwC0ehvy1HcWOrEU50QO5zWoEM5c6qnDDMVXI

Posted by: Suedehead2 27th December 2019, 03:22 PM

"Just" as in November 2015.

Posted by: blacksquare 27th May 2020, 06:33 PM

A story in three parts. Unbelievable.

Posted by: Klaus 27th May 2020, 06:34 PM

quick to act on one of their best journalists (delivering the most iconic interview of modern times) yet they sit idle on Laura :')

Posted by: Andrew. 27th May 2020, 06:35 PM

Emily Maitlis is possibly the best they have, and this is who get penalised?

Posted by: Quarantilas 27th May 2020, 06:42 PM

Laura K is literally a government sock puppet. How is that even approaching impartiality.

Absolute shambles

Posted by: Mack. 27th May 2020, 10:39 PM

Unbelievable. A woman gets replaced for telling the truth while a man lies and keeps his.

Posted by: T Boy 28th May 2020, 07:20 AM

Emily has tweeted that she asked for the night off. But I’m still suspicious.

Posted by: Doctor Blind 28th May 2020, 11:45 AM

Why do you think I cancelled my licence fee last year? BBC News is a shadow of its former self and now merely a state broadcaster, I refuse to fund it.

Posted by: The Snake 3rd June 2020, 03:55 PM

Plus it no longer uses the Met Office for its weather forecasts so you have a double reason to boycott it

Posted by: blacksquare 26th May 2021, 10:55 AM

Curiously, Kuenssberg has now stopped live-tweeting the Cummings hearing.

also lmao



Sources say!

Posted by: Iz 💀 26th May 2021, 11:07 AM

even now, I know it's a hearing, but the way she and BBC Politics is just giving this man a platform to say "we screwed up and shouldn't have been in charge" is really bad reporting, while they're still taking time to highlight his off-the-cuff, highly opinionated, comment about how the choice was "crackers" with their Corbyn derangement syndrome.

and are they going to speak truth to power and make life uncomfortable for this government? are they f***.

Posted by: Doctor Blind 26th May 2021, 11:29 AM

Seriously: why hasn't she been fired yet?

Posted by: Rooney 26th May 2021, 11:54 AM

Wasn't this already well known? Of course she denied it but I'm sure most people thought her source was Cummings. Peston clearly has a different source, although I'm sure he was getting stuff from Cummings too in the early days of the pandemic.

Posted by: Quarantilas 26th May 2021, 12:19 PM

Honestly this was even less shocking than the news that Hancock is wholly incompetent

Posted by: Dill Doe 26th May 2021, 01:30 PM

Ha! So the "government spokesman" she always talked about really was just Demonic Cummings. In a functioning democracy with an independent state broadcaster, she would be nowhere near the institution.

Posted by: Dill Doe 26th May 2021, 01:32 PM

We said all along that a socialist Corbyn government that actually cares about people and the NHS would have handled the pandemic a million times better than Blojo the Etonian clown.

Posted by: Iz 💀 26th May 2021, 02:45 PM

there's a problem with the centrist media, and it's because they are stupidly gullible in believing whatever the corrupt Tory government tells them while riding high off disparaging anything with a slight whiff of socialism.

Posted by: Smint 26th May 2021, 03:08 PM

Centrism tends to be the Tories biggest friend but then again sadly not enough people would go full on left in this country.

Posted by: Suedehead2 26th May 2021, 03:13 PM

Because she is effectively a member of the government and nobody gets fired from this government.

Posted by: Tawdry Hepburn 26th May 2021, 03:26 PM

It's utterly crazy to me that I see hardcore Tories on Twitter who seem convinced that Laura Kuenssberg is a "leftie" and a "Labour spokesperson", like how WARPED do you have to be to actually believe that?

Posted by: Quarantilas 26th May 2021, 03:33 PM

Can you ask them who their narcotics supplier is? They must sell some incredible stuff if they believe this

Posted by: Dill Doe 26th May 2021, 03:33 PM

They also think BBTory news is left wing! Truly warped view.

Posted by: Tawdry Hepburn 26th May 2021, 03:42 PM

Yes! You can guarantee that's the view of all those people who tweet about #DefundTheBBC

Posted by: Rooney 26th May 2021, 04:12 PM

The BBC is largely impartial, the fact you have the Right saying it's Left wing and the Left saying it's Right wing means it is doing its job. It's almost impossible to report on anything with an opinion without any conscious or subconscious biases, but on the whole as an overall Body it is mostly neutral. It's need to be seen as impartial is also pretty funny sometimes (not just with politics but with anything) as it does get some things wrong, but on the whole it is largely impartial and certainly a slower source of news where it corroborates it's facts, in the main.

Posted by: Dill Doe 26th May 2021, 04:33 PM

That is a common false narrative. The BBTory IS right wing and studies have proven this time and time again. It is centre-right and supports the establishment. The right always complain in order to push it further and further right, and thwy're largely succeeding.

Posted by: Rooney 26th May 2021, 04:41 PM

Can you link me to the studies which prove it? There's been studies which show a left and right win bias before, which still leads me to be lead to believe on the whole, the organisation is largely impartial.

I'm not convinced the organisation is right wing or Tory. Not disputing the fact in a political sense, there is not editorial bias to certain parties, but on the whole I think it is fairly neutral. Bias is heavily subjective for starters.

Posted by: Dill Doe 26th May 2021, 05:07 PM

How on earth can BIAS be subjective? It is is either there or it isn't, ans ir is. I'll find them later, but study after study has clearly shown a centre-right bias towards the establishment. Just watch the news and how they frame any Tory misdeeds, how they covered up for Vlojo at the memorial with OLD FOOTAGE!!, put Corbyn in a Russian hat against a red background, have the most right wing guests and Tory plants on BBToryTime, and just do client journalism for the Tories. That's not to mention the BBTory chief id a massive Tory, as are their nees editors, soooo......

Posted by: steve201 26th May 2021, 05:18 PM

They do it on purpose so that the bbc are kept in check!

Posted by: steve201 26th May 2021, 05:23 PM

I think the bbc is a great establishment and by far the most value for money media and tv. But it’s undoubtedly part of the establishment in the UK and the death of Prince Phillip is the perfect example of this but I agree they are damned if they do and damned if they don’t.

Posted by: steve201 26th May 2021, 05:25 PM

Edit deleted

Posted by: Suedehead2 26th May 2021, 07:46 PM

The biggest problem for the BBC (and any broadcaster committed to impartiality) is that the Tories have completely changed the game. Broadcasters are used to being able to report on an issue by saying "The government says this, the opposition says that". Leaving aside for the moment that the opposition view almost invariably came from the main opposition party with no suggestion that other parties may have a different view, that approach broadly worked as both sides were expressing an opinion.

The problem now is that we have a government that lies a lot of the time. "Impartiality" now means pretending that reporting a lie and the opposition view represents some sort of balance. To quote something repeated many times elsewhere "If one person says it is pouring with rain outside while another says it is gloriously sunny, the job of a journalist is not simply to report both statements. Their job is to stick their head out of the window and find out what the weather is really like". The same thing happened in the EU referendum, particularly with things like the infamous bus. That £350m claim was repeated endlessly on BBC new bulletins with no hint that it might not be true.

That insistence on "balance" can sometimes create a false impression. Until fairly recently, reports on climate change included a contribution from a politician to "balance" the views of someone who was an expert in climate science. That could create the false impression that opinion is evenly divided when, at least among people who know what they are talking about, that simply isn't true. They did the same for a long time over the safety of the MMR vaccine.

The one issue where the idea of impartiality is totally ignored is the royal family. There is never any suggestion on news programmes that some of us would like to see the end of the monarchy.

A lot of the complaints of BBC bias from right-wingers relates to general programming with comedy their main target. Satire, by its very nature, is bound to be largely anti-government, whoever is in power at the time. A lot of comedy punches upwards, attacking the powerful. In pre-Thatcher days, the powerful included trade unions so they were often the target of comedy. Now that the unions have been emasculated, they are rarely mentioned in comedy or satire.

For all its faults, the BBC remains one of the country's greatest institutions. It is one of the most trusted and recognisable brands in the world. That ought to make the Tories among its staunchest defenders. Instead, it may be the Tories who destroy it and, as a result, end much that is great about British broadcasting.

Posted by: Rooney 26th May 2021, 08:16 PM

Well as you said before you think the BBC is right wing and right wingers think it is too liberal/left wing? The examples you've said don't mean the BBC is institutionally biased, because what you percieve as bias I may percieve different. There are certainly editors of programmes that are biased and show their biases but the BBC is regulated independently and as far as I am aware the regulaters have never said there is a bias??

My one big gripe with the BBC is as Sudehead points out below - in their efforts to be impartial, it gives weight to different arguments and gives a platform for extreme views imo, if unintentional.

Posted by: steve201 26th May 2021, 08:22 PM

What’s the comparison in America - ABC? Are they all sold to the highest bidder now?

Posted by: Rooney 26th May 2021, 09:12 PM

I don't think America has a state broadcaster. ABC is owned by Disney. CBS is WarnerBros, NBC is Universal and Fox is Fox. They're all the big traditional broacasters, although I could be wrong.

Posted by: Quarantilas 27th May 2021, 10:21 AM

PBS I think?

ABC is the Australian equivalent.

Posted by: steve201 27th May 2021, 12:36 PM

Been watching the documentary on sky about history from the sixties, seventies etc and there’s episodes about tv in the decade etc and it’s American made by CNN and they said these channels were bought by private companies in the 80s but thought like ABC American Broadcast Company was originally the ‘national’ broadcaster and CBS was like ITV!

Posted by: Harve 27th May 2021, 02:22 PM

This is very /r/enlightenedcentrism galaxy brain lol

Even in a polarised environment, it is not a zero sum game. The metric you use to judge that the BBC's news output is valuable is not 'both sides are dissatisfied'.

Posted by: Dill Doe 27th May 2021, 02:36 PM

Eeexactly! The right wing are ALWAYS dissatisified. They want ALL the power.

Posted by: Iz 💀 27th May 2021, 02:53 PM

The BBC has become a lot more noticeably pro-establishment in the last decade, even if maybe that's just me getting better at noticing bias, it's just as much what they don't say as what they do. But if you think their Tory-associated directors, the slow filling of all top positions with people favourable to the government hasn't had any noticeable effect...

Right-wingers just gripe with the BBC because it does liberal culture focuses sometimes, which has very little bearing on their reporting on political power, where it has become far more of a mouthpiece than otherwise.

Posted by: Rooney 27th May 2021, 03:37 PM

There is no evidence the BBC is heavily biased to a certain political party or a wing. If someone has conclusive proof then I'll accept it but as far as I am aware loads of people say it is biased but nobody (and nor an independent regulator) has been able to prove widespread bias.

Posted by: Quarantilas 27th May 2021, 04:08 PM

*laughs in Nationalist*

Ok. Sure.


We will also just ignore the contribution that BBC made to Brexit with their refusal to refute outright lies and their insistence at both siding literally every f***ing debate to the point if you went on their on a platform of „slitting someone’s throat is bad“ there would be 2 „experts“ to counter your point, a throat slitter, and then Laura K to talk about how damaging it is for Labour/Independence that Corbyn/Sturgeon hasn’t said anything on throat slitting yet

Posted by: Rooney 27th May 2021, 04:27 PM

As Suedehead mentioned before, just because the BBC acts impartial it does not mean they are biased to a certain political view point. I take your point that Kussenberg may be slightly biased based on who her sources are, but that is wholly different to saying the BBC is a Tory Party propaganda machine, because there is no conclusive evidence for it, just people's own biases on the situation.

Posted by: Quarantilas 27th May 2021, 04:49 PM

Unbiased impartial broadcaster at work.

Posted by: Rooney 27th May 2021, 08:10 PM

I mean, come off it, that's hardly biased political reporting They literally say it's correct and then add some further content, hardly widespread political state sponsored bias.

Posted by: Iz 💀 28th May 2021, 03:26 AM

and that's the subtle priming of their biases that generally is what we call out - they correct the opposition, who don't tell the whole picture and shouldn't be in government, while exactly reporting the words of the Conservative party, who have a god-given right to govern and have no need for such mortal quibbles as context.

I don't know what relevance deaths per capita has to that statement except as a way to undermine Rayner's point, she said 'death toll'.

no seriously, where is the 'those numbers are correct but actually Malta has a higher rate of vaccination' if we're suddenly going to be misleadingly comparing countries?

Posted by: Quarantilas 28th May 2021, 07:25 AM

Thanks Iz!


This is a part of why many view it as a government propaganda mouthpiece. They are overly critical of opposition statements when the statement itself is perfectly correct (Rayner is right. We have the highest death TOLL in Europe. No additional context required) and report blatant falsehoods from the state as fact.

This is fairly new to the UK wide stage but this is one of many things they been doing for years in Scotland to push unionist propaganda and talking points.

Posted by: steve201 28th May 2021, 07:41 AM

Love how they are so certain about the deaths prevented by the vac programme but not so sure about the deaths that occurred due to their terrible decisions!

Posted by: Smint 25th June 2021, 09:24 AM

Not sure where to put this but in terms of right wing incredibly biased "news" channels (although to call it news would be against the trade descriptions act), today we find out that GB News main star and only real political heavyweight Andrew Neil after just 11 days has decided to take a break for the rest of the summer. The "culture war" stoking channel which just a couple of days ago saw India Willoughby, a trans commentator, resigning saying that it was "demonising" trans people and caused several brands to boycott being featured has got off to a dreadful start with technical issues and terrible reviews.

Oh well, a good news item for Friday finally.

Posted by: Dill Doe 25th June 2021, 12:07 PM

Don't forget the corruption of them having the BBC defence analyst COINCIDENTALLY onbaord the ship that provoked the Russians days before the 1984-esque One Nation school song!

Posted by: Iz 💀 25th June 2021, 11:18 PM

That's one - non-specific and minimising - way to put it.

Posted by: Dill Doe 25th June 2021, 11:28 PM

BBC News just has to close if we EVER get rid of this one party state. Having state news has proven inadequate in the face of the rise of the far right. It is just a slavish government mouthpiece.

Posted by: Iz 💀 28th June 2021, 09:59 AM

well at least we can take solace in this hilarious headline:

https://metro.co.uk/2021/06/27/gb-news-viewing-figures-plummet-behind-welsh-language-paw-patrol-14835885/

(the original version of the article I saw was a Welsh site so it might just be Welsh viewing figures but still lmao)

as bad as BBC News has gotten, at least it looks like Fox News But British is going to be a complete flop.

Posted by: Dill Doe 28th June 2021, 10:48 AM

But it fulfilled its other purpose: convincing head Tory in charge of the BBTory that the public want even more right eing news lol. Questiontime can remain, along with all its Tory plants and Fiona Bruce supporting them and riling up the audiencr against Labour, but we can't have The Mash Report!

Posted by: Smint 28th June 2021, 12:14 PM

Although I’m visiting my Tory voting parents at the moment and that makes it worse that they are amongst the handful of people who ARE watching this crap. Although I refuse to watch it with them.

Posted by: T Boy 28th June 2021, 12:21 PM

Let’s have no disrespect for Patrol Pawennau please. Much better content than GB News

Posted by: Chez Wombat 10th March 2023, 06:03 PM

I was sure this thread had been posted in more recently but clearly not, anyway, think it needs a bump after the events of today. Asides Lineker's censorship, even https://www.theguardian.com/media/2023/mar/10/david-attenborough-bbc-wild-isles-episode-rightwing-backlash-fears has dropped the same day (it is a slightly misleading headline if you read the whole thing, but the optics certainly aren't great). I have given benefit of a doubt in the past but this and the clear Tory supporters in Chairman positions has made this beyond doubt that it's damaged.

It's sad what's happening to one of the most cherished and important organisations we have, I really worry for their future as long as the Tories are in power, hopefully not much longer, but I'm not convinced the opposition will change much.

Posted by: Amanda Hugginkis 10th March 2023, 06:11 PM

People like Popchartfreak were arguing with me over thr psst few years based on what THEY WANT the BBTory to be, and not what it actually IS. It is a government mouthpiece, akin to Russia today, and NOT the sort of thing a liberal democracy should have. It attacks the opposition, DOUBLES DOWN when the propaganda against the opposition has been shown to be fake (Panorama hit job on Corbyn, Virgin trains hit job on Corbyn), and never challenges any right wing statement. It is an absokute Tory DISGRACE. It has lost the right to ever ever rdport on news and current affairs.

Posted by: Rooney 10th March 2023, 06:13 PM

This has angered me a lot. The free speech warriors out in force, complaining about free speech, how ironic.

Posted by: Suedehead2 10th March 2023, 06:41 PM

Congratulations to Ian Wright and Alan Shearer who have both pulled out of tomorrow's MOTD in protest.

Posted by: Suedehead2 10th March 2023, 06:41 PM

Congratulations to Ian Wright and Alan Shearer who have both pulled out of tomorrow's MOTD in protest.

Posted by: Amanda Hugginkis 10th March 2023, 06:51 PM

MASSIVE Tory Fiona Bruce was defened by thr BBTory roo, after saying Stanley Johnson's domestic abuse were both a a "one off" and also "incorrect". Shrodinger's Johnson!

Btw, this is the same Tiry who riled up QT audiences agai st Corbyn's allies, most notably Dianne Abbott, and whose show somehow manages to find thr most right wing people and Tory plants even in Liverpool

Posted by: T Boy 10th March 2023, 07:09 PM

It’s brilliant that Shearer and Wright are showing solidarity with Lineker. If only the viewers could boycott the show tomorrow as well but that’s probably asking too much.

Posted by: Rooney 10th March 2023, 07:13 PM

I think you’d be surprised, Alex Scott has turned down presenting. Issue isn’t with the MOTD team, I suspect the producers are stuck big time here as it sounds like all the regulars are sticking up for Gary. I can only see Jermaine Jenas being stupid enough to do it, can’t say a way any of the others who normally cover doing it unless they’re forced to.

Posted by: T Boy 10th March 2023, 07:20 PM

I’m not sure what you’re responding to, I said it would be great if the viewers could all boycott the show tomorrow rather than just the presenters. I fail to believe there isn’t a single right wing person who views the show regularly, therefore ALL the viewers won’t boycott it.

Also some people just view football as more important than anything.

Posted by: dandy* 10th March 2023, 08:27 PM

It’s appalling. I can’t believe they responded to the criticism by actually doing something very akin to 1930s Germany and silencing the voice.

There is no way he shouldn’t be able to say what he did. I could sort of understand it if he was a newsreader who could be undermined by it… but he’s a football presenter ffs

Posted by: Smint 10th March 2023, 08:32 PM

Was fuming when I heard this but in a way pleased that the football player community has come out overwhelmingly in solidarity with Lineker. I don't think this is a good look for the Tories at all as they are annoying more than just minority groups for once.

Posted by: Rooney 10th March 2023, 09:16 PM

The viewership will be lower, but ultimately that is not what is going to cause the storm. If there's a bunch of 0-0s then the viewership will be lower anyhow. The storm has already been created and pretty much the whole football community is behind Twitter. The PR alone is enough for the BBC to go back on their word. By all accounts, they don't have a presenter for tomorrow. Or any pundits. So they're just going to show the games and have interviews afterwards. So basically, it's YouTube. The BBC have nowhere to go with this now, talk about scoring an own goal.

Posted by: Chez Wombat 10th March 2023, 09:33 PM

...and indeed, it is going to just be matches and no pundits

It just makes no sense when this was clearly from his personal account and wasn't representing their views at all, so it doesn't even work in whatever way they say, and is unforgivable when you see they're casually leaving the Richard Sharp thing untouched. Pleasing to see pretty much everyone outside of Tory MPs is standing with him though.

Posted by: Daan 10th March 2023, 09:46 PM

BBC have also scrapped an episode of David Attenborough's forthcoming series for being "too political" (cos it tells the cold hard truth about the destruction of nature in Britain)

https://www.theguardian.com/media/2023/mar/10/david-attenborough-bbc-wild-isles-episode-rightwing-backlash-fears

Posted by: Amanda Hugginkis 10th March 2023, 09:50 PM

Oop, saw this tweet!

those BBC rules in full:
- Attenborough can't broadcast a show about UK nature loss.
- Lineker can't tweet criticising the government.
- Alan Sugar *can* tweet criticising strikes.
- The BBC chair *can* be a Tory donor who didn't disclose he facilitated a loan to Boris Johnson.

BBTory is a DISGRACE

Posted by: T Boy 10th March 2023, 09:56 PM

Fiona Bruce can also minimise domestic violence by describing Stanley Johnson’s breaking his wife’s nose as a ‘one off’.

Posted by: Amanda Hugginkis 10th March 2023, 09:59 PM

She needs the sack IMMEDIATELY. She needed the sack when she wss fillin up QT with Tory plants and riling everyone up vs Dianne Abbott!@

Vile Tory twat

Posted by: Smint 10th March 2023, 10:25 PM

That was shocking - a day after International Women's day too.

Posted by: WhoOdyssey 10th March 2023, 10:47 PM

Although the BBC are saying that it’s not a “6th episode”, but instead produced by the WWF independently. It is true that the original Wild Isles press release only mentions 5 episodes, and this “inspired” episode will, and still is, airing on iPlayer.

I know I sound like a press release there you can make your own mind up about it!

Posted by: Silas 10th March 2023, 11:41 PM

Andrew Neil got away for years with having a far right twitter feed with some absolute abhorrent shit on there, but god forbid someone questions the government

Posted by: Rooney 10th March 2023, 11:44 PM

Commentators now not taking part and players have the PFA backing if they decide not to do interviews for the BBC.. this will get resolved very quickly now or the BBC will kill an icon of football in the UK.

Posted by: Amanda Hugginkis 11th March 2023, 12:00 AM

1930s BBTory FLEEING to apologise for dodgy drslings with Nadine now, to try and scrspe some SEMBLANCE of impartiality and save what's left of its torpedoed credibility If this storm heats up, the Tory chairman will have to go! Maybe Laura K and ToryTime presenter too!!!

Posted by: Amanda Hugginkis 11th March 2023, 12:01 AM

YES!!!

BBTory needs go go. It is state propaganda in a supposed democracy. Shocking stuff!!

Posted by: Iz 💀 11th March 2023, 12:12 AM

Oh this looks brilliant. I didn't think I'd see the day when mainstream commentator talk would be honestly going on about the huge right-wing bias (or running scared of the right-wing, take your pick) that puts a huge hole in BBC impartiality.

now even people like Campbell can admit it I guess. The range of acceptable opinion has been biased for years in favour of the right-wing and now it's got so bad that even someone as inoffensively centre-left as Lineker offends by... pointing out valid historical comparisons.

Posted by: Amanda Hugginkis 11th March 2023, 12:17 AM

YES YES YES

A RECKONING!!! FINALLY!

PEOPLE ARE WAKING UP OMFG. BBTORY BIAS EXPOSED, AND THE FACT THAT THEY SABOTAGED THE OPPOSITION'S CAMPAIGN!!

Posted by: Iz 💀 11th March 2023, 12:22 AM

Targeting MOTD is a great strategy as well, hit them right where it hurts and where a large proportion of the public will have to notice it.

Posted by: Amanda Hugginkis 11th March 2023, 12:34 AM

Exactly!!! It's really brought the bias into the public consciousness. Before, as the right wing baby manchild gammond were quick to scream and cry about impartiality, as they eanted the ness to be beholden to their strange views, meant that it looked like both left and right had the same LEGITIMATE complaints, and therefore the BBTory was impartial.

However, the left has LEGITIMATE claims. The right ... well ... it does not. Imagine how the gammons would have reacted if the treatment Corbyn got had been levvied vs their disgusting Etonian twatter, Blojo the Clown!!! Or had the Sun buy up negative stories, etc, etc. Or imagine the other way, had been Corbyn's neighbour reporting on a loud domestic dispute! The press would never have quietly dropped that story...

Posted by: Smint 11th March 2023, 01:53 AM

I think this is one of the most spectacular own goals (to use a football analogy) this ghastly Tory government have done. I don't follow football but everyone knows Gary Lineker is a legend and to put him up against the likes of Sunak, Braverman and the other no marks fash isn't going to go down well.

If we are talking 1930s Germany, at least Hitler was popular with a huge number of young people (with horrific consequences) - this shower will (apart from a few weirdos) only appeal to the Boomer generation upwards. Populism without the popularity.

Posted by: Botchia 11th March 2023, 12:28 PM

Hopefully this will give the BBC the wake up call it needs to stop bowing to this Government. It's ludicrous that a sports presenter is being held to the same standards on political impartiality as those in the news division. Lineker's job has nothing to do with politics.

I imagine we will either end up now with Linekar leaving the BBC and some half arsed fake apology from the BBC or the BBC backing down entirely, just as they did in the Naga Munchetty complaint case a few years ago with so much public opinion against them - although this is a lot more high profile and there has been significantly more backlash than in the Naga Munchetty situation.

Posted by: Smint 11th March 2023, 01:06 PM

Agreed but the BBC can't stand up to this government because they are owned by this government now (Tory Director General and Tory Chairman). It is a Government state propaganda channel now.

Posted by: Smint 11th March 2023, 02:24 PM

Good news! Keir Starmer (who can be very wishy washy on many issues for my liking) has come out strong for team Lineker.

Posted by: Amanda Hugginkis 11th March 2023, 03:09 PM

Agreed!! Like North Korean statw media, attacking the opposition. It needs to go.

Posted by: spiceboy 11th March 2023, 03:11 PM

This has backfired spectacularly on the BBC hasn't it!

Posted by: Envoirment 11th March 2023, 03:44 PM

Really happy to see how this is all unfolding. Hopefully labour will do a big shake up of the BBC once they get into government and perhaps change its funding model as well.

Posted by: Amanda Hugginkis 11th March 2023, 04:06 PM

Thr Tories rook control of it the SECOND they got in by threatening its funding. Mad May would only take questions from BBTory sycophants near the end, which shows how much they are controlled. State propaganda.

Posted by: Botchia 11th March 2023, 04:26 PM

I'm conscious not to peddle conspiracy theories but part of me thinks maybe this is the intended public reaction from BBC management? It's well known that many of the senior BBC Board are effectively Tory plants (including the DG and Chairman). Maybe this is all part of the Tories' efforts to try and defund the BBC in the long term. I just find it bizarre that a corporation this large and well versed in dealing with this type of controversy has let it get this far in terms of the negative press. It's easy to forget that the story had died down by yesterday and the BBC management essentially lit the fuse by asking Linekar to step aside from MoTD yesterday. There wasn't really any pressure even from the Tories publicly for them to do that.

You just have to hope that the rest of the BBC Board removes the DG from post (which seems unlikely) or there's enough pressure on Sunak to sack the Chairman.

I'd like to think, and hope that, Labour will make the BBC truly independent of the government once it gets back into power. Put in place what is necessary to prevent anyone who has previously stood for a political party sitting on the BBC Board and remove the power for the Government to appoint the BBC Chairman (and non-executive members) and leave the decisions with the BBC Board entirely as to who takes these positions. This Government has really exposed the fact that the BBC governance structure does not work if the government of the day is purposely interfering with its independence.

Posted by: Mack. 11th March 2023, 04:35 PM

What happened with Andrew Neil and Chris Packham making comments?

Posted by: Mack. 11th March 2023, 05:20 PM

I think it is only a matter of time before a news presenter says something that the BBC won’t like. Then we could see a mass exodus from the newsroom

Posted by: Amanda Hugginkis 11th March 2023, 05:24 PM

They were Tories and they were attacking the opposition, so that was fine x

Posted by: TheSnake 11th March 2023, 05:35 PM

I am pretty sure Chris Packham isn't a Tory?

Posted by: crazy chris 11th March 2023, 05:46 PM

Linekar deserves all he gets. His Tweets were bang out of order. What if I'd said something similar about Nazis here? It's a very sore subject.

Plus he refused to answer his phone to his bosses and refused to go in and see them. Would you ignore calls from your boss? Anyone who stands by him should be fired too.

I can't believe you all supporting him here. Free Speech, yes, but what he said justifies his sacking, permanently.

Posted by: Amanda Hugginkis 11th March 2023, 05:57 PM

SPECTACULAR own goal!!! News media reporting it around thr word are calling it "supposed" impartiality and "a controversial term"!!! They're moving closer snd closer to openly saying what it is: Tory state propaganda.

Posted by: Mack. 11th March 2023, 06:14 PM

Now Sunak gets his oar in:

Posted by: Mack. 11th March 2023, 06:16 PM

So fire all the people who pulled out of today's football programmes then.

Posted by: crazy chris 11th March 2023, 06:29 PM

Yes. They're in breach of contract.

Posted by: Jessie Where 11th March 2023, 06:30 PM

Posted by: Amanda Hugginkis 11th March 2023, 06:32 PM

WROOONG!!!

Free speech fot Tory news presenters, but not a Labour football pundit? Stop supporting the fash!!!!

Posted by: T Boy 11th March 2023, 06:51 PM

If you could explain what was wrong with his tweet by quoting from the actual tweet itself, I might be able to take you seriously. Might.

But you can’t because as usual, you decide your opinion based on the person rather than the action. You love the government so anyone who speaks out is automatically in the wrong, no matter how valid the criticism.

Thankfully this is highlighting how unclear and ridiculous the impartiality rule is. They only bring that word out when it’s something that could upset the government. I know a BBC worker and he confirms that they are shit scared of the Tories and the Daily Mail and this is exactly what we’re seeing here.

I wonder, do you want Fiona Bruce sacked for minimising domestic violence?

Posted by: Amanda Hugginkis 11th March 2023, 06:59 PM

PLUS her riling up QT audiences against Dianne Abbott and other Labour figures prior to recording!

A quick reminder that the BBTory allowed ACTUAL TORY COUNCILLOR PLANTS to scream thr following, "just nuke someone, ANYBODY!"

This is aggressive, authoritarian fascism, and the BBC wss just fine with it. They did not challenge the councillors, apologise or censor thr Tiry host for not chsllenging such LUDICROUS fash rage.

Posted by: Envoirment 11th March 2023, 08:15 PM

So the compassionate thing to do is to fly these people, many of whom have been exploited and trafficked by criminal gangs risking their lives, to far away countries that have had many issues regardng their human rights records... You just can't make this stuff up! Next election cannot come soon enough.

Posted by: J00prstar 11th March 2023, 08:18 PM

Its not saying it about Nazis that's the issue. Nazi isn't a dirty word.

See if someone is doing things THAT ARE LIKE WHAT THE NAZIS DID and you point it out...
How are YOU to blame for pointing it out?

If I saw someone shoot someone else with a gun and tweeted about it, am I the villain here?

Posted by: Jessie Where 11th March 2023, 09:04 PM

Chris, this is exactly why his comparison was relevant and accurate:

Posted by: Iz 💀 12th March 2023, 02:41 AM

^Exactly.

This whole situation is a 'First they came for the communists...' with regards to being banished from 'acceptable discourse', first it was the Corbynites, then it was Labour's soft left and now it's your average pundits.

Lineker didn't say the Tories are Nazi Germany, he said rhetoric used was not dissimilar to that of Germany in the 1930s, with regard to othering these migrants. Which yet again is a problem being made out to be far more serious than it actually is if we had a compassionate policy. And it does bear resemblance to the early stages of minority demonisation in Germany at that time which allowed the truly heinous actions to come about without resistance from the majority population.

And even if it was a one-to-one comparison, if you can never compare things that are like the Nazis to the Nazis, what is the point going through the rigmarole of 'Never Again' and historical comparisons? If you do that then you absolutely won't see it coming.

Posted by: Iz 💀 12th March 2023, 10:32 AM

I see the non-virtue signalling crowd are out in full force to get their sporting alternatives. By not virtue signalling, of course.

Posted by: Silas 12th March 2023, 10:36 AM

Jesus, Id rather defenestrate myself than watch that

Posted by: Mack. 12th March 2023, 03:38 PM

Is this the same corporation that kept Clarkson for his protesters comment and kept Ross over the Andrew Sachs phone controversy.

Posted by: steve201 12th March 2023, 05:20 PM

Pity Yvette Cooper didn’t get this message when interviewed on GMB at the start!

Posted by: Smint 12th March 2023, 08:46 PM

And Sugar posting Corbyn as an actual Nazi on his twitter whilst presenting The Apprentice. The issue is that to anyone with an ounce of logic is that there is complete inconsistency and no one on the right will admit to that part (even if they think Lineker's comments were wrong).

Anyway sources close to Gary are saying that he's confident situation will be resolved shortly and there's no way he's going to back down so obvs the BBC will climbdown. Let's hope for good news soon.

Posted by: Amanda Hugginkis 13th March 2023, 12:48 AM

Bbtory Tory boss refused to answer on whether they would have tsken him off if he prsised the government!!!! Tells you absolutely EVERYTHING about this fetid wap of state propaganda.

Posted by: Doctor Blind 13th March 2023, 10:24 AM

Excellent news!

Posted by: Smint 13th March 2023, 11:21 AM

There's so much exploding gammon around in the UK now that you can eat free in Wetherspoons all week!

Posted by: Silas 13th March 2023, 12:53 PM

It was obvious they would have to back down over a clearly hypocritical stance, especially given the broad latitude noted far-right nutbag Andrew Neil was given because he „is a great interviewer“ (I personally don’t rate him much. He’s very combative and antagonistic against everyone who isn’t a Tory or neonazi)

Posted by: Smint 13th March 2023, 01:32 PM

And the good news keeps coming - Fiona Bruce is now stepping back from her role as a domestic violence charity. Funny that her opinion that just one broken nose (which is completely disputed by Johnson's father's partner) was fine doesn't resonate with them. Hopefully this Tory stooge is off our screens full stop before too long.

Posted by: Amanda Hugginkis 13th March 2023, 01:59 PM

!!!!!

YES!!!

Ana absolute RECKONING!!

The director got a SAVAGING on SkyNews, challenging his impartiality and calling him what he is - a Tory. Articles and media across the WORLD and, importantly, domestically, were savaging the BBC and its record of implicit Tory support, plus the fact that ANDREW NEILL is a thing!!!! , and truly damaged the government pripaganda arm's credibility.

Most importanrly, it badly affected the beleagured BBTory's belived Tories where it hurts - the polls! They can't have that!

They had to back down.

https://www.bigissue.com/opinion/gary-lineker-is-the-final-nail-in-the-bbcs-coffin-and-i-wont-be-renewing-my-license-fee/

Posted by: Mack. 13th March 2023, 02:45 PM

Fantastic to see Gary Lineker back but yet still Fiona Bruce who dressed a bit inappropriately for Crimewatch all those years ago stays as presenter on Question Time it isn't okay at all.

Posted by: Amanda Hugginkis 13th March 2023, 02:47 PM

She needs to go. "Just a one-off"!!!! In an attempt to defsnd Blojo's dad!!!

Posted by: Mack. 13th March 2023, 05:00 PM

BBC did have a choice; it's just they finally realised what they'd done and decided to undo their mess that they got themselves into in the first place.

Posted by: T Boy 13th March 2023, 06:59 PM

Hopefully this is a turning of the tide and an eye opener for the media. They’ve not been playing to their audience for a long time.

Posted by: Chez Wombat 13th March 2023, 07:07 PM

Good to see, though the damage to the BBC from this isn't gonna go away. They've now essentially pissed off both sides and shown everyone exactly what they are which won't be easy to shake. Sooner the next GE and the Tory plants up top are out the better, although still quite a while

Posted by: Silas 13th March 2023, 07:12 PM

Don’t think how Fiona Bruce decides to dress is the problem here????

Posted by: Smint 13th March 2023, 08:59 PM

I'd love to agree but although this is a very satisfying climbdown, the BBC is still owned by a Tory and has them in leadership positions. Plus on this occasion they picked on probably the most popular man in the most popular sport in the UK. Most times their targets aren't in a position to get the mainstream support, sadly. However, it has opened more eyes to the corruption that is going on so perhaps they'll be slightly more careful, who knows?

Posted by: Iz 💀 14th March 2023, 05:11 AM

This feels like a decent conclusion but no long-term solutions, that will only happen once the current team heading up the BBC are gone.

Posted by: Mack. 14th March 2023, 09:51 AM

Sorry I meant this:

Posted by: Doctor Blind 14th March 2023, 11:07 AM

It was the right conclusion, but it was unfortunate that it ever came to this really. The BBC has angered just about everyone; initially caving to pressure from the right wing press and parts of the UK Government and then a humiliating collapse to further pressure from its own sports team and increasing public/political pressure. It was absolutely ridiculous that you had those that have been disingenuously claiming anger at so-called 'cancel culture' shamelessly calling for him to be sacked for his comments - have some consistency in your argument.

I think the Fiona Bruce situation is a little different though. I imagine that they knew that the topic of Stanley Johnson would come up and the legal team prepared that statement for her to read out. That doesn't change the optics of minimising domestic abuse with the flippant sign off 'it was a one-off' but I do understand why she had to interrupt to make it clear that Yasmin's comments were opinion and not fact, and I don't think it's consistent to call her out for that.

No matter how much of a Tory shill she is xx

Posted by: Silas 14th March 2023, 11:14 AM

I think it’s right to call her out for that sign-off. That was beyond legal talk and straight into minimisation and someone who claims to be so deeply involved in the cause, that was just callous language and she should have known better.

Posted by: Amanda Hugginkis 14th March 2023, 01:49 PM

THIS!!!

A legal statement could be something like: "Allegations of domestic abuse have been made against Blojo's Tory dad (who spawned the worst prime minister in history), by his late wife. She claimed he broke her nose in one incident. Blojo's (aristocratic pos) father hasn't commented on the matter, and he has not been convicted."

Covers them legally and doesn't minimise domestic violence. She literally flippantly said, it was a one off!!!, in defence of her Tory overlords. She really should have known better, and it vame across as a purposeful defence via minimisation.

Posted by: Amanda Hugginkis 14th March 2023, 04:01 PM

Labour FINALLY saying it how it is - though it should have done so in 2017 and ESPECIALLY up to 2019, when BBTory went IN on Corbyn as a threat to thr Tory establishment - and has said that BBC acted like something "from Putin's Russia". Correct! BbTory is nothing more thsn government propaganda these days.

Posted by: spiceboy 14th March 2023, 07:09 PM

He is spot on actually and anyone offended by it are completely missing the point by not being offended by the actual actions of the government towards vulnerable people.

Posted by: spiceboy 14th March 2023, 07:11 PM

He is a twat. How is it compassionate to send exploited and abused people to a country with a horrific human rights record?!? Honestly you can’t make it up.

Posted by: Amanda Hugginkis 16th March 2023, 01:36 AM

Former BBC staffers have expressed concerns about the leaked WhatsApp and email messages suggesting the corporation bowed to pressure from No 10 to avoid using the word “lockdown” at the start of the pandemic and to turn up criticism of Labour.1

He said the “most troubling aspect of this is that these messages suggest that the political news team were not just made aware of Downing Street’s view but encouraged to reflect it as the BBC view … That’s pretty scandalous”.

New article in the Guardian, with ex BBC reporters quoted in it. Some retweeted thr allegatioms!!!

Seems I was right, Popchartfreak!!! The BBTory is government, Tory, establishment propaganda. Fascism.