Skip to main content

More BBC Bias

Yesterday I blogged about James Bartholomew and his bullshit performance on 5live's morning phone in. I didn't mention that he was opposed in that discussion by Polly Toynbee, who many see as a voice of the left - a 'guardianista'. This is because she was useless, conceding way too much and providing bugger all authoritative opposition to the flurry of unchecked right wing histrionics.

However at that point I had not listened to the entire discussion. Later, at about the 50 minute mark (after the umpteenth travel and weather update) the final three callers were brought on, together. Eileen called in from the Benefit Justice campaign, Jason called in as the voice of entrepreneurs from, of all places, the south of France, and Francine, a small business owning bigot, came on and spoke first. 

What she said was some of the most disgusting bigotry I have ever heard. Using the term 'benefit breeders' this ignorant bigot proceeded into a lunatic tirade against feral kids, antisocial behaviour and large families. When corrected by Eileen she couldn't even keep quiet, again another right winger so programmed, so on edge, that she had to release that tension by huffing and tutting and sighing audibly. 

Throughout her tirade Nicky Campbell did nothing to correct her or moderate her appalling bigotry. Of course had she made equal comments about race, gender, sexuality or even age, you can be 100% sure he would have stepped in. Yet, and more proof of the BBC's disgraceful bias, when Eileen made a broad point about big business evading tax, he stepped in to 'correct her' articulating an apparent, yet hypocritical, need for accuracy. 

Ok, the point about taxes may have been slightly off topic (though not really) and it may be, technically, a bit of a generalisation to say they all pay zero percent tax, but really that's the part you decide to correct? That's the comment that warrants an intervention? This is the problem with the BBC; the left is at a huge disadadvantage because of the prevailing media message, yet is never given a proper platform on an equal footing accordingly.

I tweeted Nicky Campbell about this. To his credit he did respond, but only to say that 'it wasn't an interview it was a discussion', and that 'lots of callers corrected her'. They didn't, those three were the last to phone in; besides it's the job of the chair of a discussion - in my view - to maintain objectivity and correct false information and prejudice. Not so with Auntie.

Comments

  1. Replies
    1. It's pervasive. Propanda is everywhere and people are so used to it they take is fact.

      Delete

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

I Fucking Hate the Work Programme

That did not go well.
My legs were wobbly to begin with as I closed in on the church that passes for the office of the employment wing of the Salvation Army. My appointment was 3 to half past. I really did feel sick. Pretty early on, when he asked for the forms he gave me last time to fill in, I knew that what was arranged on the letter (a short interview with me bringing my CV and jobsearch) was actually going to be much longer. I also knew that, come half three when I had to leave to catch my bus back ten minutes later, I was going to have problems. 
Unfortunately, though more for me I fear, it never got that far; at 20 past he terminated the interview citing my apparent 'putting up barriers' as the reason not to continue. This was because I refused consent for him to keep my CV. I asked why he needed it and offered, three times, to show it to him (that's all), he said it was to apply for jobs on my behalf. The EEC's need this information.
What's an EEC? Employm…

U.N. and Them

What are my thoughts on this?

It's a humanitarian crisis. Is that a phrase we should only reserve for famines in Africa or force majeure? We seem to have a blind spot to these things when they are on our own doorstep - it couldn't happen here, could it?

Yes.

Seven years of the most brutal selfish and greedy governance, not to mention the least competent, has brought us to the point where the United Nations are telling the Tories they are causing a 'human catastrophe' amongst the disabled and the sick. This is not the first time, and even that doesn't include their comments on the hated and spiteful (not to mention ineffectual) Bedroom Tax.

Do the Tories persist with these policies because they actually believe they are correct or even moral?

Or is it because they have no other way to appease the media attack dogs and/or the braying Shirefolk that delight in persecuting the poor as they do torturing foxes and badgers?

Is it both?

We have a government, in a first wor…

Anybody Out There?

Just so I can be sure this is being read at all and decide whether it's worth continuing, please shout out in the comments. Even if you think I'm talking barmy bollocks, it'd be helpful to know if there are people reading this and not weird bots from phishing sites or Russian hackers or some weird sentient algorithm.

Apologies if you are none of those things, but I'm considering what to do with this blog.

Thanks